Thirdly, the structure of the Canadian parliament is not the only method that can be used. Types of reforms that have been proposed have been based off of other country upper house configurations. Those countries have shown working alternative ways of how to separate powers over the legislative bodies. The Federal Republic of Germany has an alternative approach to federalism which differs to that of Canada and so does the United States of America. Those two countries have been very successful with their unique forms of parliament and offer an alternative structure to what Canada currently has.
The history of the formation of upper houses in certain countries comes with the necessity to correct the injustices of their pasts. The institutional
…show more content…
The Bundesrat is a body within the German government that represents the interests of the individual states and thus acts as a link between the Federation and the federal states. The Bundesrat is made up of appointed representatives of the federal state government with each state given a certain amount of votes in regards to their population. In total there are 69 seats with each Lander given between three to six seats. (Reuter 2009, pg. 17) The Bundesrat democratic legitimacy comes from the fact that its state governments are elected and thus those appointed to the Bundesrat were theoretically chosen by the people. Thus to be a member of the Bundesrat the person must have a role in the government at the federal state level. The Bundesrat does not need to pass every bill, but rather is only required to provide approval to bills if they directly affect the Lander and currently almost 50% of all bills passed need the approval of the Bundesrat. (U.S. Library of Congress) The Bundesrat can reject appeal laws to Federal matters, but the Bundestag can overrule those objections by having the same majority as in the Bundesrat who rejected it. Review and discussion over the proposals submitted by the Federal government are two of the Bundesrat’s main responsibilities which portray its checks and balances role in the federal government. If an agreement can not be made between the two chambers, then a Joint Conference Committee is created to resolve any differences and create a bill that has been passed by a majority in each chamber. The Bundesrat has a total of 16 committees who are are given certain undertakings in regards to their areas of knowledge and experience. (Reuter 2009, pg. 25) The Bundesrat only has six weeks to consider a bill so the work in the Bundesrat is generally done
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.
As time goes on, some countries become more relevant in the global sphere while others start to fade away. Canada is a country that only becomes more relevant as time goes on. Since being granted full sovereignty, Canada has had a growing role as a major world player. Much of their international growth has to do with its close ties to the United States and the United Kingdom. However, the country has also undergone huge change and refocusing on a domestic level. With influence from both Europe and the United States, Canada has a very unique system of governing. This paper will focus on a few major areas of Canada. It will look into the history of Canada, the structure of its government, its politics, and many of the major issues it faces today.
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.
Many modern democracies have a bicameral legislature which is a body of government that consist of two legislative chambers. The bicameral legislature provides representation for both, the citizens of the country and the state legislature on a federal level. The Canadian parliament has two chambers, the lower chamber which is an elected House of Commons and the upper chamber which is the non-elected Senate. The Canadian Senate is assumed to be a “sober second thought” [3] on government legislation which is a phrase that describes the Senate’s role in promoting and defending regional interest. There has been an immense amount of the public outcry regarding the Senate after spending scandal that occurred during the recent election period. A question that has induced discussion in parliament is whether the Canadian Senate should be reformed or not? This issue divides the population in half because of differing views. Some political parties want the abolition of the Senate to occur while other parties would like to have an elected Senate because provinces are not represented equally. A method of deciding the faith of the current Senate, the functions of the Senate and objectives of Senate reform should be defined. The assumptions about the purpose of the Senate, problems of the current Senate, the goal of Senate reform and the method of achieving the reform may help provide a consensus on how the Senate should be reformed.
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 original purpose of the senate was two-fold, firstly they were meant to add some degree of regional representation to the debate. The one-hundred and five senators are separated into regions with a set number coming from each of the regions of the country. Secondly, the senate was meant to be in the words of Sir John a Macdonald “a chamber for a sober second thought” , that is to say that it provides a second opinion on bills and any other legislation that has passed through the house of commons. The modern senate however does not fulfill these two functions adequately anymore, instead the regional distribution is not done equally, so there are areas that are very over represented and others such as British Columbia that are woefully under represented . And the sober second thought that the senate is meant to offer is instead turning into a more symbolic confirmation similar to the royal assent that the Governor General gives in the name of the Queen. This second issue happens because the senate lacks the legitimacy of the house of commons because they are not elected. In modern times the public is weary of a body of un elected officials affecting the legislation of their chosen elected officials. Now to effectively reform the senate there are three main areas that will need to change namely the distribution of seats, the way in which senators are chosen, and the affiliations of the senators themselves. Firstly, the original purpose of regional representation in the senate was to counteract the representation by population in the house of commons. This helped to ensure that French speaking Quebecois, and the western provinces were not marginalized by the English speaking majority and the power of Ontario in national policy making. The distribution of the seats is done as follows, first the country was split into four regions the Maritimes,
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 need for government reform in Upper and Lower Canada was created because of the incompetent way the government managed the country, a lack of representation in the government, a lack of understanding of the colonist's in Upper and Lower Canada, and discrimination towards the French in Lower Canada. Numerous colonists arrived to Upper and Lower Canada to begin a new life with a proper government however, the government in Canada did not satisfy their needs.
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.
In theory, the Parliament is the most important institution in the Canadian government and all members of the parliament are equal. The Prime Minister is supposed to be primus inter pares, meaning first among equals. But over the years, the cabinet has become more institutionalized and less departmentalized. Hence the Prime Minister’s power has increased over the years. Canada is the one of the most decentralized federations in the
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
When evaluating either the liberal democracy or constitutional monarchy in Canada it is rudimentary and essential to first recognize that any one given governing structure or system cannot unequivocally be correct or incorrect. Therefore, the present Canadian liberal democratic system functions well; nonetheless, it would further benefit from adopting both the Nordic democratic socialist model and the proportional representation electoral system. The Nordic governing system would benefit the individuals by providing them with parallel wages, universal health care, free or affordable education, public pension plans, welfare, and free trade. Next, if Canada is to adopt the proportional representation electoral system the votes will better represent
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.
Germany is a federal parliamentary republic, and federal legislative power is vested in the Bundestag (the parliament of Germany) and the Bundesrat, the representative body of the (Lander), Germany 's regional states. There is a multi-party system that, since 1949, has been dominated by the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD). The judiciary of Germany is independent of the executive and the legislature. The political system is laid out in the 1949 constitution, the Basic Law, which remained in effect with minor amendments after German reunification in 1990. The constitution emphasizes the protection of individual liberty in an extensive catalogue of human and civil rights and divides powers