Is Canada a Secret Dictatorship?

Canada's Senior Levels of Government Set Up Like Banana Republics

Feb 14, 2009

Canada looks like a secret dictatorship. The country's government was based on Britain's Parliamentary System but has come to resemble a totalitarian system.

When Britain's Parliament approved the British North America Act of 1867, thereby founding Canada, it was clear British parliamentarians had in mind a form of government modeled after their own.

But some time after Sir John A Macdonald became Canada's first prime minister, the way that Canada's political parties began to conduct the business of government veered away from the British parliamentary model. The result -- once every four years, democracy breaks out for a few weeks, culminating in an election.

PMO The Ruler

Between elections, Canada is ruled by the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), effectively making the power of the prime minister suspiciously akin to that of a dictator.

This is particularly so under majority governments, but largely the same under minority governments. The effect is similar in the provinces, where between provincial elections premiers have powers in their jurisdictions far too similar to those of de facto dictators.

How Is This Possible?

Britain gave this country a great model. Its government is made up of two houses of parliament. The lower house is the House of Commons. Most laws originate there. The upper house is the House of Lords. It's role is to be a place for sober second thought on proposed new laws, approved by the House of Commons but not yet signed into law by the British sovereign.

In Canada, the upper house of parliament is the Senate. It serves a similar purpose as Britain's House of Lords. Its future role is much discussed in Canada of late, but is of little significance to this discussion or, in the judgment of some, to anything else for that matter.

Little Power

The role of Canada's House of Commons is much like Britain's. The vast majority of Canada's laws originate there. Consequently, it appears to have considerable the power. Not so. Here's why.

In Britain, every person elected to the House of Commons has the right, enshrined in historic precedence, to speak openly in the Commons. They may question or criticize the governing party of the day on any matter, regardless whether they are a member of the party in power or are in opposition. British members of parliament take seriously their jobs of representing the interests of their constituents. The party to which they belong often comes second. Therein lies the critical difference between Canada's government and Britain's.

Can Break Ranks

Similarly, in the United States, members of the House of Representatives and the Senate can break ranks with their parties and vote on proposed legislation with the opposition parties. Both parties do have elected members in each house whose job it is to try getting all their members to vote with their party. Even so, it's news when all members vote with their parties.

So how does it work in Canada? People elected to Canada's House of Commons also belong to political parties, with a few exceptions. Unlike Britain, however, this membership in a Canadian political party takes precedence, especially if that party is in power. The party is everything.

Party Discipline

Members of Canada's House of Commons are subject to "party discipline". This democracy-stifling practice denies members of parliament freedom to act according to the wishes of their constituents, or their conscience or best judgment. Their party tells them how to vote.

What's worse, they are denied the right to speak out in the House of Commons or in public against actions their party is proposing to take. Any who break "party discipline" are ostracized, if they are lucky, but are more likely to be ejected from their party.

Power Compromised

The only power Canada's members of parliament have is their vote in the House of Commons, and that is compromised by their obligation to vote and speak only according to party discipline. The end result is that all effective power defaults to the party leadership. In the case of the party in power, it defaults to the Prime Minister, effectively giving him or her powers that are remarkable for their similarity to a dictator.

This could have been put right in 1982 when the BNA Act was converted into Canada's constitution and repatriated from Britain. Those in power chose not to do so.

Some Canadians have likened the country's governance to a banana republic. There is a certain resemblance.

The copyright of the article Is Canada a Secret Dictatorship? in Canadian Politics is owned by Jim Osborne. Permission to republish Is Canada a Secret Dictatorship? in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.