The Democracy Of Canadian Society

“The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed from without. It has to come from within”. (Gandhi) A lawful and fair democracy is one that represents the people, where the will of the people is done not where the government’s will is enforced. Here in Canada we believe a democratic government is well suited for its people but like any other system it has its flaws. This country was a model democracy. Canada’s wealth, respect for legal, human and civil rights almost promises that this country has the potential to uphold a legitimate democracy. Reading headlines today concerning the state of democracy in Canada we can see how our political system is slipping. A democracy should uphold the rights of its people rather than the rights of a

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

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

David C. Docherty’s scholarly journal responds to the continual controversy and debate of the usefulness of the Canadian senate in 2002. Docherty’s article does an amazing job at analyzing the current Canadian senate and argues that the senate is a failing Canadian institution because of two democratic deficiencies: the undemocratic nature of senator selection and the inability of senators to represent provinces properly (45). These two features of why the senate is a failing Canadian institution can be compared to how Rand Dyck defines democracy in Canadian Politics: Critical Approaches. Docherty looks at several previous senate reforms and answers the question of why these senate reforms failed, in doing so Docherty lays down a framework for a possible successful senate reform but acknowledges the obstacles. Docherty does a very good job at accessing the problem of the senate, accessing the problem of previous reforms, and suggesting a plausible type of reform for the senate. This provides the reader with the knowledge of why the Canadian senate is a failing institution but also the possible solutions of how the senate can be reformed in order to maximize its democratic potential. Although, Docherty fails to provide an exact reform that needs to be taken, he just draws upon other failures and hypothesis that this may be the right solution for reform. Rand Dyck’s chapter 11 fills in the missing gap of reform that needs to be taken by drawing upon one of the best attempts at

The first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system used in Canada poses several constraints on political parties, benefitting some and hindering others. Under the FPTP system a winning candidate simply requires one more vote than the next candidate to win the seat, thus emphasizing the importance of regionally concentrated constituent bases (Dickerson & Flanagan, 2009). This structural constraint is inherent to the FPTP electoral system and benefits the Conservative party, who have several regions of concentrated support across Canada. Alberta

A number of issues plague the current state of Canadian democracy, such as poor voter turnout, the increasing polarization of politics, and even numerous scandals regarding the Senate. Yet, arguably the most important issue in relation to the Canadian electoral process is the debate over whether or not the state should implement electoral reform for federal elections, more specifically replacing the Single Member Plurality system (SMP) with the Mixed Member Proportional system (MMP). Some analysts, like Christopher Kam, defend the SMP system and claim that a number of the issues that are used as the basis for the support of MMP are actually the result of larger forces than simply the electoral format. And, that holding politicians

The right to vote in a fair election is fundamental to Canadian democracy. While protected under law, there are tactics which have been used to prevent individuals from exercising this right. In the 2008 and 2011 federal elections, some voters received fraudulent “robo-calls,” instructing them to vote for candidates who were not running for election, or directing them to incorrect or non-existent polling stations. This was a calculated act of voter suppression presenting serious consequences for democracy in Canada. First and foremost, it was a deliberate attempt to deprive Canadians of their right to vote. As such, victims of these calls, as well as many other citizens, were left feeling disillusioned with our electoral system and mistrustful of politics in general. This has not been aided by the fact that only one person was ever charged in connection with the scandal. What that has proven, however, is that it is possible to utilize robo-calls to commit election fraud with relatively little consequence. The use of robo-calls poses a harmful impact to Canadian democracy by denying citizens their right to vote, fostering distrust in politics, and setting a dangerous precedent for future electoral fraud.

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

Another important reason that Canada should select a different election system is that the FPTP system has a large impact on smaller parties. According to Political Scientist Maurice Duverger’s Law, given enough time FPTP systems will eventually become a

The current plurality voting system in Canada is regularly attacked for unfairly representing the popular vote and giving some parties a disproportionate amount of legislative power while leaving others with none. Opponents contend that other electoral systems would be far superior and provide a better democracy. Proportional representation (PR) is usually cited as the best alternative; the debate of proportional representation versus plurality often hinges on the balance between fairness and efficiency. Without attempting the political calculus to determine the rate at which fairness should be sacrificed for efficiency, this paper will address the very claim that PR is more fair than the plurality system. The proponents contend that PR is

A democratic government has long been favoured as the most fair and representative government for a country to have. This essay will explore the advantages and disadvantages of both minority and majority government (for example efficiency, compromise, and power) and argue that in fact neither offers a fair representation of Canadian’s due to lack of both transparency and accountability.

First Past the Post and Proportional Representation. Instead of throwing out First Past the Post and replacing it with Proportional Representation we should try to combine them. Mixed Member proportional takes the best aspects from each of this systems and combines them to make the “perfect” system. Ontario is already experimenting with Mixed Member proportional. Mixed Member Proportional is more transparent. They provide a list before the election of all candidates and how they picked them. Using this list people can see if there is a strong man to woman ratio and if all races, religions etc are represented. Along with people voting for their local candidate people also vote for their of choice. The party vote determines the share of seats for that party. Also, there are more safeguards such as if the party doesn’t have enough members to fill their share of seats they can “top them up.” Topping them up is when the party takes the top members and uses them to fill the open seats. This system will make parties represent every race, religion and

As Canadian citizens we are entitled to our rights and freedoms however, certain ’civic duties’ exist that every member of our democratic society must uphold. Among these, voting is probably the most crucial to the successful operation of a democratic society.

There is a fundamental problem with democracy in Canada. The problem is rooted within our federal parliamentary voting-system. However, there is a promising solution to this issue. Canada should adopt the proportional representation system, known as the party list format (party-list PR), at the federal level if we wish to promote the expansion of democracy. If Canada embraces proportional representation in the battle for electoral reform then we will see beneficial results. Party-list PR will increase voter participation, which in turn will create more accurate representation in the parliament and ultimately a positive shift away from our disturbingly partisan dominated political culture.