Chapter 9 Review Questions

The legislative branch makes laws, the executive branch implements laws, and the judicial branch interprets laws. However, overlap exists as laws can originate in the executive, or given that the legislative branch is dominated by the Prime Minister and Cabinet who also oversee the executive branch. Furthermore, courts have also determined policy on topics such as physician assisted suicide, abortion, the legal definition of marriage, etc.

The Governor General’s role is purely symbolic. Although the strict letter of the constitution suggests that the role of the monarch is a formidable one, the real decision-making power of the executive is exercised by the prime minister and cabinet. In matters such as the selection of the prime minister and the dissolution of Parliament, constitutional convention is far more important than the discretion of the monarch. Royal assent of legislation is virtually automatic. As a democratic country, the elected representatives of the people govern, not appointed monarchs.

When public sentiment can be gauged through polls, and when the PM and Cabinet can speak to either the general public or targeted groups via the media and personal appearances, there is no perceived need to communicate through government MPs or the party organization. The result, says Brooks, “is that Parliament often seems to be little more than a procedural sideshow.”

The idea is that those important interests should have a voice in cabinet. Thus, business concerns are conveyed to cabinet by the Ministers of Finance and Industry. The concerns of labour and farmers are conveyed by the Ministers of Labour and Agriculture. In the interests of national unity, all of the provinces get a cabinet minister. Women are represented by female ministers, Francophones outside of Quebec often get a minister, the ethnic communities and Aboriginal citizens get ministers, as well. Through this, the political goals of the party in power are served, important interests are assured that their concerns will be heard, and national unity is advanced.

The prime minister’s status in cabinet has usually been characterized as primus inter pares—first among equals. However, over the past few decades, the power of the prime minister has grown such that he/she alone is able to set the government’s agenda and decide on major policy issues. The prime minister has become the dominant individual in the government.

The finance department has almost exclusive authority over the preparation of the revenue budget, budget speeches, and economic statements. The finance department can virtually veto proposed legislation if it is strongly opposed. If deficit reduction is a government priority, this places enormous power in the hands of the finance department. As the person in charge, the Minister of Finance is in a position of unparalleled influence. The only one who can overrule the Finance Minister is the Prime Minister. Donald Savoie adds that the enhanced importance of the budget enables the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance to introduce new measures and policies under the cover of budget secrecy and avoid debates in cabinet and long interdepartmental discussions.

The Prime Minister’s Office is partisan, politically oriented, and operationally sensitive. The Privy Council Office is non-partisan, operationally oriented but politically sensitive. The Privy Council Office does strategic planning, is active in the formulation of policy, and monitors the activities of the departments to ensure coordination. The Prime Minister’s Office is focused on the political needs and priorities of the Prime Minister, contributes to policy formation, and serves as the Prime Minister’s eyes and ears.

Central agencies (Finance Department, Treasury Board, Privy Council Office, Prime Minister’s Office) are parts of the bureaucracy whose main or only purpose is to support the decision-making activities of cabinet. The agencies perform such functions as providing cabinet with needed information, applying cabinet decisions in dealing with other parts of the bureaucracy, and communicating cabinet decisions and their implications to the public, provincial governments or other organizations within the federal state.

The election of 1984 gave the Progressive Conservatives a majority of seats in the House of Commons. However, the Senate was dominated by Liberals. They balked at a number of bills proposed by the Conservative-dominated House, most notably the GST bill. This tension was eliminated when Prime Minister Mulroney used a clause of the constitution to appoint eight additional Conservative senators. The same situation greeted Prime Minister Harper, and he was able to appoint 18 Conservative senators, thus making the Senate more hospitable to bills from the House.

Question Period is the primary forum through which the opposition can scrutinize and criticize the government. It is the opposition’s main chance to influence the issues that will be discussed in the media and the way the government will be portrayed by the press.

It refers to the excessive centralization of power in the hands of the Prime Minister and cabinet and the marginalization of Parliament.

The King-Bing Affair took place in 1926 when Governor-General Lord Byng refused PM William Lyon McKenzie King’s request for an election, inciting a constitutional crisis and a debate about the role of the Governor-General. Ultimately, the affair redefined the Governor-General’s role as more ceremonial and, in the view of many constitutional experts, established that the monarch’s representative in Canada should accept ‘advice’ given by the PM.

Reasons outlined by Brooks include: a reminder of the colonial experience under British rule, and a memory of French subordination; a trigger of anti-federalist grievances amongst Québec nationalists; Governor-Generals as representatives of the monarch can, and have caused controversy, with the King-Bing Affair and more recent statements seen as inconsistent with the parameters of the role from Michaëlle Jean and Julie Payette.

Previously, PMs typically appointed Senators either from or sympathetic to their own political party. Beginning in 2016, those Senators appointed under PM Justin Trudeau were designated as independents, even though they have tended to vote with the Liberal Party almost all of the time.

These two parts are the House of Commons and the Senate. The House of Commons has 338 Members of Parliament (MPs), elected by riding or electoral district according to population, though the population of each constituency can vary greatly. The Senate has 105 seats for Senators who are appointed based on constitutional requirements. They are selected regionally with 24 seats each for Ontario, Québec, the West, and the Maritimes, 6 seats for Newfoundland, and 1 seat each for Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut.

You can begin by discussing whether the two chambers are in need of more democratization. If you think they are, you can discuss the issue of party discipline and research ways that other advanced democracies (e.g., the UK, the US, Australia) deal with this issue. You will also want to discuss the issue of electoral system reform. Thirdly, you can discuss the idea of requiring the Senators to be elected.

In discussing this question, you can raise a number of issues (e.g., the fact that judges are accountable only in a very general way, their socio-economic backgrounds, the fact that yet another body is taking over the work of elected MPs and MPPs). You can also discuss the American system, the notwithstanding clause in our Charter, and the darker moments in Canadian history when elected reps failed repeatedly to protect vulnerable minorities.

To answer this question, you can review the various Officers of Parliament in order to analyze how, in their functions, they manage to provide Canadians with a watchful eye as to how the government is working in a non-partisan, apolitical way. These various officers have developed over time, in many instances, they have their roots in activities in the provinces which have been on the forefront of the development of parliamentary officers.

Answers will vary based on whether you believe Governor-Generals (or Lieutenant-Governors) should make statements like these. Support your response with evidence and examples from the textbook and/or your own prior knowledge. You may choose to draw on examples from the textbook, including the King-Byng Affair, Michaëlle Jean, or Julie Payette.

Cabinet Committees are a set of committees within the Canadian Government, each focused on a specific topic. Brooks outlines how they have changed over time from more formal committees under Pierre Trudeau, streamlined to only five committees under Jean Chretien, and grown again under Stephen Harper. Significant changes were made to Cabinet Committees by Justin Trudeau, with both their names and focus. You may choose to conduct research on Cabinet Committees over time; the website of the PM lists all current Cabinet Committees in the Canadian Government.