The Canadian Senate Should Be Reformed Or Not?

In his article Marsh (2010) suggests that the Australian political system could benefit from new infrastructure by replacing senate with committees of

The Senate plays a key role in tandem with the House of Commons, in the operation of Canada’s government, some people think that the Senate should be abolished; however without the Senate, “The right to bear arms” could become true for Canada. The Senate should be reformed; abolishing or keeping the Senate at its current state would be unjust. The current Senate is not elected, effective, nor equal.

In contrast to the Canadian parliamentary system, which has remained fairly static and unchanged since Victorian times, the Canadian legal system has undergone a tremendous evolution over the last century and a half. When looking at Canadian history in depth one discovers the repeated movement to take power from the superiors or the overruling and place it into the palms of the people. As seen through examples our western law (canadian law) has slowly branched off from the supremacy of God (mosaic law), to the supremacy of the monarchy (bristish law), finally to a realization of the importance of citizen participation in the creating, governing, and administrating of the laws (Greek law).

The Canadian electoral system is criticized for using the single member plurality (SMP) system more commonly known as first past the post, we adopted system from the British because at the time there were only two political parties in Canada. The current problem now is that many people feel that the system is unfair given that a party is able to gain a majority government even if they received less than fifty percent of the vote. As long as they have the majority of the popular vote, that party wins. However, the first past the post system has been able to establish a clear line of accountability between the elected representative and the voters. Yet, the public still feels that a proportional representation system would be

The Special Joint Committee of the House of Commons and the Senate was implemented in 1980 in the wake of the Quebec referendum on independence. The goal of the committee was to hear submissions from the public on amendments to the Constitution. In a three-month consultation period, 914 individuals and groups submitted briefs before the committee (Clément, 2015). Hoping to have a direct impact on the Canadian constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, five organizations

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

For many years, there has been an ongoing debate as to whether or not the Senate should undergo a reform. Many Canadian citizens are unsatisfied with the fact that the Senate is not elected. How are citizens to be sure that they are being properly represented when they are not able to choose who represents them? Although the Senate is an integral part of the governmental system, many Canadians are leaning towards the idea to completely abolish the Senate. The credible, David C. Docherty, outlines the previous attempts for the Senate reform while describing the mindset of Canadians and where the reformation of the Senate currently stands in his article “The Canadian Senate: Chamber of Sober Reflection or Loony Cousin Best Not Talked About.” The previous attempts for the Senate reform while describing the mindset of Canadians and where the reformation of the State currently stands.

“When they call the roll in the Senate, the senators do not know whether to answer present or not guilty” (Theodore Roosevelt/Google Images.) The Senate plays an important role in the Canadian government. Canada's Senate today is made up of a variety of backgrounds such as different cultures and religions. It also includes both men and women. The Senate looks at the different issues that individuals or groups might have. They look at the children, veterans, the poor, the elderly and much more. Senators look at issues in more depth. When the House of Commons passes a bill, it must also pass a vote in the Senate before it becomes a law. Canada’s Senate consists of one hundred five politicians,

“The government should not be guided by temporary excitement, but by sober second thought,” stated Martin Van Buren in 1838. In Canada’s government today, this “sober second thought” is provided by the upper house of Parliament, the Senate. This legislative Chamber, created under the Constitution Act of 1867, has, for the most part, met its purpose of considering and revising legislation, investigating national issues, and giving the regions of Canada an equal voice in Parliament; however, due to poor judgment in appointment and a resulting lack of qualification in members, the Senate has also been deemed scandalous and undemocratic. The Senate bears much value as it is crucial to a perceptive government; however, it also bears the need for

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.

The majority of Canadians normally hold similar political notion that, unlike firm beliefs that varies in due time, are more widespread and are considered as the base for political culture. It is these values and attitudes that Canadian citizens share that compose the heart of Canada nation state political culture system. The political culture in general demands other things such as regional or even linguistic aspects to be able to fully explain Canadian society and how it sees politics; nevertheless for this paper, it will only focus on the similarities that Canadian share in their political attitudes of a nation culture as a whole. It will talk about on the likeness of thought that differentiate them from other countries. To be able to understand Canada political culture, one has to understand some historical events that straightening the view point of those living in Canada. Canada is most of the time seen as a multi-cultural country, a country that is built on two society and language the French and the English; yet however there are the common beliefs that all Canadian share. Canada founded it nation through advancement, deciding to exonerate itself from the British Empire slowly with time and change, unlike our neighbor the United State who gain their independence through the revolutionary war,

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

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.