Summary: The Canadian Parliamentary System

There are many things in life that we as humans should know. One of which is civics. Civics is basically the study of rights and duties as a citizen. We all are part of a society and it is crucial to know how your government body runs. There are many aspects of a government that can make it different in every country. The main part is the type of government, which is either democratic or authoritarian. In democratic governments people usually vote to make decisions and authoritarian someone makes the decision for the people. In Canada we have a representative democracy as in we do not vote directly for our leader but we vote for people who represent us in the House of Commons. Learning how your government operates is as important as what rights and the responsibilities

In Canada, voter turnout has become a major issue; as there is a large amount of the population that does not vote in elections. Back in 2008, a total of 58% of the countries` population voted in the election. This is a startling low number, which since has begun to increase only slightly in recent years. In a democratic society, voting is essential for it to function with its full potential. Doing so enacts one of your basic responsibilities as a citizen, as well as shows that you are staying involved in your community and government. The serious lack of voter turnout contradicts this responsibility. There are individuals who speculate that it would be beneficial to make voting mandatory, with repercussions for those who do not vote.

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. Above all, the senators nominated by senate are the venerable politicians, nobles, and the people possessing good prestige and social status. So Senate is a good completion and supplement to the House of Commons from both the political background and diversity, which can reach a balance and stability for legislation system. With the social progress and continues development of legislation system, the rhetoric and proud of appointment and dismissal, the power of supervision and voting are replaced by the “Only relatives are employed”, ”political return” system. The shortcoming of system and its devoid of keeping pace to time finally hamper the development of itself, however. Under this circumstances, “Duffy” is the essential victim under the increasingly corrupt

"Natural rights are those which appertain to man in right of his existence. Of this kind are all the intellectual rights, or rights of the mind, and also all those rights of acting as an individual for his own comfort and happiness, which are not injurious to the natural rights of others." --Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, 1791.

Niccolò Machiavelli, better known as the father of modern political theory, wrote the famous socio-political treatise The Prince, during a dark time in his career. In The Prince, there are several policies that can be found in the American government, specifically in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Many of our American leaders have adopted similar policies as Machiavelli's book is recognized as a political manual for many leaders. Obviously, there are many common themes in The Prince and The United States government's policies, such as the idea of arming one's citizens along with how leaders are brought to power; however, there are also many differences, in particular, the distribution of power in government.

For a long time the debates had been going about how was the better prime minister of Canada. On the the top of most lists of best prime ministers are Mackenzie King and Sir John A. Macdonald. For example, according to the Expert Survey that was made in 2013 “Laurier came first, Macdonald second, and King third, but the difference in their overall scores was negligible”. Both prime ministers had a strong vision of the country that helped shaped Canada to become the country it is today(in 2015).

Government is a straight forward institutional which a land and its people are ruled. It protects its citizens, divides the powers that interprets laws. The gov’t are made up of the three branches. The branches are the executive, judicial and legislative. Each branches interacts with one another to ensure the strength than one another. Each branches sets their own powers. They can also share in one another’s power, so that it will be possible for them to balance of powers against each other.

Ministerial responsibility is based on a body of constitutional conventions; it ensures the accountability of the government to the people of Australia. Ministerial responsibility is the responsibility to the parliament by a minister or on a minister’s behalf for actions taken. Ministerial responsibility is a policy that ministers in a government depend on maintaining the support of the parliament. The underlying legal concepts are The Rule of Law, Democracy and the Constitution. The Rule of Law, relates as big decisions about the country are subject to the law. If they break the law, they will go through the same legal processes as everyone else. Democracy, checks the spread of power across different groups, preventing one person from controlling the nation. The Constitution, makes the Members of Parliament take an oath, when being elected. This means they will act in the best interest of the country.

George Washington’s leadership was indispensable in successfully launching a new government. George Washington was chosen to be the leader at the Constitutional Convention or the Philadelphia Convention in 1787, because he had gained a great amount of trust and respect after the Revolutionary War from supporters of a national government. In addition, Washington’s support for the constitution was critical, since citizens had an admiration for him. If he did not support the constitution, neither would the citizens. Washington also contributed his comments to the Convention and wrote letters to his political associates. The presidential cabinet was developed by George Washington to set the pattern for future presidents.

Canada has two legislative bodies in the parliamentary system, one is the Senate of Canada which is constituted by the appointed members. Secondly, is the House of Commons, which is made up of elected officials. The Senate is consisted of 105 members that are recommended by the Prime Minister and the appointed by the Governor General. The members of the Senate can be made up of business people, lawyers, doctors, hockey players, and many more, because of the variety of experience from the individuals of senators gives a better understanding of the people they represent and of the problems that Parliament must try to solve.

The Senate: “The upper chamber of Parliament where there are 105 members who are appointed until age 75 by the Crown on the advice if the prime minister.” (Rules of the Game pg 106)The original Senate that was created in 1867 had only originally 72 seats. It was created to counter balance representation population in the House of Commons, although in recent years the Senate has become to reinforce representation of groups that have often been underrepresented in parliament, examples; Aboriginals, visible minorities and women. There has been a huge debate’s on whether Canada should keep the Senate. The people all over Canada have mixed opinions on if we should keep the Senate or not. Some Canadians believe that we should abolish it. Others could

To be able to understand this concept, it important to understand the roles of the Canadian Constitution. On the one hand, it distributes the powers across the two levels of government (Hubbard & Paquet, 2011). On the other hand, it lays out how judicial interpretation should be applied at the federal level in regards to power distribution and decisions related to the application of the Constitution (Hubbard & Paquet, 2011). The very process places provincial governments in a position of subordinate since they are subject to the interpretation of the Constitution by federal judges of the Supreme Court of Canada (Hubbard & Paquet, 2011). Centralization occurs as a result of the constitutional distribution of powers enabling judicial decisions to be taken at the federal level (Hubbard & Paquet, 2011). It is noteworthy to mention that this phenomenon does not appear to result directly from the original text of the Constitution; the responsibility is on governmental practices that have developed from judicial interpretations of the division of powers (Hubbard & Paquet, 2011). Such judicial decisions are believed to shape the applications of the Constitution and the constitutional order in ways that lead to higher centralization and that put Canadian federalism at stake (Hubbard & Paquet,

Separation of powers refers to the idea that the major body of a state should be functioned independently and that no individual of a state should have power separately. Therefore, separation of powers means that splitting up of responsibilities into different divisions to limit any one branch from expurgating the functions of another. The intention of the doctrine is to prevent the application of powers and provide for checks and balances of governing a state. It is a doctrine of constitutional law under which the three branches of government, executive power, legislative power, and judicial power are been kept separately to prevent abuse of power.

Of all modern democracies, the United States, Great Britain, and France are among the most exemplary illustrations of liberal democracy. Although these three nations share the characteristics of liberal democracies, they differ greatly in multiple facets of their respective political cultures. Both the similarities and differences among these nations can be attributed to each country’s history, more specifically because of their revolutionary paths to liberation into modernity. The diversity of each country’s political practices, from political participation to governmental structure, while varying between them, still uphold the values of liberal democracy that allow these nations to succeed today. In this paper, I will be focusing on the divergence

According to Hague and Harrop (2007, p. 336), there are three different branches relating to the parliamentary system. Firstly, the legislature and the executive are “originally linked”. Secondly, the parliamentary executives, the cabinet minister and the Prime Minister, share responsibilities. Therefore, the parliament is “jointly responsible for the actions of the government…primus inter pares (first among equals)”. (Haywood, 2007, p. 95) Lastly, a typical feature of the parliamentary system is that the offices of the Head of State and the Head of the Government remain separate from each other.