Week 3 Lecture F2023 1030A Part 3

Summary

The lecture examines the gap between Canada’s democratic ideals and how political power operates in practice. Canada has institutions that appear to give citizens many ways to influence government, but power is often concentrated among party leaders and senior officials. This can limit the influence of elected representatives and citizens, and may contribute to declining participation in traditional politics.

Canada’s democratic institutions—and their promise

The lecturer describes several features that make Canada’s political system seem inclusive and accountable:

• Canadian citizens aged 18 or older can vote.
• Voters elect MPs who are expected to represent their constituents. Constituents can reject them in a future election.
• The Senate is intended to review legislation and improve its quality.
• Courts can rule laws unconstitutional. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives citizens a way to challenge laws they believe violate their rights.
• Federalism gives citizens more than one level of government to approach. Provincial and federal governments can negotiate, challenge one another in court, or otherwise advocate for citizens.

These mechanisms help explain public confidence in Canadian political institutions. However, the lecturer cautions that having democratic institutions does not necessarily mean they work as intended or give citizens meaningful influence.

Federalism: options, conflict, and pressure

Federalism is presented as a potential democratic strength because people can turn to different levels of government. Yet governments can also use their powers in ways that constrain other governments and reduce those options.

• Federal spending power: The federal government can use its financial resources to encourage or pressure provinces to follow federal priorities. The lecture uses health care as an example: provinces administer health care, but federal funding is tied to principles in the Canada Health Act—public administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability, and accessibility.
• Provincial unilateral action: The lecture cites Alberta legislation proposed in 2022 that would allow the province to refuse to enforce some federal laws on provincial lands and could let cabinet amend provincial legislation without approval from the legislature.
• Ontario’s “strong mayor” powers: The lecture says that in 2023, Premier Doug Ford extended powers to the mayors of 26 cities, including London. These included proposing certain housing-related bylaws with support from only one-third of council, vetoing some council decisions, and hiring or firing senior municipal officials. The lecturer argues that such powers can shift authority away from elected councils and concentrate it in fewer hands.

The broader lesson is that federalism can give citizens multiple routes to influence policy, but unilateral action by one level of government can weaken those democratic openings.

Party discipline concentrates influence

Party discipline means how closely elected party members follow the decisions and wishes of their party leadership. The lecturer contrasts Canada’s strong party discipline with the weaker discipline described in the United States.

The lecture distinguishes three models of representation:

• Delegate model: An MP acts as a direct messenger for constituents and follows their preferences.
• Trustee model: An MP uses personal judgment, acting in what they believe to be constituents’ best interests.
• Party-member model: An MP primarily follows the party leadership’s direction.

The lecturer argues that Canadian MPs and provincial legislators often function mainly according to the party-member model. Party whips help ensure members vote as the leadership expects. This can mean MPs do not vote according to their own judgment or their constituents’ wishes.

Why party discipline is strong

Party leaders have important ways to reward loyalty and penalize dissent:

• The prime minister selects cabinet ministers. Cabinet membership can bring greater public visibility, media opportunities, influence over policy, and prospects for future leadership roles.
• MPs outside cabinet—often described as backbenchers—generally have less influence over government policy.
• Prime ministers also make or influence appointments to positions such as senators, deputy ministers, Supreme Court judges, and ambassadors. The prospect of future appointments may encourage loyalty.
• Opposition leaders can reward members by appointing them to shadow cabinets or parliamentary committees, which offer greater visibility and influence.
• The prime minister may also threaten to seek an election, potentially putting MPs’ seats at risk.

Together, these incentives can make MPs more responsive to party leaders than to constituents. The lecturer’s central point is that strong discipline allows a small group of political elites to shape policy, determine what gets debated, and set the political agenda.

Declining participation and the possibility of a democratic deficit

The lecture presents Canadian election-turnout figures as evidence of declining participation over time. It notes a long-term decline in federal turnout, from about 75% in 1984 to about 60% before recovering toward 70% in more recent elections. The lecturer says that other measures—such as interest in politics and involvement in political parties—show similar concerns.

Some scholars and observers interpret these trends as evidence of a democratic deficit, or even a wider democratic crisis. One possible explanation is that citizens feel their votes have limited impact when MPs follow party leaders, senators owe their appointments to prime ministers, and party leaders dominate decision-making.

Political participation beyond traditional channels

The lecturer argues that declining participation in conventional politics does not mean Canadians have stopped engaging politically. Some have turned to other forms of participation, including:

• Using social and traditional media to criticize leaders and hold them accountable.
• Pursuing court challenges and judicial activism to protect rights and freedoms.
• Organizing protests and movements to press governments to change policy.

Examples mentioned include protests and campaigns related to bike infrastructure, the Ottawa truck convoy and pandemic policies, and the Idle No More movement. The lecturer also refers to Indigenous protests concerning the treatment of Indigenous peoples, land and resource issues, and missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls.

Whether this shift indicates a healthy democracy is left as an open question. One view is that democracy is weaker when citizens withdraw from formal institutions. Another is that political engagement through civil society and other arenas can still be a sign of democratic health.

Overall conclusion

Canada’s political system is described as substantially democratic, drawing mainly on the Westminster parliamentary model, with some features associated with the United States. But it is not portrayed as perfect. Concentrated power, strong party discipline, and limits on citizen influence raise questions about how inclusive, participatory, and responsive the system is. The lecturer concludes that there is room to improve Canadian democracy and says these questions will be explored further in political science courses.

Speakers and sources mentioned

• Speaker: One course lecturer speaks throughout. The subtitles do not state the lecturer’s name; the video metadata identifies the channel as Dr. Alcantara.
• Sources and materials: Canadian federal election-turnout figures shown in lecture slides; an unnamed study reporting that relatively few Canadians vote primarily for an individual candidate rather than a party; and V-Dem democracy rankings and reports.
• Institutions and examples: The House of Commons, Senate, courts, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, federal and provincial governments, municipal councils, party whips, cabinets, parliamentary committees, and shadow cabinets. The lecture also refers to the Canada Health Act, Alberta legislation proposed in 2022, Ontario’s strong-mayor changes in 2023, the Ottawa truck convoy, and Idle No More.
• Additional speakers: No interviewees or other speakers are identifiable in the subtitles.