Relationship With The Executive
Unlike the House of Commons, the Senate has no effect in the decision to end the term of the prime minister or of the government. Only the Commons may force the prime minister to tender his resignation, or to recommend the dissolution of Parliament and issue of election writs, by passing a motion of no-confidence or by withdrawing supply. Thus, the Senate's oversight of the government is limited.
Most Cabinet ministers are from the House of Commons, rather than the Senate. In particular, every prime minister has been a member of the House of Commons since 1896, with the exception of John Turner, who became prime minister when his party elected him leader, but whose government was defeated in the subsequent election. (Turner was outside Parliament altogether at the time, and was never a Senator.) Typically, the Cabinet includes only one senator: the leader of the government in the Senate. Occasionally, when the governing party does not include any members from a particular region, Senators are appointed to ministerial positions in order to maintain regional balance in the Cabinet. The most recent example of this was on February 6, 2006, when Stephen Harper appointed Michael Fortier to serve as both a senator representing the Montreal region, where the minority government had no elected representation, and the Cabinet position of minister of public works and government services. Michael Fortier resigned his Senate seat to run (unsuccessfully) for a House of Commons seat in the 2008 general election.
Read more about this topic: Senate Of Canada
Famous quotes containing the words relationship with, relationship and/or executive:
“Sisters is probably the most competitive relationship within the family, but once the sisters are grown, it becomes the strongest relationship.”
—Margaret Mead (1901–1978)
“When any relationship is characterized by difference, particularly a disparity in power, there remains a tendency to model it on the parent-child-relationship. Even protectiveness and benevolence toward the poor, toward minorities, and especially toward women have involved equating them with children.”
—Mary Catherine Bateson (20th century)
“She isn’t harassed. She’s busy, and it’s glamorous to be busy. Indeed, the image of the on- the-go working mother is very like the glamorous image of the busy top executive. The scarcity of the working mother’s time seems like the scarcity of the top executive’s time.... The analogy between the busy working mother and the busy top executive obscures the wage gap between them at work, and their different amounts of backstage support at home.”
—Arlie Hochschild (20th century)