Canadian Politics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Canadian Politics - Essay Example This issue has also appeared in Canada. The country’s governance has structured in such way that all key decisions are taken by parliament; however, actions that are opposed to the country’s parliamentary system have not been avoided. At this point, the following dilemma has been set: should the power of the judiciary and the executive in Canada be controlled so that the power of the country’s parliamentary system to be adequately protected? It is argued that the limitation of the power of judiciary and executive in Canada would be quite necessary in order to ensure that democracy in the country is sufficiently promoted. The above argument is justified and appropriately backed by referring to the relevant literature. Particular emphasis is given on the power of parties and the judiciary to define the terms on which parliamentary decisions in Canada are based. In the study of Charlton and Barker emphasis is given on the potential limitation of the party discipline in Canada, so that the freedom of the members of the parliament to be increased. Reference is made to two, opposite, views. Kilgour, Kirsner and McConnell, note that party discipline in Canada should be reduced, or even eliminated, since it reduces the power of the members of the parliament to vote independently in regard to the issues brought to the parliament for discussion and verification. The party discipline, as applied in the parliamentary system of Canada, means that the members of the parliament have to align their vote with the decisions of their party (Charlton and Barker 2009, p.217), a rule that has caused strong oppositions by the members of the Canadian parliament. Kilgour has been a member of the Canadian parliament since 1979 (Charlton and Barker, 2009, p.217); in 1990 he voted against a bill of his party (Conservatives) in regard to the authorization of Goods and Services Tax (Charlton and Barker 2009, p.217). As a result of the above decision, ‘he was expel led by his party’ (Charlton and Barker 2009). Due to the above fact, he decided to join the Liberal Party (Charlton and Barker 2009). In 2005 he decided to continue his career as an independent member of the parliament, especially due to a claim for ‘governmental failures in using appropriately the funds related to a sponsorship program in Quebec’ (Charlton and Barker 2009, p.217). The case of Kilgour shows that party discipline, as currently applied in Canada, prohibits MPs to criticize the decisions of their parties, even if the indications for failures related to party initiatives are many. In other words, party discipline in Canada should be significantly reduced, only applied in certain cases, or, if possible, eliminated, allowing the development of opposing views within the parliament. In this way, the quality of democracy in the specific country would be improved (Kilgour, Kirsner and McConnell, in Charlton and Barker 2009, p.218). In any case, the problem would not be whether the Canadian parliamentary system would become similar with the American Parliamentary system, where the members of the Congress have increased power to state their view (Charlton and Barker 2009, p.218), or not; instead, emphasis should be given on the level of democracy in Canada, as reflected in the country’s parliamentary system. At the next level, the following issue should be highlighted: in each current form, the party discipline