Prime Minister Research Paper

Firstly, the House of Commons has the ultimate check on government power via a vote of no confidence, this last happened in 1979 when Margaret Thatcher was able to be elected due to the Labour government's failure.

These sorts of powers would generally be associated with a President, not a Prime Minister.

The Scrutiny of executives by the Parliament would not let political parties to abuse its power as Select Committees question the Prime Minister publicly. A confidence vote, meaning a motion of no confidence, is a vote on whether a group of people still has confidence in a government or leader. This is mainly a statement or vote which states that a person in a superior position, be it government, managerial, etc, is no longer deemed fit to hold that position. Votes of no confidence would not let the leader of a political power to hold this post is the Prime Minister is found to be dictatorial. Other members of Executive, for example cabinet discussions, scrutinise the Prime Minister

The prime minister has a significant amount of power within the Canadian government. Some of the sources of the prime minister’s powers are the number of seats in the House of Commons he and his party has, his ability to give push/give priority to certain government agendas, and his ability to appoint different governmental positions. For a politician to hold the office of PM his party must hold the majority of the seats in the house; this means that by convention his party must be in solidarity with his decisions, which gives the PM’s the loyal support of his party. Another power of the PM is the ability to put forward government agendas that they believe should be prioritized. The PM also has the ability to appoint people who they believe

In the constitutional monarchy, the resident Governor-General 99% of the time carries out ceremonial tasks, however in the unlikely case that the Prime Minister is acting against the constitution or if he/she can’t guarantee safe passage of supply or if he/she lose confidence of the House of Reps. This along with other reserved powers of the Governor-General allow for the country to function smoothly. As may be alluded to by the left-wing progressives, the reserved powers of the Governor-General have only been used once in history to avoid the country going into economic meltdown since the Prime Minister couldn’t secure supply for the budget. From the conservative view, since the Queen’s representative is a resident of Australia they will only make decisions first and foremost with the best interest of the nation at heart. Another issue in a republican system which the constitutional monarchy would solve is the likelihood of a dictatorship. Polls suggest that if we were to become a republic, they want to vote in a president. However, the problem with this model is that the executive president will hold the ability to enforce views and powers which may be seen as presidential oversight. Nonetheless, he may be able to do that. This scenario would be disastrous if a

Canada’s parliamentary system is designed to preclude the formation of absolute power. Critics and followers of Canadian politics argue that the Prime Minister of Canada stands alone from the rest of the government. The powers vested in the prime minister, along with the persistent media attention given to the position, reinforce the Prime Minister of Canada’s superior role both in the House of Commons and in the public. The result has led to concerns regarding the power of the prime minister. Hugh Mellon argues that the prime minister of Canada is indeed too powerful. Mellon refers to the prime minister’s control over Canada a prime-ministerial government, where the prime minister encounters few constraints on the usage of his powers.

However, prime ministers are as powerful as they appear due to the multiple sources of power they control within the UK. Mainly, the prime minister has a vast amount of power as

Justin Trudeau was born on Christmas day. He is strong, athletic and relatable. His extraordinary childhood of privilege was public. As a Prime Minister, he is framed mostly to posse’s youthful charm and traits - the physical acumen, a taste for the rigorous, and the zeal for testing himself. Indeed, his celebrity was a contributing factor and ascension to the office of the prime minister.

There is a larger insight on the whole picture. The PM alone or the along with several ministers set the priorities and direction of the government while allowing the central agencies overlook the situation. Central agencies like Prime Minister’s Office, Privy Council Office, Department of Finance and Treasury Board Secretariat became more powerful in the political system.

Being the leader of the free world is an accomplishment that citizens of the United States see as job with a vast amount of responsibility. Along with the responsibility comes great scrutiny. Presidents have come and gone, leaving a legacy that either creates a lasting memory of great leadership, or leaves a bad taste in the mouth of American voters. Leading the way in the land of the free is judged by three points: how the president chose to conduct themselves during controversial times, critical situations, and most importantly how they plan to help the citizens of the United States.

The president and the prime minister are both in charge of the day to day operations of government and they are both the leaders of military.

The monarch is a figure head and does no decision making. The voters of a parliamentary system elect parliament who then elect the prime minister and the cabinet. The prime minister is normally the leader of the most popular party in parliament. The PM even being the head of government is not as powerful as the head of government in a presidential system. The parliament of the system withholds the most power. They make or break any law. Compared to the separation of powers as in a presidential system there is only a separation of functions. Each part of government has its own function to perform, but there is no system of checks and balances. An example of the overlapping of powers is the need of a vote of confidence. A vote of confidence is proposed by a party and needs backing from the other part of government. With no system of sorts there is more likely of upheaval and change of rule. There is not as much stability in a parliamentary system as there is in a presidential. Lastly there is no judicial rule as there is in a presidential system. A parliamentary system has had success in the past but still is seen as not as successful as a presidential system.

After reading the min-case, The Prime Minister’s Powerful Better Half I would portray Ching as an authoritative leader. As stated by the textbook “influences can be defined as the change in a target agent’s attitudes, values, beliefs, or behavior as the result of influence tactics”. Influence tactics is a person’s actual behavior that is designed to change another person’s attitudes, beliefs, values or behaviors. The concept usually comes from the leader’s perspective. HO Ching is the CEO of Temasek with an outstanding education background, excellent working background as well as a personal background. Also, in my reading HO Ching expresses her abilities to change the behaviors of staff in ‘humble roots’. She has the commitment and the determination to build an effective enterprise.

Parliament - Parliament is pretty much the identical to the legislative branch here in the US. The prime minister is accountable in his actions to the parliament. The parliament consists of the house of lords, house of commons and monarch.

The parliamentary system, unlike the American presidential system, is recognizable by a fusion of powers between the legislative and executive branches. The Prime Minister, who is the chief executive, may be elected to the legislature in the same way that all other members are elected. The Prime Minister is the leader of the party that wins the majority of votes to the legislature-either de facto, or in some cases through an election held by the legislature. The Prime Minister appoints Cabinet Ministers. However, unlike in the presidential system, these members are typically themselves legislature