Backbench Research Paper

Robert H. Schuller once stated, “Tough times don’t last, but tough people do.” In the novel Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand, Louie struggles with fitting in anywhere and staying out of trouble. He was constantly doing things to cause trouble and making mistakes. Pete, Louie’s brother pushes him to run to escape his troubles. Throughout Zamperini’s life, he gains perseverance which gave him the ability to survive through life.

The senate is viewed as a reflective body. It is often called the ‘chamber of sober second thought’. The Canadian senate is still one of the only ones in modern democracy not to have undergone senatorial reform. This makes for the Canadian senate to “represent and embody some of the most anti democratic features of representative assemblies” (Docherty pp.27). The senate is the upper house of the parliament. It has 105 seats, distributed as fairly as possible amongst the various provinces. Senators are appointed and this is the major reason for people wanting senatorial reform, however the Canadian senate have

Parliament has a central function in carrying out a scrutiny role. It carries close inspection and where it is necessary, amendments maybe proposed this is carried out in both houses. It holds the government collectively and the PM and other ministers accountable for their actions. It does this in debates, question times and through the work of Departmental Select Committees (DSC). However it maybe be argued that is not enough since scrutiny does not often involve blocking legislation. It is not expected that parliament will make substantial changes, but it does

David C. Docherty’s scholarly journal responds to the continual controversy and debate of the usefulness of the Canadian senate in 2002. Docherty’s article does an amazing job at analyzing the current Canadian senate and argues that the senate is a failing Canadian institution because of two democratic deficiencies: the undemocratic nature of senator selection and the inability of senators to represent provinces properly (45). These two features of why the senate is a failing Canadian institution can be compared to how Rand Dyck defines democracy in Canadian Politics: Critical Approaches. Docherty looks at several previous senate reforms and answers the question of why these senate reforms failed, in doing so Docherty lays down a framework for a possible successful senate reform but acknowledges the obstacles. Docherty does a very good job at accessing the problem of the senate, accessing the problem of previous reforms, and suggesting a plausible type of reform for the senate. This provides the reader with the knowledge of why the Canadian senate is a failing institution but also the possible solutions of how the senate can be reformed in order to maximize its democratic potential. Although, Docherty fails to provide an exact reform that needs to be taken, he just draws upon other failures and hypothesis that this may be the right solution for reform. Rand Dyck’s chapter 11 fills in the missing gap of reform that needs to be taken by drawing upon one of the best attempts at

Opposing the belief that a dominating leader is running Canada, Barker brings up several key realities of the Canadian government. He gives examples of several “… instances of other ministers taking action that reveal the limits prime-ministerial power,” (Barker 178). Barker conveys the fact that Canada is not bound by a dictatorial government, “…it seems that the prime minister cannot really control his individual ministers. At times, they will pursue agendas that are inconsistent with the prime minister’s actions,” (Barker 181). Both inside and outside government are a part of Canada and they can remind the prime minister that “…politics is a game of survival for all players,” (Barker 188). Barker refutes the misinterpretation of the Canadian government by acknowledging that a prime-ministerial government existing in Canada is an overstatement.

Stephen Harper tries to make a compelling argument in his paper called “Rediscovering the Right Agenda”. Here, Harper expresses why he thinks the PC and Alliance parties should combine. This section of the paper will be analyzing his findings on why he believes it is important that this coalition of the conservative parties should happen. I will be separating this section into arguments that I thought were important to his main theme.

Many modern democracies have a bicameral legislature which is a body of government that consist of two legislative chambers. The bicameral legislature provides representation for both, the citizens of the country and the state legislature on a federal level. The Canadian parliament has two chambers, the lower chamber which is an elected House of Commons and the upper chamber which is the non-elected Senate. The Canadian Senate is assumed to be a “sober second thought” [3] on government legislation which is a phrase that describes the Senate’s role in promoting and defending regional interest. There has been an immense amount of the public outcry regarding the Senate after spending scandal that occurred during the recent election period. A question that has induced discussion in parliament is whether the Canadian Senate should be reformed or not? This issue divides the population in half because of differing views. Some political parties want the abolition of the Senate to occur while other parties would like to have an elected Senate because provinces are not represented equally. A method of deciding the faith of the current Senate, the functions of the Senate and objectives of Senate reform should be defined. The assumptions about the purpose of the Senate, problems of the current Senate, the goal of Senate reform and the method of achieving the reform may help provide a consensus on how the Senate should be reformed.

