When looking at the current state of Senate in Canada today, many provincial governments are unhappy with their position in parliament and how their voices are being heard in the federal government. Senate reform has been a popular topic for over 60 years, with minimal changes toward how Senate has been run since the Constitution amendment in 1982. Originally, the Senate was to be a platform where regional representation was shown at the national level, and at its creation was credited with three main duties: to give proper representation of the regions of Canada, to be a ‘sober second thought’ for the House of Commons legislation, and to represent the population for Canadian interests. Many view that these duties are not being properly done by the current senate and have in many …show more content…
Looking at the political history of Canada, there has been quite a few times when provinces were unhappy with the divisions of powers between themselves and the federal government. In 1985 Alberta’s Select Special Committee proposed the idea of a Triple E Senate reform. They viewed parliament, especially Senate, as a way that they could bring their issues to the national forum and they could be taken care of. The provinces have been more interested in a more regionally represented parliament that would be more interested in aiding in regional issues. They believe that Senate should follow through with one of its major duties and instead of simply focusing on Ontario and Quebec due to their larger populations, should instead have representatives from each province to strengthen the federal government in its relations with its provinces and the total Canadian
Whereas, the Quebec conference was a plan to develop a detailed plan for confederation in which it said there was one vote per colony except east and west Canada where they got two. Then Prince Edward Island started to worry about representation due to a small size. After that it then adopted the seventy-two resolutions and that was a plan of what the government will look
An example of Federal governments making it difficult for provincial governments would be when the Federal government challenged Premier Dufferin Pattullo’s authority. He had introduced reforms to shorten the workday,increase minimum wage and increase relief payments, he also attempted to introduce many projects into BC. However, the federal government challenged his authority and didn’t allow him to carry out those
Pierre Elliott Trudeau is a significant person in the history of my theme, Canadian politics in relation to the legal system. As the 15th Prime Minister of Canada, he played a huge role in shaping Canada through his political career by upholding a philosophy of Canada united as one through a strong federal government. In the wake of the 1980 referendum win, Trudeau immediately wanted to fulfill the constitutional promise that he made during his campaign. It was he who had the vision of patriating the Constitution, and for the following 18 months this would become his top priority. Being the most reluctant to include an entrenched Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Constitution, he immediately formed a commission to get ideas from
The Amending Formula protects the Constitution from being unjustly altered, this is done through Mr. Trudeau’s purposeful decision to make it nearly impossible to change the constitution. The steps required to amend the Canadian constitution include the approval of the Senate, then the approval of the House of Commons and the legislatures of at least seven of the ten provinces, if these provinces represent at least 50% of the population of Canada. This is also known as the 7/50 rule. Thus, the Amending Formula has been designed to ensure it will never be unjustly altered regardless of the regime it is under, attesting to the fact that the Amending Formula effectively provides legal stability, and
Amna Talha Ms. Scopis CLU3M0 16 January, 2023 Ruination or Salvation? Bill 21 And Its Effect On Quebec Society
Federalism in Texas The state of Texas practices a political culture based on traditionalistic and individualistic values. It is evident that the state of Texas falls into the historical interpretation of cooperative federalism. Cooperative federalism is metaphorically represented by the marble-cake in the sense that the power of state and local governments becomes blended and cannot be properly distinguished. Cooperative federalism, otherwise known as the marble-cake federalism can best be used to describe Texas due to the fact that Texas is incredibly active in interpreting states’ rights.
For centuries the world was governed by unethical and overpowered rulers or tyrants. This was the way of life and nobody tried to defy it until a young nation decided to break from tyranny and build a country based on fair morals. For centuries, after we discovered the New World, Britain had a tyrannic dominion over it. As time went on, the people who lived in America kept on receiving unfair treatment by Britain with unethical taxes and rules. Eventually, the colonists were fed up with the cruel treatment and decided to break apart.
