After only sixteen months as a Member of Parliament, the Prime Minister promoted Trudeau to be one of his senior cabinet ministers by making him the Minister of Justice. As Minister of Justice, Pierre gained national attention for his introduction of divorce law reform and for Criminal Code amendments liberalizing the laws on abortion, homosexuality and public lotteries (4). When Prime Minster Lester Pearson announced that he intended to retire from public office in late 1967, many long-time elected Liberal members touched off a leadership campaign to choose his successor. This development did not affect Pierre personally at
* There are three levels of government that make legislation in Canada – the federal, provincial, and municipal levels -. The federal legislative branch, Parliament, is composed of the House of Commons and the Senate. * For legislation to become law, it must first be passed by the House of Commons and then be approved by the Senate. Because the Senate assesses the work of the House of Commons, it has been called "the chamber of sober second thought." * Each province also has a law-making body.
Political Science 1G06 2013 II Lecture 2a: The Canadian Executive: - Where does executive power lie in the Canadian political system? - Canada is a constitutional monarchy - At least in a Constitutional sense, it is the Queen that is at the Apex of Canadian power Crown - “Defined as the collectivity of executive powers exercised by or in the name of the Monarch” Governor General: - The Governor General exercises Crown power within Canada, in the name of the Queen Power in Theory - The Governor General (at least on paper) o Appoints Senators and Judges o Gives royal assent to law o Summons and dissolves Parliament Power in Practice: - All of this is done on the “advice” of the government of the day - The Governor General’s assent is usually
An essential model of the executive that has been in operation for many of our previous governments is Cabinet government, which could be said to sprout from the idea that the prime minister was originally ‘primus inter pares’, according to Walter Bagehot – or ‘first among equals’. This form of leadership is usually approached with prime ministers using cabinet frequently to seek advice and counsel on issues and even proposed legislation. As the chair of cabinet and head of government, the prime minister has power over the length and frequency of the meetings, and as part of Cabinet government, this is usually exercised in a manner such that the Prime minister does not have any significant power over the rest of cabinet, and therefore decisions should be made collectively as possible, and consensus should be achieved. The issue of collective responsibility must also be mentioned; this is an important aspect of UK government and maintains strength in the executive. This type of government was operating in full flow under the leadership of James Callaghan in 1976, where he allowed his cabinet to freely debate whether or not the UK should accept the loan from the IMF.
The majority of new laws or changes to existing laws come from government but the can also come from MP’s, Lords or even a member of the public. E.g. ‘Sarah’s Law’. Both the House of Commons and House of Lords must debate and vote on the proposals. 2.
How far do you think Russia had moved in the direction of a parliamentary system of government by 1914? A parliamentary system of government is where there is a government in which members of the cabinet are appointed from elected members of an assembly, and in order to remain in power, must hold the vote of the majority. Right from 1613, Russia had been an autocracy ruled by Tsars. The tsar had no limits on his power and one of the Tsars strongest supporters was the official State Church, the Russian Orthodox Church. The Tsar had advisers, but he was not bound to listen to their advice, and laws were made by imperial decree.
This is the means by with parliament passes the government’s legislation. Parliament is almost the only source of legislation. When a party wins the general election, a government is formed consisting of various parties. This government then makes laws that become acts of parliament, the legislation thus having been passed by parliament. Most bills that are passed by parliament are government bills; however, some bills that are passed through parliament are private members bills.
Scrutiny of the Executive: As governments tend to enjoy large parliamentary majorities, Parliamentary approval is rarely withheld. However, the House of Commons plays an important role in scrutinising the policies and actions of the government, in debates, parliamentary questions and within the influential cross-party select committees. In this particular respect, Parliament is representing interests of different groups of public, ensuring therefore that there is no unnecessary discrimination during legislative process. Both primary and secondary sources of legislation are subject to scrutiny, including international and EU legislation as well. Parliament is not expected to make substantial changes to such legislation but it is able to issue some warning or advise government about such legislation to be implemented.
Discuss the advantages of law making in Parliament There are many advantages within the law making system. One of the main advantages is that a law is made by our elected representatives, making it democratic. The House of Commons is an elected body which could potentially be changed every five years due to a general election, if the government has not performed as the public expected. However, the public vote in the MP’s within the House of Commons, therefore the HOC has the public’s support with certain decisions making it efficient. On the other hand, the House of Lords is not elected but is made up of a wide variety of people with different background and specialised expertise therefore allowing decisions that are made to be less biased and more thorough.
This facilitates a slower and more deliberative legislative process. An advantage of this is that minority groups have more opportunities to protect their interests by voicing out their opinions, which will be reflected by the legislators in the congress. They are free to stand on the minority side or even antagonistic to the president during the discussion of different issues. Therefore, the policy may take time to be ultimately adopted but is more likely to be a good one, and the president may not be able to guarantee the delivery of campaign promises in most cases. However, the downside is that some social problems, including some urgent ones, can be unresolved for a long period of time as arguments shuffle between the legislature and the executive.