Answer any two of the following questions for ten points each. The expectation i

Answer any two of the following questions for ten points each. The expectation is also that, being a take-home exam with a wide window of time to complete two questions, you will make direct and specific reference to, and citation from the readings. The style is that of an essay, and as such your answers should be structured after a miniature term paper. The quality of your writing is important here in communicating a clear answer. Question 1: There are a number of factors that affect the nature of representation by Canada’s individual Members of Parliament. It has been observed that the role and nature of the job has evolved throughout our history, and some factors have definitely changed over time. Authors such as Smith, Bakvis Malloy and Docherty have addressed the challenges to democratic representation in Canada. What are these limitations, and how do they affect the nature of genuine democratic representation at every level of Canadian government? Question 2: The Westminster style of Parliamentary democracy has a tendency to place a significant amount of power at the level of the offices of the Executive. This focusing the locus of power at the top has severe implications for representational democracy. Authors such as Bakvis, Docherty, Malloy, and Savoie illustrate both the implications that this phenomenon for democracy and suggest some solutions that might lessen the democratic deficit. What are the factors that focus power at the top of the political ladder, and what solutions have been suggested to lessen this tendency? Amongst the solutions proposed, which are more politically practical than others and why. Question 3: When Canada repatriated the Constitution and embedded the Charter of Rights and Freedoms therein in 1982, this placed significant limits upon the expression of parliamentary supremacy, or so it has been argued by many authors. But is this really so? How is parliamentary supremacy limited, and if it is limited, is that a positive or negative effect of the decision to integrate the Charter into the Constitution? Using authors such as Hiebert and Kelly, take up either side of this argument, or both, in answering this question. readings used these past few weeks: – Donald Savoie, Governing from the Centre: The Concentration of Power in Canadian Politics, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1999, pp. 71-109. – Janet L. Hiebert, “Notwithstanding the Charter: Does Section 33 Accommodate Federalism?”, in Goodyear-Grant, Elizabeth, and Hanniman, Kyle, eds., Canada at 150: Federalism and Democratic Renewal, Kingston, Queen’s University Institute of Governmental Relations, 2019, pp. 59-84 – James B. Kelly, “The Supreme Court of Canada and the Complexity of Judicial Activism,” in Abelson, Donald E., James, Patrick, and Lusztig, Michael, eds., The Myth of the Sacred: the Charter, the courts, and the politics of the constitution in Canada, Montreal & Kingston, McGill-Queen’s UP, 2002, pp. 97-122. – David C. Docherty, Mr. Smith Goes to Ottawa: Life in the House of Commons, Vancouver, UBC Press, 1997, pp. 31-59. – Louis Massicotte, “Changing the Canadian Electoral System,” in Paul Howe, Richard Johnston and Andre Blasi, eds., Strengthening Canadian Democracy, Montreal, IRPP, 2005, pp. 65-98.

The post Answer any two of the following questions for ten points each. The expectation i appeared first on homework handlers.