Preview

Constitutional Monarchy In Canada

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
712 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Constitutional Monarchy In Canada
Yes to Constitutional Monarchy Canada is a constitutional monarchy; this means that the powers of the monarchy in Canada are limited by the Constitution. Our monarch is now Elizabeth II, who is also the Queen of the United Kingdom. As our Queen does not live in Canada, she appoints, under the advice of our Prime Minister, a Governor General to represent her authority in Canada. There is a great debate among Canadians, on if they really need a constitutional monarchy. The fact is Canada does need a monarch. Firstly, power corrupts people. The monarch lends its powers to the elected politicians, as long as they act within the Constitution. In the event that the elected politicians succumb to corruption, and/or disobey the Constitution, the monarch is able to act as a safeguard and take away that authority that was given to them in the first place. Canada’s armed forces and naval vessels swear allegiance to the monarch, which also helps protect the people, in the act of corruption. Constitutional monarchy also helps act as a symbol to Canadians, and it already appears throughout national life. The Queen’s image …show more content…

Many people comment on the fact with the monarchy system, Canada still isn’t fully independent from Britain, with the Queen and her representatives being able to control the Prime Minister. This statement is completely blown out of proportion; first of all the monarch isn’t involved in any of the day-to-day operations of the government. Secondly, there are many examples of the Prime Minister still having much of the power. The Prime Minister can also tell the Governor General when to dissolve parliament. The Parliament still holds most of the power, where the monarch is more seen as a national figurehead. Lastly it keeps the powers of government distributed equally, by making sure the elected head is also not the head of

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    U1A6: Matching Activity

    • 463 Words
    • 2 Pages

    I. Queen Elizabeth II legally remains the head of Canada though in more of a figurehead role…

    • 463 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Thesis: Although it took nearly a century to do so, Canada transformed from a self-governing British colony to a fully independent nation through the defining moments of Vimy Ridge, Chanak crisis, and the Statute of Westminister,…

    • 1157 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    There are many events that have sculpted Canada’s autonomy through our history and created the independent nation we live in today. Before and during the First World War Canada did everything Britain said because we were under their BNA act. However, in 1922 after the war, Britain and Turkey were fighting over the British controlled port of Chanak. When Britain told Canada to come fight with them, instead of saying yes, Prime Minister King said we would take it to Parliament and have a vote. Fortunately, the dispute ended before anyone had to go to war. The following year, Canada and America created a treaty that protected…

    • 277 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Some of the ways Canada remained independent of foreign control are: When president Reagan’s administration had a project they were trying to get Canada involved in called the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI, but also referred to as Star Wars). This was a plan to arm satellites that could destroy soviet missiles from space. Not many people believed the plan would work and even if it did there would no longer be balance between the two superpowers, ergo in 1985, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney politely said “no”. President George Bush brought the idea back to life in 2004, and wanted Canada to participate in the new missile defence initiative, but it wasn’t clear who the missiles where protecting North America from. Many Canadians thought that Canada should participate but Prime Minister Paul Martin decided against it. After 9/11 Canada aided the US in attacking Afghanistan, to get to where the Taliban government was aiding Muslim terrorists, but Canada refused to participate in using the war as a pretext for ousting Saddam Hussein. The UN also didn’t approve of Bush’s attack on Iraq. After World War II Canada had completely disengaged itself from the British Empire, ergo Canadian representatives refused to go along with British plans. They put their powers to good use for peace rather than a “mother country”.…

    • 708 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Canada was granted the right to self-government in 1867 but did not have full legal autonomy until the Statute of Westminister was passed on December 11, 1931. Lord Balfour, was the one that proposed all Dominions be conceded full autonomy in their legislations. It allowed these former colonies full legal freedom except in those areas where they chose to remain subordinate to Britain. This means Canada, the colony of Newfoundland, the commonwealth of Australia, the dominion of New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, and the Irish Free State all had established equality amongst Britain. I feel that the statue of Westminster Is one of the best events to happen to Canada because this granted us the freedom to pass our own laws without the consent…

    • 163 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    When Canada’s founders were thinking of Canada’s legislature system they valued accountability.[4] Unicameralism is a single legislative house or chamber and their just isn’t the same accountability as the bicameralism legislatures.[5] They did not want one “high-handed Cabinet” because this could pose a threat and to the founders this was “classic forms of autocracy.”[6] This is why bicameralism was introduced to the legislature. They were concentrated on checks on balances in the form of The Cabinet, the Commons, and the Senate, which were like the three branches of government.[7] What is funny is that the word “democracy” was used differently back in those days and they used mixed or balanced.[8] The Founders were viewed as being Liberal democrats because of them picking the bicameralism legislature over the unicamerlism legislature.[9] Also the Father’s visions were never for a “fusion of powers” in the legislature, but that the…

