欢迎来到留学生英语论文网

客服信息

我们支持 澳洲论文代写 Assignment代写、加拿大论文代写 Assignment代写、新西兰论文代写 Assignment代写、美国论文代写 Assignment代写、英国论文代写 Assignment代写、及其他国家的英语文书润色修改代写方案.论文写作指导服务

唯一联系方式Q微:7878393

当前位置:首页 > 论文范文 > Politics

Canada's Broken Democracy

发布时间:2017-04-04
该论文是我们的学员投稿,并非我们专家级的写作水平!如果你有论文作业写作指导需求请联系我们的客服人员

Broken Democracy

With such massive territory, resource-wealthy lands, and immense cultural diversity, Canadians seem to have it all. Though in reality, with the decline of voter turnouts, unsuitable constitutional model with a Senate of no use, the desires and necessities of the citizens are somehow being neglected. In consequence, its citizens through means of poor representation perceive the government of Canada as dysfunctional. It is suggested by this research, with the support of contemporary empirical statistics and circumstances that the Canadian government is dysfunctional due to how the political institution is structured. Through the research, it is to be established that the Westminster Model, First-Past-the-Post voting system, and an unnecessary, appointed Senate is to blame as why the desires and needs of the citizens are poorly represented ensuing in a dysfunctional federal government.

The research will proceed into three associated sections. Section I will state a major criticism of the Westminster Model through centralization in power of the Prime Minister. Section II will argue that the Senate should be abolished as it is unrepresented and unelected. Section III will point out concerns that result through a First-Past-the-Post electoral system in which Canada practices up to date. It is to be established then that there is little to no place in the federal government where the desires of the citizens are being acted upon.

Section I: The Westminster Model

It is significant to address the government structure of Canada, as the entirety of the research will be grounded on it. Canada patterned its constitutional structure with one that is practiced in United Kingdom, called the Westminster model. The system includes, “the concentration of executive power through one-party cabinets, executive dominance over the legislature, party system, asymmetric bicameralism, and plurality elections” (Studlar 2006, 837-841). Over time, such government structure aided Canada into developing as an industrialized sovereign nation. Although, with the decline of citizen participation primary in elections in the past decade, it is perceptible that there is a problem on how the Canadian government operates and blame can be concentrated to the core structure of the political institution.

One foremost criticism of the Westminster model is that such constitution allows the presence of a prevailing executive branch in which power is primarily centralized to the Prime Minister. This centralization of power deviates the notion of Canada as a democracy but rather a monarchy or may even be called a dictatorship. The Prime Minister exercises the power to appoint members of the Cabinet, Senate, and even play a major role into the selection of the Governor General, all of this while maintaining dominance in the House of Commons. Elizabeth May, MP and leader of the Green Party of Canada, stated in her interview with Deborah Campbell, that “the excessive power exercised by the Prime Minister has made the Prime Minister's Office the central controlling force and absolute decision-maker in the federal government” (Campbell 2013).

Furthermore, the authoritative position of the Prime Minister is undoubtedly biased not only for politicians in the government but also, and mostly, for the citizens of the nation. The position of the Prime Minister did not come about by direct election of the public but rather by the election of representatives the public elected. Such notion still partake a sense of democracy. Although in contrast, the only democratic component in the federal government (the representatives) are having complications in expressing the desires of their constituencies as they may face rough consequences if they stand their opinions towards the Prime Minister. To supplement this point, Mark Jarvis and Lori Turnbull stated that, “The prime minister commands the steadfast loyalty of his MPs, largely through a carrot-and-stick approach; co-operative MPs might be rewarded with cabinet posts or coveted committee positions, while rogues can be and at times are punished with removal from caucus or even barred from running as a candidate for the party in future elections” (Jarvis and Turnbull 2012). In simple terms MPs are without choice, required to act upon the desires of the prime minister and not the desires of the people that elected them. This led us to wonder as where the opinions and desires of the citizens can be found in the government.

Section II: The Senate

The Westminster model constitutes an asymmetric bicameralism, which means that the legislature should comprise two houses, including, the Senate or the “upper house”, one of the most controversial topic in Canadian political discussions and conferences today. A key argument in these discussions is whether the Senate is still essential. Moreover, the “quest for a Triple-E Senate” also appears in such discussions, which simply advocates for a Senate that is “elected, equal, and effective” (Behiels 2010, 118-145). All of these talks occur for a certain cause or purpose. Unlike the House of Commons, people that comprise the Senate are not democratically elected but appointed by the Governor General only with the advice of the Prime Minister. It is ludicrous that such system even exists. A system in which an individual has the opportunity to regulate a whole sector of the government is extremely biased. It safe then to state, with this flawed structure that the Canadian constitution is in dire need of reform.

With the “failure of the Meech Lake and the Charlottetown Accords”, the likelihood of some sort of a constitutional reform, to some extent, is impossible (Savage 2007, 137-170). Although in 2011, Prime Minister, Stephen Harper introduced Bill C-7, “An Act respecting the selection of senators and amending the Constitution Act, 1867 in respect of Senate term limits” (Spano 2011). Yet another valiant action into reforming the constitution, though as with other attempt in the past such bill in some way cannot be approved. This leaves just one alternative, the abolishing of the entire Senatorial institution.

