The Canadian Parliamentary and American Congressional governments are fundamentally based upon the same principles; such as democratic ideals and both have an executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. However, the parliamentary and congressional governments implement both democracy and the differentiated branches of government very differently. This essay will examine both the similarities and the differences between the two structures. Firstly by exploratory the executive branches of their respective governments; then analyzing the electoral systems; and the final contrast which will be presented is the bill to law processes. The presentation of the aforementioned differences will plainly demonstrate that the Canadian parliamentary
More dominant figures such as Thatcher and Blair have capitalised heavily on both strength of their personality and their parliamentary majorities. The creation of a more developed policy unit in Downing Street is effectively creating a "Prime Minister's Department". However it can be argued that the prime minister such as Tony blair, has not got a chance of effectively being a president, for example he prefered to dominate foreign and international affairs. The individuals of the UK, could argue that instead of focusing on other countries such as Pakistans, Afghanistan, he should of helped the UK more, improving and making it a better place to live in. An example of where this is present is, he distanced himself from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office so cut himself off from civil servants that could have questioned his views.
Disadvantages: - According to critics, “the monarchical system brings with it a set of undemocratic values – elitism, privilege, etc.” Advantages: - The Crown has a role to play when unexpected crisis develop. It is a source of legitimate power that can be used “only when normal controls cannot operate and a crisis gets out of hand” So, if the Crown possesses no real power in most instances, where does executive power lie in the Canadian political system? Prime Minister and Cabinet: De facto power: - In a de facto sense it is the Prime Minister and his or her Cabinet that are the most powerful executive agents in the Canadian government Cabinet: - It is in the Cabinet that policy is decided upon - The Prime Minister alone decides the Membership of the Cabinet, but there are some constraints provided by convention (long-standing practices rather than legal requirements): - 1. “All Cabinet ministers must have a seat in Parliament:” - Elected Members of Parliament from the House of Commons - Or Senators - Those without a seat may be in Cabinet temporarily. However, by convention they must gain a seat in Parliament
Of course changing and reforming the senate would not be an easy process it is a process that needs to happen for the betterment of the senate and the government of Canada. Canada’s government is a democracy and has always been a democracy. However in the government one important aspect of it is not democratic, the senators are appointed by the current in power Prime Minister. These senators that are appointed by the Prime Minister in power will always back the Prime Minister on every bill because he will only appoint senators from his own party. Every bill issued by the Prime Minister or party in charge will undoubtedly be passed by all of the senators appointed by him.
The Canadian Government positions should be elected by the people in Canada because it would prevent many problems by the members in the Canadian Government. People all believe that to have their own opinion is a great advantage but not all people have the time to do background research on the Candidates. By having the people of Canada vote for who they want would than restrict partridge from happening behind the scenes. Voting for our own leader in the senate would than help everyone in a great way. This would become easier on our daily lives.
This contradicts a democratic society and is seen as a dictatorship because elections are the cornerstone of a democracy. So if two out of three powers that are running the UK are not elected, this itself questions whether or not we are living in a democracy. Furthermore, having a monarchy is very important yet traditional but not in the same aspects of Parliament, as they have more authority over
Which also allowed the federal government the opportunity for revenue. One of the main emphases for the Hamilton and the Federalist Party was that the federal government was too over power the states. They felt that leaving too much power in the hands of states would only create a weak type of government, with very little power to act. Citizen’s rights would be protected by the legislation, court systems, and of course the Bill Of Rights; distrusting the people with the vote. The federalist created the House of Reps which was directly voted by the people.
To What Extent Are Backbench MPs Lobby Fodder? We’re led to believe that the MPs we elect to form Parliament actively participate in the governing of our country. Yet in reality, most of the power lies with the executive and the influence of a backbencher is thus lessened. Are they a loyal party drone? Do they represent the constituents effectively?
These agencies have strong connections with Congress as it is Congress that authorizes their existence and finds the funds to finance them. Congressional committees must also oversee their operation. This acts as check on presidential power and a president who fails to influence his office with his goals will realize surely this. Therefore, the president has come to rely more on the specialized staff that work for him in the
However, this is not true because the Congress is both an independent and co-equal branch of Government. As David Obey said “We may belong to the same party but we are an independent branch”. Checks and balances are required to keep the government stable and avoid the President going against the wishes of the people. “I think Barack Obama is terrific. But people still need to recognise we have an institutional responsibility to do oversight on the President” Garry Bass, Congress.