    • 3508 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Canada and Germany are countries that have different political ideologies also they have some parts of government bear similarities.Although they are two different country, there are have three clear difference between two government systems they use.First, Canada has a three parts of parliament,with House of Common, Senate and Government Governor. In contrast, Germany only have two parts of parliament,with a Bundestag and Bundersrat.Secondly, Canada is president have power, but in Germany is Chancellor.Finally, compare advantage and disadvantage of two government system, Germany’s goverment system is more…

    • 87 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    * Constitutional Monarchy: Powers of the monarch reduced by laws. Governor General represents the Monarch. E.G. Australia operates as a democracy.…

    • 1478 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    This newfound sense of independence both among citizens and internationally led to Canada beginning to really form its own unique culture, and governmental policies, not feeling as much obligation to act as their founders…

    • 1575 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    * Congress is a bicameral legislature that includes the House of Representatives (435 members representing the population) and the Senate (100 members representing the states)…

    • 2005 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    King managed to get Canada majority of its independence and made Canada a self-governing country. He also got Canada out of the dark and ended the great depression. He brought Canada’s economy to a stable position again and created new jobs causing the unemployment rate to drop. King successfully led Canada through World War II, which increased Canadian economy, vanished the effects of the depression from Canada, and at the same time created a great reputation for Canada. In conclusion, King was a successful leader and deserved the position of Prime Minister of Canada. He never gave up on Canada and also brought hope to Canada at the worst times, which brought Canada to where it is now. He believed in Canada and only because of that he was a successful man and was able to make Canada a great…

    • 1495 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    P. M Democratic Dictator

    • 627 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In 1867 Canada’s government was established as a parliamentary democracy. It was declared that those in government are to follow the Bill of Rights and run Canada for the people. Recently, there has been much debate on whether or not the Prime Minister could be considered a “Democratic Dictator”. Democracy “is a foremost issue” and the people of Canada are arguing that one person may hold too much power. After exploring the possibilities, I do not believe the Prime Minister can be considered a Democratic Dictator, as he/she must be elected, have an opposition, and every law proposed is voted on in the House of Commons. However, in opposition to this statement, the P.M. holds…

    • 627 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    "It is what we prevent, rather than what we do that counts most in Government." (Mackenzie King august 26, 1936) This statement sums up the best secrets of Mackenzie King's success as prime minister, and perhaps, the key to governing Canada effectively. King's record of prime minister is sometimes difficult to judge. He had no uninteresting images, he gave no repetitive speeches, and he champions no drastic stage. He is remembered for his easygoing, passive compromise and conciliation (Gregory, page 267). Yet Mackenzie King led Canada for a total of twenty-two years, through half the Depression and all of the Second World War. Like every other prime minister, he had to possess ambition, endurance and determination to become prime minister and, in spite if appearances, his accomplishments in that role required political acuity, decisiveness and faultless judgment.…

    • 1057 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Never in the constitution is stated that the head of the government can be removed from office if the people feel he/she no longer has the nations best interests at hand. Therefore, Canada proves to be more democratic by allowing the people/representatives to strip the head of government from power if they no longer feel like the interests of the people are being fulfilled. One could argue that that it is not mandatory for a Prime Minister and his cabinet to step down after they have lost the confidence of the House of Common, as it is a constitutional convention, and not a law. However, once the head of government loses the confidence of the lower house, it could potentially be challenging to get pass future legislations and bills in the house. Therefore, it is in the best interest of the Prime Minister and his cabinet to step…

    • 625 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Electoral System In Canada

    • 1922 Words
    • 8 Pages

    A good government is a reflection of its citizens. The mechanics of a good government distinguish it from different governments around the world. However, how a government elects its leader is a big part of the way it runs in general. Many governments have different systems in which they elect their leader. In North America, electing a leader is a big responsibility for the citizens of that country. Particularly in Canada, our electoral system has been the same for many years and relies on the citizens to make a decision. Canada uses a system called first-past the-post or single member plurality . This system consists of a simple objective; to receive a majority of the votes . This system has worked well for many years without any major issues.…

    • 1922 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays