Back in high school and in university we were introduced to the two systems of governance in Canada, Great Britain and the U.S. Canada like the U.K is a parliamentary system, with the normal three levels of governance: the legislature, executive and judiciary components. As a republic, the U.S. has a similar constitutional makeup, although how each of the members is selected varies greatly. In Canada, the Prime Minister is selected by which party gets the most seats in the House of Commons. The PM also sits in Parliament. Sometimes, if a party doesn’t win the majority of seats to form a government, the party with the most seats can negotiate with another party to form what is referred to as a “minority government”. Minority governments are tricky because they can be toppled by a “confidence vote” on critical motions such as a budget. Canada currently has a minority government as a result of the last federal election in September 2021. The PM currently selects the members to Cabinet who are normally members of Parliament, unlike in the U.S. where the President selects Cabinet members who do not sit in Congress.
In the U.S., citizens vote separately for the President and for candidates to the House of Representatives and the Senate, often in what are referred to as “mid-term elections”. Unlike in Canada where there are mainly five official parties, the U.S. only has two parties: the Democrats and the Republicans. As a result, Congress can often see a split in control between the House of Representatives and the Senate, as is the case now with the Republicans controlling the House and the Democrats the Senate. In addition, there are those members who are independents. The Canadian Senate on the other hand is made up of appointed members (by the Governor General on the PM’s recommendation) who now do not have any party affiliation. Compared to the American Senate, the Canadian Senate does not have much power, especially when it comes to financial matters such as the budget. It examines bills referred from the House and can recommend amendments which the governing party can accept or ignore in the final reading before parliament. While committee hearings before the U.S. Senate can make or break policies or federal appointments, the Canadian Senate’s committees can simply provide reports on selected subjects which the Government most often ignores and get shelved.
Appointments to the Supreme Court are a whole other matter. In the U.S., such appointments are highly politicized and depend on which party the President and Senate members come from. In recent years, the majority of Supreme Court justices have been appointed under Republican regimes, resulting in a prevalent conservative court. In Canada, on the other hand, Supreme Court appointments are more or less apolitical and made to reflect regional, ethnic and affirmative action considerations. Frankly, given recent decisions by the American Supreme Court (e.g. Roe vs. Wade), I must say that I prefer the more independent Canadian version when it comes to appointing jurists.
There will always be debates over which system is better. The fact of the matter is that both have their benefits and flaws. One major concern with the American system is how the President is elected and the role of the “electoral college”. For example, in the case of Donald Trump, he had smaller percentage of the popular vote than Hillary Clinton and yet won the election. In both countries, it is especially important to win certain urban and rural areas in order to be politically successful. For this reason, parties target certain key states in the U.S. and certain key provinces in Canada. One major difference is how candidates in the election process are funded. In the U.S. there is no end to the hundreds of millions of dollars that candidates can gather from such sources as Super PACs (political action committees). For example, this year’s midterm election was expected to set a new spending record, with over $9 billion being raised. This is significantly higher than the previous record of $7 billion, which was set in 2018. In Canada, contributions to candidates are far less and are regulated by controls enforced by an independent agency, namely Elections Canada.
To change the current governance systems in both countries would require significant constitutional amendments which don’t appear to be on the horizon anytime soon. I would suggest, maybe just maybe, the time is right for governments to re-examine the governance processes in light of our histories and the continuing changes in both societies.
FROLITICKS 