Canadian Democracy: Veiws Of Canadians Essay

The electoral system in Canada is also known as a “first past the post” system. “First past the post” means the candidate with the highest number of votes wins the congressional seat, whereas the other candidates with a lower number of votes don’t get any representation. There are many cons to this system that will be highlighted throughout this essay. I will argue that the electoral system requires reform due to the discrepancies between the percentage of popular votes and the number of seats won. Canada’s electoral system has many problems and is not seen as fully democratic since it has provided poor representation for both candidates that win and lose. Candidates can win seats with less than 50% of votes, meaning that even if the majority of the nation, or province did not vote for the candidate they still win the election as they consume the highest number of votes among the parties. FPTP allows two people in different ridings to get the same number of votes with the outcome of one winner since the distribution of votes and seats are unequal. The system can also encourage strategic voting such as not voting for whom you think is the best fit but voting for the candidate that seems most likely to win in order to beat candidate you dislike. FPTP leads to an imbalance of power and has the potential for corruption.

genders. Women may have the same political rights, however they are still degraded and seen as inferior to men. So, women in politics are now trying to prove that they are just as capable as men are. However, their attempts are being suppressed due to the inappropriate comments against them. Sexist remarks in the media against female political candidates is the reason why there is a smaller amount of women in government.

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.

Canada’s friendly neighbor to the South, the US, has an electoral system that is composed of 3 separate elections, one of them deciding the head of state. The president elected by the people and he or she is the determining person of the country’s political system. In the US runs like a majority system” In Canada, however, elections are held slightly differently. Citizens vote for a Member of Parliament in a 308-seat house and candidates win not by a majority, unlike in the US, but by a plurality. This means that a candidate can actually win by simply having more votes than the other candidates. This method of representative democracy, in general, does not cause too much controversy in a global scope but has

The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen

There are Canadian citizens who thought that the Canadian government we have is perfect, citizens who believed that every aspect of the government was truly democratic, and citizens who believe that government could do no wrong. Truly this group of believers has been living a lie. In our Canadian system of government, large aspects within are far from democratic and need to be changed. Liberal-minded people will cry out for a change in order for government to serve the people better, and on the other hand the more conservative thinkers will argue that no change is needed because our government is efficient and considerate. However, our voting system, our Senate, and the power vested to the Prime Minister are far from democratic, do not

The Canadian voting system is called, “First past the Post”. This electoral system only runs fair if there is a total of 2 candidates. In that way, the chance of winning is split into two, therefore majority of the voters are taken into consideration.

On the other hand, the Canadian electoral system has also been accused of being undemocratic and unrepresentative in many aspects. Although the Canadian single member plurality

Significantly, by electing senators, there will be more satisfaction in the Canadian public. Appointing senators who participate in the Senate chamber debating and voting on legislation affecting day-to-day lives is considerably undemocratic and a threat to democracy for others. By all means we the people of Canada constitute democracy by giving it meaning with our participation and votes. But because senators are not elected by citizens nor appointed by provincial governments, the Senate lacks the effectiveness of federal principles and senators can

Canadians, like citizens of numerous countries around the world, take pride in living in a democratic nation. While Canada is unequivocally a democracy, there are certain aspects of the system that call into question its true democratic nature. The first past the post electoral system Canada currently has in place is undemocratic and unjust, as it undermines millions of citizens’ rights to vote. This has influenced a great deal of subsequent apathy and indifference toward politics in the masses, and democracy no longer seems to be a benchmark of Canadian society.

Women legislators have consistently made up 22 per cent of Canada’s Parliament ranking Canada 48th in the world when it comes to electing women to its national parliament. Canada has lagged far behind other similar countries that are too rooted in values of liberal democracy, the welfare state, and social equality. On average, 43 per cent of women hold decision-making positions in Nordic countries. Why has Canada fallen behind in promoting greater female political representation? Feminists like Catherine MacKinnon, have argued that Canada’s lack of female political representation has been a result of the patriarchal character of Canada’s liberal political system in which concepts of formal

Women comprise just 26 per cent of politicians currently elected to the House of Commons. Only three Premiers are women and municipally, only 28% of city councillors are women and 18% of mayors. Canada is ranked a distant 63rd in the world on the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s list of Women in National Parliaments.

Canada’s FPTP electoral system has been and continues to be criticized, however. Primary among the reasons for this is the disproportionality of the federal election outcomes – specifically, the vast discrepancy between the percentage of votes and percentage of seats. This means that a political party can win majority government even if they fail to win a majority of the votes. This FPTP system has also been said to lead to small parties being under-represented in election outcomes, which may misleadingly underestimate the popularity of their views than is actually the case (Donley, 2003). Moreover, because the percentage of seats is not in proportion to the MPs’ share of votes in their ridings, the common sentiment among voters is that their vote is essentially wasted. The issue of disproportionality has been used as a basis to propose electoral reform in Canada. The alternatives to Canada’s current FPTP electoral system include, but are not limited to, proportional representation (PR) and the alternative vote system.

Democracy is present in this situation because all 8 elements of democracy are in it. Rule of law is in this situation because every Citizen has the right to protest against the regime in a democratic country such as Canada. Human dignity is additionally involved in this situation because all Citizens are protecting each other and don’t want to be harmed by hazardous gases. Political Equality and Political Freedom are additionally a component of this democracy because they let Citizens of Canada have the right to verbalize liberatingly and give their opinion on the situation. Common Goods is an immensely colossal part since the people are protesting for a better and safer environment. Getting involved in protests is an astronomically immense

Democracy is defined as “goverment of people ,by the people,for the people”. Yes, Canada is a democratic country . This is because canada consists of a government Which has been elected by the people. The first element of democracy is “rule of law”. It is noticed because in canada Everyone is treated equally. The second element supporting the notion that Canada is a democratic Nation is “ respect”. all citizens must respect the rights, religions, and levels of others. Finally, the third element that shows Canada democracy is “ personal freedom” , for example people enjoy freedoms such as religion and expression.Canada is a true Democratic country because they follow the major elements of democracy.