Essay On Canadian Politics

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

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.

Though Harper wanted to run for the federal New Democratic Party for the 1993 election he resigned from the Manitoba

It is interesting to note that this sweep, in which the Progressive-Conservatives essentially dominated in all provinces never got the same attention that the Liberals' victories had received in the 1960s and 1970s and in particular Trudeau's stature among the population versus Mulroney's is noteworthy. There was no sort of Mulroneymania among the press and the general population. The question is why did Mulroney fail, despite having greater electoral success in 1984 than Trudeau did in 1968, why was Mulroney unable to capture the same amount of the enthusiasm that Trudeau had in 1968? It may have to do with the fact that many of the key platform planks among the Liberals and the Progressive-Conservatives were similar, in particular when it came to Quebec. I was surprised just how closely Mulroney's Quebec policy, despite being a Progressive-Conservative, mirrored that of Trudeau's. In addition, when it comes to discussing Quebec politics, it is rather surprising to see the Quebec population, which was by-in-large politically left-leaning, vote en masse for a Progressive-Conservative party running on a neoconservative platform, the fact that Mulroney promised

If the New Democratic Party gains power, they are going to make the health care in Canada better for citizens. Health care is definitely a very important factor in keeping everyone in Canada happy and healthy. Without healthcare, we will get sick more frequently, and not going to regular checkups will make diseases more likely to affect us negatively. The NDP is proposing to end the fees for ambulance services. This will make people more likely to call an ambulance instead of taking a chance of driving themselves. This could save lives because ambulances are much faster than driving yourself in a car because people are required by law to move out of the way of an incoming ambulance on the road. The NDP is saying to give seniors the support they need to live in their own homes instead of being forced to move to an old age home when they get to old to care for themselves or when loved ones and family can no longer care for them. If they get support in their homes, they will not need to go through the stress of moving to a different environment in their late age. If they reduce their stress to as little as possible, they will be more prone to a longer life span. The NDP is promising a fifty percent increase in the number of doctors and nurses being trained each year, so that there is more available in hospitals and emergency

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 government needs to take more caution creating the federal budget. Edwards stated that “Consider Canada's experience. In the mid-1990s, the federal government faced a debt crisis caused by overspending, which is similar to America's current situation. But the Canadian government reversed course and slashed spending from 23 percent of GDP in 1993, to 17 percent by 2000, to just 15 percent today. The Canadian economy did not sink into a recession from the cuts as Keynesians would have expected but instead grew strongly during the 1990s and 2000s."

Yet the strings on the public purse continue to tighten. Transfer payments from the federal government continue to decrease as provincial debt loads increase. And, although the minister of health and the premier assured them that the costs of health care were doubling or even tripling, Albertans have witnessed a steady decline in government spending on health care. The proportion of gross domestic product, (GDP), which Alberta allocates to health care is ranked last among the ten provinces, (Taft, 1997). Albertans now find themselves with a struggling health care system and a waiting list.

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.

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

The Four Political Parties of Canada       In a country as vast and as culturally diverse as Canada, many different political opinions can be found stretched across the country. From the affluent neighbourhoods of West Vancouver to the small fishing towns located on the east coast of Newfoundland, political opinions and affiliations range from the left wing to the right wing. To represent these varying political views, Canada has four official national political parties to choose from: the Liberals (who are currently in power), the Progressive Conservatives, the New Democrats, and the Reform Party. What is particularly interesting is that none of the latter three parties compose Her Majesty's Official Opposition in the House

During the twentieth century, Canada as a nation witnessed and endured several historical events that have had a deep and profound influence on Canadian politics. The most influential and constant force in twentieth century Canadian politics has been the increasing power and command of Quebec nationalism and the influence it has had on Canadian politics today. Quebec nationalism has shaped the structure and dynamics of Canadian federalism from a centralized to a decentralized form of federal government (Beland and Lecours 2010, 423). The decentralization of several sectors within the Canadian government has been a direct effect of Quebec nationalism. Decentralization has led to more autonomy among the provincial governments, especially in

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.

Voters are not the only people who benefit from the practice of party discipline. The practice is also fundamentally important for the stability of the Canadian government. Being a pluralist country means there are groups (political parties) of differing ideologies that represent