The checks and balances that the founders of our country put into place to limit the power of the executive branch have failed and allowed the Prime Minister to gather unprecedented and unchecked power. There is a need to establish or re-establish effective checks for the prime minister, at different steps along the policy making process. The traditional checks and balances on the executive branch have come from the house of commons, the senate, and the Governor General. These institutions are meant to work together to ensure that the country is being governed fairly and in the name of the people. However, over the last thirty years the power has been moving away from the legislative branch towards the executive. In a system where majority

For many years, there has been an ongoing debate as to whether or not the Senate should undergo a reform. Many Canadian citizens are unsatisfied with the fact that the Senate is not elected. How are citizens to be sure that they are being properly represented when they are not able to choose who represents them? Although the Senate is an integral part of the governmental system, many Canadians are leaning towards the idea to completely abolish the Senate. The credible, David C. Docherty, outlines the previous attempts for the Senate reform while describing the mindset of Canadians and where the reformation of the Senate currently stands in his article “The Canadian Senate: Chamber of Sober Reflection or Loony Cousin Best Not Talked About.” The previous attempts for the Senate reform while describing the mindset of Canadians and where the reformation of the State currently stands.

For many years it has been argued that parliamentary sovereignty has, and still is, being eroded. As said by AV Dicey, the word ‘sovereignty’ is used to describe the idea of “the power of law making unrestricted by any legal limit”. Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution, stating that Parliament is the supreme legal authority in the UK, able to create and remove any law. This power over-rules courts and all other jurisdiction. It also cannot be entrenched; this is where all laws passed by the party in government can be changed by future parliaments. In recent years sovereignty of parliament has been a

Furthermore, sometime backbenchers rebel to vote for a political party’s ideologies even though they were forced to do it. For example, at the Tuition Fee vote, backbenchers revolted over tuition fees hike which then caused a lot of problems for Liberal Democratic Party.

“The government should not be guided by temporary excitement, but by sober second thought,” stated Martin Van Buren in 1838. In Canada’s government today, this “sober second thought” is provided by the upper house of Parliament, the Senate. This legislative Chamber, created under the Constitution Act of 1867, has, for the most part, met its purpose of considering and revising legislation, investigating national issues, and giving the regions of Canada an equal voice in Parliament; however, due to poor judgment in appointment and a resulting lack of qualification in members, the Senate has also been deemed scandalous and undemocratic. The Senate bears much value as it is crucial to a perceptive government; however, it also bears the need for

The Canadian Senate has been a long standing problematic section of the Canadian government and since its creation in 1867 and has been scrutinized for its effectiveness and purpose. In recent years, concerns have been raised and approaches have been suggested into reforming the Senate. Those in favour of taking drastic measures to reform or even abolish the Senate agree that the Senate is not functioning and not a trustworthy part of Canadian government. However, there are those who view that the Senate can still be saved say it has a purpose in the Canadian government since it serves a vital function in passing Canadian legislature. Nonetheless, maintaining a government body that is non functional needs to be addressed and revised and gone

In Canadian government it best to have legislators who do not vote their own interests and they vote the interests of their constituents. If legislators vote in their own interests they could be going against their own parties or the constituents that voted them in. Even if they know a lot about the subject they should still keep their interests out of their decisions and keep the interests of their constituents. Legislators that vote their own interests might even be going against the party policies, which could get them kicked out of the party or disciplined. Legislators are there to represent the people of their riding, not to vote their own interests in.

Hook up, according to dictionary.com is “an instance of people meeting, communicating, or cooperating.” The phrase “hook up” has a wide variety of meanings throughout different generations and different locations/cultures. The definition most people in high school or college understand from Urbandictionary.com is “to make out with someone, or to have sex with someone.” Because the phrase can be used in many different contexts, there is a lot of misunderstanding as to which definition is being referred to. There is no universal definition, so when encountering people of different ages or different cultures it is important to make sure you provide clear context.