PM or King?
Well, as promised here is the first of (hopefully) many posts I'll be writing on the different issues/concerns I have with the federal government and the way it is run. An important note, both political parties,unless explicitly mentioned, are guilty of most of these things (IMHO,anyways). Another note, the problem I'm discussing here relates to majority governments, minorty governments have been so rare I don't have the time or enough information to discuss that situation with much confidence. Now to begin.
Perhaps the biggest problem I have with the Federal government lies with the power that our PM has. Or to be more specific, how much power the PM (& PMO) has managed to concentrate in one place. Perhaps the only other position that can claim a similar level of power is the Minister of Finance, and even then the PM wins out.
It starts with the control the PM exercises over his/her party. Being able to prevent candidates from running for your party or on the other hand "parachuting" candidates into different ridings is just the start. The different patronage powers allows one to reward those that helped you out or to offer as a prize for being loyal. With regards to the party MP's, the PM can promise Cabinet and Parliamentary Secretary positions to reward loyal MP's. And the you have the Cabinet, where most(if not all) the important policy is decided upon, and who is the head of the cabinet? Who decides what Cabinet consensus is?
And to control all of this it only takes 3 people, the PM and two deputies: the Minister of Finance and the party whip. The whip takes care of the back-benchers and makes sure they follow the party's (read the PM's) line. The Minister of Finance keeps the Cabinet in line just by being in control of the purse strings, he (or she) can either allow each minister's projects to go forward or to impede them by denying funding. Finally you have the PM (and the PMO) as the ringmaster, who with his two "lieutenants" becomes the "captain" of this little ship we like to call Canada, pretty much free to do as he wants (at least until the next election).
Guess this reason this bugs me so much is goes against the idea of responsible government in Canada, best defined in this quote from one of my old poli sci textbooks:
We have a system that follows the letter but not the spirit of responsible government. And increasingly, we have one man (or woman) in a position to control all of the levers of power.
Perhaps the biggest problem I have with the Federal government lies with the power that our PM has. Or to be more specific, how much power the PM (& PMO) has managed to concentrate in one place. Perhaps the only other position that can claim a similar level of power is the Minister of Finance, and even then the PM wins out.
It starts with the control the PM exercises over his/her party. Being able to prevent candidates from running for your party or on the other hand "parachuting" candidates into different ridings is just the start. The different patronage powers allows one to reward those that helped you out or to offer as a prize for being loyal. With regards to the party MP's, the PM can promise Cabinet and Parliamentary Secretary positions to reward loyal MP's. And the you have the Cabinet, where most(if not all) the important policy is decided upon, and who is the head of the cabinet? Who decides what Cabinet consensus is?
And to control all of this it only takes 3 people, the PM and two deputies: the Minister of Finance and the party whip. The whip takes care of the back-benchers and makes sure they follow the party's (read the PM's) line. The Minister of Finance keeps the Cabinet in line just by being in control of the purse strings, he (or she) can either allow each minister's projects to go forward or to impede them by denying funding. Finally you have the PM (and the PMO) as the ringmaster, who with his two "lieutenants" becomes the "captain" of this little ship we like to call Canada, pretty much free to do as he wants (at least until the next election).
Guess this reason this bugs me so much is goes against the idea of responsible government in Canada, best defined in this quote from one of my old poli sci textbooks:
A regime in which legislative and executive power are fused together in a cabinet which is accountable to an assembly of the peoples elected representativesIn other words, our cabinet should ultimately have to answer to the House. But ultimately, who makes the final decision in Cabinet? The PM. And who can control the way the House votes (at least his party)? The PM.
We have a system that follows the letter but not the spirit of responsible government. And increasingly, we have one man (or woman) in a position to control all of the levers of power.
Tags:
posted by Daz at 3:11 p.m.
2 Comments:
Hey man,
Long time, no talk. Lost your number after a cellphone repair. Send me a quick e-mail with your number, maybe we can get together for some geocaching soon.
As to your point, I totally agree with the party leader thing, the reason I mention the PM (and the PMO) explicitly is due to the fact that they can make changes affecting the whole country, not just the party.
And you're right, most Canadians do elect their MP's based on their corresponding parties leader. I'm probably one of the few that voted for my MP out of a personal preference for him above all the other candidates in the riding.
Now you know why the party-in-power (whichever one that is at any given time) is reluctant to close down the gun registry. They're afraid the citizens will rebel and try a palace coup the old-fashioned way...
Post a Comment
<< Home