The Structural Constraints Of The Liberal Party 's Loss

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.

The Liberal Party's membership of Canada is committed to the fundamentals that have developed and sustained the Liberal Party from any other political party; individual freedom, responsibility and human dignity in the framework of a just society; political freedom in the framework of meaningful participation by all interested persons, and the Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides the framework for both a democratic society and for the interaction of members within the party. It is also devoted to equal opportunity for every person, to the enhancement of our unique and diverse cultural community, to the recognition that English and French are the official languages of Canada, and to the preservation of the Canadian identity

Since party politics began in Canada, the style in which leaders are elected is comparable to a horse race. Using the single member plurality (SMP), more commonly referred to as “first past the post,” method of seat allocation in both the House of Commons and each province's Legislative Assembly, whoever gets the most votes is asked to form the government; this only takes into accounts the number of seats a party wins, not the overall popular vote. In a political system not limited to two parties, like the United States, many times over 50% of Canadians do not want the party that won, to win. In this current electoral system, votes are wasted, smaller parties are terribly misrepresented and, in some cases, a party with a lower percent of

First-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system in general allows candidates to win who may not have a majority of the vote. It privileges big parties and majorities at the cost of smaller parties and coalitions. It also favours parties with strong regional concentrations over parties whose electoral base is more spread out. This is Canada’s current election system and for the past couple of years. In the years that Harper has been in power, he has won majority of the seats with less than 50 percent of the votes. In fact, in 2011, “Stephen Harper won a majority government with 54.1 percent of the seats and only 39.6 percent of the total vote” (Aucoin 161). Harper was able to form a majority government without a majority of the vote and he had a plurality of votes that was less than 50 percent. Canada has been electing its government in this way and the winning party does not hold the majority of the votes, with a few exceptions. In terms of changing the election system, FPTP system is able to produce a clear majority and the majority that wins is able to produce a clear line of power through a majority government. Also, supporters of FPTP, such as Brian Crowly, say that clear lines of power are

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

In recent elections, the separatist parties in Quebec have seen crushing defeats, raising questions about their relevance in modern day Canada. Support for Quebec separatism has diminished in the past several decades, with the rise of the NDP in the 2011 federal election and the more recent provincial Liberal victory in April of 2014. In the 2011 federal election, specifically, the Bloc Quebecois was reduced to only four seats in the House of Commons, while the NDP took the majority of Quebec’s seats. The provincial Parti Quebecois (PQ) has also been faltering, losing more often than not to the Liberal Party of Quebec (PLQ). Indeed, over the past decade, the PLQ has only lost one election, and has held majorities in many. The most recent election put them back into power after a short PQ minority government that began in 2012. These recent elections may point to a future in which the separatist movement in Quebec may be silenced. Since the late 1950s, the question of Quebec separatism has existed, with levels of support varying throughout the following decades, leading up the referendums of 1980 and 1995. The defeats suffered by the separatist parties in recent elections demonstrate that the separatist movement may be close to being over in Quebec.

Save and complete this worksheet and upload to the Unit 1 Activity 11 Dropbox by the deadline. Where indicated cite your sources by providing links to your references.

Fred Cutler and Matthew Mendelsohn’s article “Unnatural Loyalists or Naive Collaborationists? The governments and Citizens of Canadian Federalism”, delved into a compelling analysis of Canadian citizens and federalism. In a country of much diversity, as discussed in lecture, it is difficult for citizens to hold the ‘right’ government accountable because of the blame shifting each level of government does. To give an illustration, this article briefly touches upon the propaganda the provincial and federal government use to shift blame on one another for policies such as healthcare and education. However Cutler and Mendelsohn go one step further and analyze if Canadian citizens are able to judge policies without allowing their provincial status

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 recent 2015 federal election saw a dramatic change in the Canadian political landscape. The Conservative party, the governing party of Canada for the past decade, was thoroughly defeated with the Liberals, who had, in relation to seats, been in third place, gaining a majority and subsequently forming government. The reasons for this defeat are examined in the editorial: Why the Conservatives lost, and how they can win again.

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.

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

At the end of World War One in November 1918 the Labour Party emerged as a strong political Party. Prior to this it was the Liberal Party that was expected to be the main opposition to the Conservatives, with Labour as a party who used the popularity of the Liberals to become noticed. However, it soon became apparent that the Liberals were a weak and flagging party who were unable to unite as one to make decisions. It is evident that the First World War may have been an important factor in the growth of Labour and the decline of the Liberals.

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

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.