Canadian and American Government
[7 of 8]
previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] next 
What does that mean? What difference does it make?
A third basic difference between our system and the Americans’ is that custom, usage, practice and “convention” play a far larger part in our constitution than in theirs. For example, the President of the United States is included in the written constitution: his or her qualifications for the position, the method of election, the method of removal — all the essential powers of office, in black and white, unchangeable except by formal constitutional amendment.
The Canadian Prime Minister did not appear in the written constitution until 1982. The Constitution Act of that year empowered the Prime Minister to call a constitutional conference within one year, consisting of him- or herself and the provincial Premiers and (for limited purposes) elected representatives of the Yukon Territory and the Northwest Territories, and another conference with the Premiers within 15 years.
Our written constitution still contains not one syllable on prime ministerial qualifications, the method of election or removal, or (except for the calling of the constitutional conferences) the Prime Minister’s powers. Nor is there anything on any of these matters in any Act of Parliament, except for provision of a salary, pension and residence for the person holding the recognized position of first minister. Everything else is a matter of established usage, of “convention.” There is nothing in any law requiring the Prime Minister or any other Minister to have a seat in Parliament; there is just a custom that he or she must have a seat, or get one within a reasonable time. There is nothing in any law to say that a government that loses its majority in the House of Commons on a matter of confidence must either resign (making way for a different government in the same House) or ask for a fresh general election.