It is ruthless enough to have an indirect democratic constitution, but having such institution in the government completely deviates the notion of democracy. Furthermore, the fact that the Prime Minister is able to ‘indirectly’ appoint senators, a notion in to which is associated with the power to enact all of his interest with having little to none opposition means that such institution is left unchecked and is precisely ineffective therefore, should be abolished. To supplement the point of abolition, Scott Henning of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation stated that, “The more complicated the reform, the more likely provincial horse-trading and tinkering will ruin any chance for improving the system. Abolition has the best chance of passing and getting us through opening the Constitution unscathed” (Hennig 2013). This ascertains that abolishing the entire institution of the Senate is the most legitimate action to act upon.

Section III: First-Past-the-Post Electoral System

It has been demonstrated to this point that the Prime Minister within the Westminster constitutional model holds excessive amounts of power and the representatives contained in the House of Commons are failing to express the desires and needs of their constituencies through means of party restrictions and the lack of influence from the opposition. It has also been established that the Senatorial institution, so called the Upper House, is to be abolished as reforming the constitution is unattainable, in addition the lack of effectiveness and representation in such institution attests the need for such action. With all these said, it is apparent that the desires of the citizens are not being heard. To point out the problem as to why such poor representation is occurring, it is important to address the notion of Plurality Electoral system, also called First-Past-the-Post.

It is important to address what FPTP or Plurality Electoral System is. In such system, “Countries are divided into territorial single-member constituencies; voters within each constituency cast a single ballot for one candidate; the candidate with the largest share of vote in each seat is elected; and in turn, the party with the largest number of parliamentary seats forms the government (Norris 2004, 3-66)”. The key word in this definition is ‘share’. For instance, in a certain election in where three candidates are running for office, one candidate received 36% of the votes while the other two received 32% each. The candidate with the highest portion of votes wins the election. A definite problem that one can found with this analysis is that the rest 64% of the votes are wasted therefore, would not be represented in the government. This maybe the reason as to why “turnout tends to be lower under plurality rule” (Fisher et al 2008, 89-104)

Source: Elections Canada

As observed on the graph above, the voter-turnout in the country has declined. It is never good to have such low participation in elections as Canada prides itself as a sovereign democratic nation. In a democratic government the desires and wants of the citizens ought to come first but over the years these desires and wants cannot even be heard.

Conclusion

Through the years of Canadian national growth the Westminster constitutional model has helped Canada in to becoming a world economic leader. It is never to be forgotten that such system has facilitated into uniting the east and the west. Although contemporarily, leaders of the Canadian nation has taken the system into advantage and abused the same constitution that the Fathers of Confederation has founded. Prime Ministers used their position to create self-centered policies without considering the interest of the citizens. The respected Upper House, through the past decade has been center of controversies and corruption without even being democratically elected. Citizen-participation in elections have declined as votes are being wasted through such Plurality system. It is established by this research that the longstanding Westminster constitutional system, unelected and inefficient Senate, and Plurality electoral system has caused severe government dysfunction. It is up to the people of Canada to stand for their beliefs as they are the only means into resolving all these evils.

Bibliography

Behiels, Michael D. 2010. "Stephen Harper's Rise to Power: Will His "New" Conservative Party Become Canada's "Natural Governing Party" of the Twenty-First Century?" The AmericanReview of Canadian Studies 40 (1): 118-145. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1283748908?accountid=14771.

Block, Clayton, Daniel Larrivée, and Stephen Warner. "Estimation of Voter Turnout by Age Group and Gender at the 2011 Federal General Election." Elections Canada. April 1, 2012. Accessed November 11, 2014. http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=rec/part/estim/41ge&document=report41&lang=e#p4.

Campbell, Deborah. "Elizabeth May: How to Stop Harper's 'Elected Dictatorship'" The Tyee. October 16, 2013. Accessed November 10, 2014. http://thetyee.ca/News/2013/10/16/How-to-Stop-Harpers-Elected-Dictatorship/.

Fisher, Stephen D., Laurence Lessard-Phillips, Sara B. Hobolt, and John Curtice. 2008. "Disengaging Voters: Do Plurality Systems Discourage the Less Knowledgeable from Voting?" Electoral Studies 27 (1): 89-104. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2007.11.001. http://search.proquest.com/docview/59807610?accountid=14771.

Hennig, Scott. "Tear Down." Reform or Abolish. November 25, 2013. Accessed November 11, 2014. http://reformorabolish.ca/tear-down/.

Jarvis, Mark, and Lori Turnbull. "Mark D. Jarvis & Lori Turnbull: Canadian Prime Ministers Have Too Much Power." National Post Full Comment. May 2, 2012. Accessed November 10, 2014. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/05/02/mark-d-jarvis-lori-turnbull-canadian-prime-ministers-have-too-much-power/

Norris, Pippa. 2004. Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior, 3-66. West Nyack, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. Accessed November 11, 2014. ProQuest ebrary.

Spano, Sebastian. "Legislative Summary of Bill C-7." Library of Parliament Research Publications. June 27, 2011. Accessed November 11, 2014. http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?ls=C7&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=1&source=library_prb&Language=E.

Studlar, Donley T. and Kyle Christensen. 2006. "Is Canada a Westminster Or Consensus Democracy? A Brief Analysis." PS: Political Science & Politics 39 (4): 837-841. http://search.proquest.com/docview/59730947?accountid=14771.


上一篇:Voting Habits in American Elections 下一篇:Media and the representation of war