The 1979 Pepin- Robarts Commission and 1980 Quebec Liberal Beige Paper argued for increased representation of regional interests in the federal levels of government though the use of appointed Senators by provincial governments. (Stilborn 1992, pg. 31) Provincially appointed Senators would have allowed the provinces to influence federal actions that impact provincial areas. The original idea for the Senate was to offer a second opinion to bills that the House of Commons passed. With having provincial appointed Senators, it would cause the Senate to move away from representing Canada on a whole to being more focused on representing Canadians on a provincial basis. Another reform proposal was the idea of having term limits, as done in the United States of America.
However, abolishing the Senate may not be the best for Canada in the end, so another argument is to reform the Senate. The best plan at the moment to reform the Senate is the Triple E plan, as it would make it so that the Senators are elected, each province is represented equally, making the Senate more effective. If we were to abolish the Senate the only way to do so would be by a constitutional amendment backed by at least seven provinces representing 50 per cent of the population, or one with unanimous provincial
In many countries, conflict between different groups of people is inevitable. In Canada, the divide between English-speaking and French-speaking regions has been a prominent political and cultural topic since the birth of the nation. The most well known of these conflicts goes to Quebec. The province has sprouted several movements and parties supporting the autonomy and independence of Quebec. One of those parties is the Bloc Quebecois.
All over Canada, Canadians have different views as for what should we do about the Senate .Yes, the Senate has some important qualities but what we do not need the Senate for today is one of its original purposes, to represent the interests of the provinces in the federal legislative policy process. For example, people like “Ralph Goodale, who fought hard for Saskatchewan’s interest around the Cabinet table for more than a dozen years. John Baird, the regional minister for Eastern Ontario today,”(Eugene Lang) is a current equivalent. The provincial interest is taken care of by regional ministers in a way that no senator or group of senators could hope to
Our current laws are not strict enough on our government if loopholes such as this exist. We elect our government to rule, regulate and act in the interest of Canadians, yet Harper was able to disregard the interest of Canadians and prorogue parliament for his government’s own partisan reasons. Six years later, nothing has been done to ensure prorogation is not again used in such a partisan way. In analysis we also run into the issue that the Governor General plays an integral part in the prorogation process. The ability to end a parliamentary session is too much power for an individual that Canadians cannot keep responsible.
To call this era of drastic change the ‘Quiet Revolution’ is a vivid, and yet, paradoxical description. The Quiet Revolution was a time of intense socio-political and socio-cultural change in Quebec, which extended beyond Quebec’s borders because of its influence on contemporary Canadian politics. As a result of the effects of the changes that occurred during this Quiet Revolution, most Quebec provincial governments since the early 1960s have maintained political and social orientations based on the core concepts developed and implemented during the Quiet Revolution. As such, there is no doubt that the Quiet Revolution had a significant impact in Canadian History. This impact can be characterized by the prelude to the Quiet Revolution; the demographic evolution of Quebec; the social educational reforms that were put in place; the economic reforms and their impact; the rise of nationalism; and finally, the cultural changes that occurred.
The Senate in Canada should be abolished Introduction: Canada senate is a part of legislation institution in Canada, which represents the interests of upper class people. Different from America, it is not produced by election but directly-nominated by the premier and appointed by governor. Senate, governor, and the House of Commons are like three legs of a tripod which constitute the congress and legislation system in Canada. Senate undertakes the responsibility of proposing expostulation to governor and cabinet, which acts the role of supervision and restriction. Senate played critical role when Canada established federal government in 1867, the diversity of senators warrants the smooth convey of popular will to governors and legislators coming from different ethnic group and social status.
316). Rocher draws upon the same historical timeline as Trudeau when he alludes to the period of modernization in Quebec after WWII, however he focuses on the distribution of autonomy and responsibility to provinces for managing their own institutions separate from the central government (p. 316). The transfer of health care, education, social services, and economic development was representative of the pragmatism of the constitution and the sharing of jurisdictions between regional and central governments (p. 316). Although there is no mention of the role of nationalism by Rocher, he thoroughly mentions the role the central government plays in ensuring national unity, he describes the position of the federal government as “having to consult, coordinate and, inevitably, compromise in the face of mounting federal-provincial conflict”, this is connected to the discussion of compromise between the central and regional governments described by Trudeau (p.