Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative called for an early election in 2015 and believed they would win, however, the results were not what they have expected. Their defeat was partly due the Canadian parliamentary system with single member districts and the Canadian electoral system. Unlike the United States’ presidential system that elects a president, a prime minister is considered as the head of the Canadian government. If Canada uses the American presidential system, and elects a president there would probably be major changes in Canada’s electoral history.
Though, in the 2015 election, even if Canada has a system similar to the United States, Trudeau would still win this election. Canada’s parliamentary system doesn’t allow Canadians
…show more content…
Although the Conservative party still had a strong stand in the prairies, which was also the key region to the Conservative majority party in the 2011 federal election, because of the Canadian electoral system, the Ontario region had more seats in the parliament; in which when the conservatives lost their support in the Ontario region, they have lost quite a few seats in the parliament. As the Conservative party lost their support in the Ontario region, the liberals took over the Ontario region and won 80 seats. The Liberals led by Pierre Trudeau won 184 seats in parliament and formed a majority government, and the conservatives with 99 seats as the opposition party after 9 years as the governing party. The Canadian electoral system that help the Liberal party to win the election is called the majoritarian system and Canada uses the “first-past-the-post” sub-system with the “single member district system” from the majoritarian …show more content…
Unlike Canada, where people vote for candidate to represent their riding, the people under a presidential system vote for a candidate that runs to become the president, and the candidate with the most popular vote becomes the president. If Canada uses a presidential system, the results of the 2015 election would not be a lot different than the results when Canada has a parliamentary system. As Pierre Trudeau received a lot more popular votes than Stephen Harper, so Trudeau would be elected as the president of Canada instead of Harper. Also, a presidential government tends to be more stable than a parliamentary government because there won’t be disputes between parties since there is only one party in the government. According to the United States presidential system, there is a rule that a president can’t be elected to the office more than two terms, so if this rule applies to Canada, Stephen Harper wouldn’t be allowed to be elected
Now that you are up to date with currents events I will briefly touch on some strong point of the Canadian democratic system. Citizens in Canada indirectly hold power in a free electoral system and are given better representation and more freedoms for their citizens than other systems of government. The freedom of speech, freedom of political expression, and the freedom of the media allow citizens to vote in favour of their own interest. Democracy in Canada is rooted on the grounds of equal rights; this gives people equality before the law, human rights, free and fair elections and so on. In comparison to the Third World, power is in the hands of the “Big Men”, the police and army are the ones who hold control not the people and where corruption is a norm, Canada may look like a utopia. Another strong point in the Canadian political system is everyone no matter race or sex has the right to vote as long as you are a Canadian citizen over the age of eighteen. Until the 60s/70s parties would make up electoral boundaries this was done to increase the number of votes in that location this is called gerrymander, this was unfair because certain parties had an advantage over others. However, now under the Electoral Boundaries Commissions this problem does not occur and no party has the upper hand over another. Interestingly the
It has become widely accepted that Canada uses a first past the post electoral system. However, this system may not be in the best interest of Canada any more. There are many reasons why Canada should change its electoral system to a mixed member proportional one, a variant of proportional representation. With a first past the post system, the elected officials will always be of the majority and this excludes minorities from fair representation. Adopting MMP can create stronger voter turnouts, more personal campaigning, better individual representation, and better party selection. John Hiemstra and Harold Janson, are both in favour of a MMP electoral system. They understand that with the switch, the citizens will get more representation in
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.
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
The surprising voter turnout at these elections is a powerful example of the upsides downs happening in politics and it is illustrative of what makes politics interesting as we can never be too sure of what may happen: new government elected, fresh start for Canada, the path towards a new political future is activate in order to preserve an ideal democracy every citizen hopes
How can the Canadian government be dominated by one ruler when it has democratic elections with many competing parties? Mellon believes that Canadian elections have low voter turnouts and even lower public interest. Canadian elections are essentially sporadic. Finally, Mellon also believes that prime ministers “…are supported by a growing circle of advisors, pollsters, and spin doctors that help protect their position,” (Hugh 175). The main focus of Mellon’s argument is this idea of a prime-ministerial government.
Although Canadian electoral system has always undergone periodic reforms, new challenges always accompany electoral changes and therefore the system should be consistently reformed to meet new circumstances.The current electoral system in Canada is a product of a series of electoral changes that have always taken place since the foundation of the Canadian confederation in the mid 1880s. During the early years, the rights of individuals to vote were significantly limited as only white males had the right to vote but only after meeting certain requirements. A secret ballot was unheard, and it was only after a number of changes were implemented that all social groups in Canada were given the right to vote. Even after these changes, electoral
In Canada Federal and Provincial First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) elections are based on single member districts or ridings. Each riding chooses one candidate to elect into parliament. In order to win a candidate must obtain the highest number of votes but not necessarily the majority of votes. The party that wins the most ridings is named the official government of Canada with the second place party becoming the official opposition.
In theory, the Parliament is the most important institution in the Canadian government and all members of the parliament are equal. The Prime Minister is supposed to be primus inter pares, meaning first among equals. But over the years, the cabinet has become more institutionalized and less departmentalized. Hence the Prime Minister’s power has increased over the years. Canada is the one of the most decentralized federations in the
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
Even though opposition doing everything they can to topple the power of Alberta PC, PC wining election until 2012 which is describe as one-party system and finally lose their place at 2015 election. After the Social Credit’s tenure in office, as well as the Lougheed Conservative era, NDP in Alberta ended the Socred hold of power in 2015 by winning the general election of Alberta with 54 seats, PC getting 10 seats, liberal getting 1 seats, wild rose getting 21 seats and Alberta party getting 1 seats in Legislative Assembly of Alberta.
For decades, Canadians have been defending their right to have a fair and open electoral system. Since its creation in 1867, Canada has been proud to call itself a true democratic country, but today there would be many people who disagree with this statement. The Canadian electoral system, which uses First Past The Post (FPTP), has come under scrutiny for not being as fair as it claims to be. Over the past couple of decades, many countries have switched their system to Proportional Representation (PR) or some form of it. Based on successful results in other nations, Canada’s current FPTP system should change to Mixed Member Proportional (MMP), which is a form of Proportional Representation, as it will allow for more fair elections. The intent of this paper is to outline how an electoral reform from First Past the Post to Proportional Representation or Mixed-Member Proportional, will lead to more confidence in the government, more accurate seat-vote percentage, and better overall representation of the population.
The individual is of minimal significance when considering who to vote for in an election. Canadians can vote with confidence because they know politicians' actions will fall in line with the ideology of their respective party, which they have elected to become government.
FPP is a simple system that for the average citizen is easy to understand and it provides electorates with fast results. However, simplicity and fast results are being enjoyed at the expense of democracy. The system’s ability to generate phony majority governments represents a major blow to Canadian democracy. In Canada’s case, it is the lack of proportionality that allows this to happen . Canada’s current voting system “has been producing majority governments with less than 50% of the popular vote” since the 1940’s. . Only in the Canadian voting system “parties can turn minority of votes into majority of seats.” When parties rule against the will of the majority of the population, democratic values are clearly undermined; therefore, Canada must