Canada Should Not Re-Open The Constitution

Many politicians argue that there is a need for institutional reform in the United States—the sole purpose of such reform should be to develop a more efficient system for the state as a whole. However, others argue that there are existing institutions in the United States that are structured efficiently. In order to help determine where an individual will stand on the debate about institutional reform, one must compare the effects of different forms of political institutions with the existing form in the United States. There are three new proposals of reform to discuss for the United States: 1) change in the electoral system for the House of Representatives, 2) change in the executive structure

“it would require that all the appointments for the supreme executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one another.”

As you can see the welfare of Canadian democracy is threatened and extreme measures need to be taken to turn around the mess we are so deep in.

If the Senate is kept at its current state, it will continue to operate fine, however the Senate can be much more effective at what it does if it gets amended. Currently the Senate is not elected, equal, nor efficient. People who comprise the Senate are selected by the governor general on the advice of the Prime Minister, so those selected most likely will act in good intention towards the Prime Minister. The Senate, unlike the House was designed to represent Canada’s regions, however it over-represents some provinces at the expense of others. For example currently, Quebec and Ontario each have 24 seats, the same amount of seats as the four Western provinces as a whole. Atlantic Canada, with a mere 7% of the population, holds a unproportional 29% of the seats. Canadians deserve laws that are fair and free of errors, and the Senate contributes to that. The Senate’s job is to foster national unity, however currently they act in the interest of themselves and the Prime Minister rather than in the interest of the people.

The entrenchment of rights in the Canadian Constitution comes after long experience with a system of parliamentary supremacy. The American judicial tradition of treating the written constitution as fundamental law cannot have an instant Canadian counterpart. Thus, it does not follow that the Canadian courts will necessarily claim a role comparable to that of courts in the United States, nor is it clear that the representative bodies in Canada would tolerate such a judicial assertion of power. Opposition by government bodies to the Charter have already occurred in Canada, where the Parti Quebecois government of Quebec invoked the “notwithstanding the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms” clause for the purpose of protecting their language laws from attack under the charter. This report will attempt to note some of the common and distinctive features of the text of the two constitutions as well as to how they differ.

Federalist 51 mentions that “the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy for the inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches.” Keeping this idea in mind, it is the reason why the legislative branch is divided into the House of Representatives and the Senate. By dividing the legislative branch, Congress assures that too many individuals do not control one large portion of the government and that the legislative branch works with more efficiency without too many conflicting opinions. Additionally, in the Judiciary branch, the author explains that “some deviations [from absolute democracy] must be admitted.” The exception is necessary because according the Hamilton or Madison, the branch needs specific qualifications in order to elect essential members and that the position must be permanent so that it combat all dependence on authority. This concept sets up the process by which Supreme Court justices are put into power today where the president appoints a judge to serve for life or until the judge chooses to retire. Moreover, the article proposes the design that the overall government itself should be split into two sections, the federal and state level. This so that the state government can adhere to the values of its individual populations while the federal government lays down the general guidelines so that the state government’s values does not exploit the citizen’s natural

The Canadian constitution is one founded on the idea of responsible government. This is a principle that is meant to hold the state. However, many have since struggled with understanding how the Monarch of Britain fits into this form of governance. Some say the monarch is meant to be the representation of the state, and the figurehead we need to keep our government in check. Others point out that the Monarch is an unelected official incompatible with the ideas of responsible government and democracy, for that matter. Scholars seem evenly split between both camps. A question must be proposed about these opinion however, is the Monarchy harmful enough to Canadian society to spend the time, money, and effort to overhaul our constitution? It shouldn’t have to be stated but abolishing the monarchy is no easy task, so to even undertake this measure, we as a society must be absolutely sure of the decision and the consequences Advocates of monarchy are expressing their support for the institution on nostalgic grounds,

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.

In the book “A Brilliant Solution: Inventing the American Constitution” by Carol Berkin she explains the constitution from start to finish from how it all began, to the debates inside the convention and finally the end product. Berkin takes the reader and puts him directly in the middle of the convention of 1786; throughout the book you can feel the excitement, the frustration, the tensions between delegates and the overall commitment to making a new government work for all.

The recent 2015 federal election saw a dramatic change in the Canadian political landscape. The Conservative party, the governing party of Canada for the past decade, was thoroughly defeated with the Liberals, who had, in relation to seats, been in third place, gaining a majority and subsequently forming government. The reasons for this defeat are examined in the editorial: Why the Conservatives lost, and how they can win again.

The Supreme Court of Canada uses the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to limit the scope of legislation and administrative power by implementing section one of the charter; which results in an open dialogue between the government and the courts on various legislation deemed unconstitutional. In this essay I will discuss the extent in which section one of the Canadian Charter allows the Supreme Court of Canada to dictate legislation, how they go about narrowing legislation and administrative power through the Oaks test, and the history of the Supreme Court from 1982 – present day will be analyzed resulting in an understanding of the legitimacy the courts play with such a role.

Today, Ontario and Quebec have maintained their 24 member senatorial status. The four Western provinces have 6 members each. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick both have 10 seats. Prince Edward Island was given 4 out of the original 24 Maritime senators. Together, Newfoundland and Labrador have a total of 6 members. Finally, Nunavut, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories stand in the equation with 1 senator apiece. Along with the Senate`s original intentions, the principle of equality between the provinces is evidently lost. The Senate primarily fails because it was formerly created to balance out the representation by population which lies in the House of Commons however currently only seems to reinforce it. In fact, Canada’s central provinces, Ontario and Quebec, account for 60 percent of the seats in the House of Commons and almost half of the seats in the Senate at 46 percent.5 The inadequacy of regional representation is emphasized as the Canada West Foundation clearly states: “Canada is the only democratic federal system in the world in which the regions with the largest populations dominate both houses of the national legislature.“6 With an unelected Senate that no longer fulfills its role of equal regional representation and a House of Commons grounded on the representation of provinces proportional to their population, the legitimacy of Parliament has become a

The consequences of the senate not being able to reform have been western provinces feeling like they are left out in the process of decision-making, policy making and other legislative decisions made by the federal government. “The senate was envisioned as a legislative body that would serve several functions in addition to legislation”(Lawlor, Crandol,2013). The senate is refereed as the sober second thought in terms of legislation review but the second thought is rarely concerning the western provinces. Western alienation is caused by regional misrepresentation which is mainly caused by the senate. According to Lawlor, some provincial governments have challenged the unilateral approach by the senate to restructure itself. However the Supreme Court Of Canada will consider a reference case on the constitutional status of senate reform in November 2013. This means that the senate may be reformed this year, the western provinces would prefer a senate that can represent their interests. The senate may need a reform in order to remove the discrimination of the west but in order to do this, it must reform the whole committee that the senate works with.

There is a fundamental problem with the democratic process in Canada. This problem is rooted within our electoral system. However, there is a promising solution to this issue. Canada should adopt the mixed-member proportional representation electoral system (MMP) at the federal level if we wish to see the progression of modern democracy. The failure to do so will result in a stagnant political system that is caught in the past and unable to rise to the contemporary challenges that representative democracies face. If Canada chooses to embrace the MMP electoral system it will reap the benefits of greater proportionality, prevent the centralization of power that is occurring in Parliament and among political parties through an increased

It is definite to say that the design of a constitution of any country will impact their politics and society. The impact that it has depends on say, whether that country has a democratic regime or an authoritarian regime and how the institutions that are stated in the constitution are organised for example the government, the legislature, the electoral system, the party system and so on and this piece of academic writing will demonstrate how.