Very amusing and quite accurate. However, I do feel the need to say that she is not the Queen of England as there hasn't technically been one for almost 300 years, assuming I remember my history right. She is styled Queen of Canada in this context.

But... look at the bright side. We actually vote for our presidents
directly, so we don't even have that excuse. LOL.

Thank you for the laugh.

Sarah Lynn

Even though most Western countries are governed on the basis of Representative Democracy; What the electees are actually representing is the views of their political partys and are mostly voted in on that basis; as most people vote Party; not for or against issues.

Bread and Circuses: The Romans had it right 2000 years ago: nothing much changes.

The "new" system we are supposed to be having here in the UK, known as Alterntive Vote, as opposed to the current "First Past The Post" system is supported by the small parties not the big ones.

Basically its an attempt to power-grab by small parties who have little chance of gaining power under the current system. No guesses as to the stance of the Big partys?

I always tell my Candidates, when they can be bothered to visit their prospective constituency rather than spout soundbites on the TV or Radio, that the current system only works because most people vote against, rather than for, issues.

I always tell them that the person that will be elected is the least worst of the candidates standing as none of them are the best for the job.

They do NOT like that :-)

Cynical? me? surely not... :-)

As for the Queen as Head of State I think its a good thing.

It's Ironic that in the 21st century, the British People need to have someone to protect them from the excesses of Professional Politicians.

The power is still there; even though it is not wielded by "Custom" and "Tradition": and the British Armed Forces serve the Monarchy; not the State.

For those unfamiliar with Canadian politics, the Queen is a figure head and does not have an impact on Canadian government. She is an anachronism as Dorothy Colleen has described. The primary difference between Canada and another "democratic country" such as the United States is that big business has less of an impact on swaying election results. For example, the New Democratic Party, a socialist party led by Jack Layton, has a chance to be the Official Opposition (by finishing with the second largest number of seats).

Members of the House of Commons are elected by the people. Generally, the Prime Minister is the leader of the party that has the greatest number of seats in the House of Commons.

Unfortunately, the members of the Senate are appointed by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister. The PM usually fills empty Senate seats with party cronies. There are 105 seats in the Senate—all of them are filled by Conservatives and Liberals. Occasionally the Senate rejects bills passed by the House of Commons.

There is a need for reform to make Canada a true democracy. Eliminating the Queen (the Governor General is the Queen's representative) as the traditional head and getting rid of the Senate would be steps in the right direction.

An election inequity is shown by the party standings in the House of Commons where there are 305 seats. Canada has a population of over 32 million and 13.8 million adults voted in the 2008 election. Although the Green Party recorded 937,000 votes, 6.8% of the vote, the Green Party had no seats in the House of Commons. The New Democratic Party had 37 seats with 18.2% of the vote. The Bloc Quebecois held 49 seats, although they had only 10% of the votes, because the BQ voters are concentrated in the province of Quebec. The Liberals recorded 26.2% of the vote and held 77 seats. The Conservatives won 143 seats and 37.6% of the vote. Stephen Harper is the Conservative Party leader and the Prime Minister of Canada.

As a Canadian I have to say that's the best and most brilliant way of explaining how our Government officials get elected.

Thanks for that laugh