There is much talk within the Democrat Party in the United States, particularly now that they control the House of Representatives, about the impeachment of President Trump.

The grounds for impeachment of a sitting President are that he/she must be found guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Now, most reasonable people would ask what exactly it was that President Trump did to qualify to be impeached. Or, has it become sufficient for people as outwardly stupid as Maxine Waters to simply make an impeachment demand.

Even though an impeachment remedy clearly does not apply to President Trump, it is a useful remedy in certain circumstances when the actions (or inactions) of a President of the United States cry out to be addressed and rectified. The wellbeing of the country must be paramount and there must be a mechanism in place to deal with a President who morphs into a demagogue, criminal or blatant incompetent. I believe everyone would agree that having that kind of remedy available to deal with a despot, and do so before irreparable harm is inflicted on the country, is a good thing.

In Canada, we have a different form of government than the Constitutional Democracy enjoyed by citizens of the United States. Ours is a Parliamentary Democracy and the differences between the two are stark.

In the United States, there are three levels of government: The legislative branch (The House of Representatives and the Senate), the Judiciary (The Supreme Court of the United States) and the Presidency. The drafters of the U.S. Constitution gave each branch of government certain distinct powers so that there were checks and balances governing each branch. And, as noted above, even the President of the United States, the most powerful office in the world can, under certain circumstances, be impeached, removed from office, and replaced by the Vice-President.

Canada’s Parliamentary Democracy is a different matter entirely. In fact, a Parliamentary Democracy, where one political party has a majority, is, in my view, the closest thing to a dictatorship that exists.

The Prime Minister tells his Members of Parliament what he or she wants them to do and they dutifully get in line and do what they are told. Oh, I know that from time to time rebels emerge, but they are quickly silenced by either expelling them from the government caucus or by just ignoring their existence until the rebel quits.

Now, that gets me back to the doctrine of Impeachment. To my knowledge, we do not enjoy such a remedy in Canada. If we have a Prime Minister who is incompetent or who has acted in a manner that would constitute an impeachable offence in our southern neighbour, we have no alternative but to wait until the next election to vote out of office the person exhibiting the impeachable characteristics. I realize that his own party members could act to get rid of a Prime Minister who deserved such treatment but, as noted above, most would not be inclined to risk the ramifications if their attempts to oust the incompetent were unsuccessful.

So, the end result is that in Canada, we find ourselves being governed by a “dictator” who is clearly out of touch with Canadians; does not have the requisite qualifications to be the leader of anything, never mind an enterprise the size and complexity of Canada; embraces every liberal cause with great relish, whether the cause makes sense or not; spends money the country does not have, running up huge deficits; travels the world with his family complements of the Canadian taxpayer and makes a fool of himself in the process; passes a signature piece of legislation that legalizes the production and use of a mind altering drug and dismisses the negative consequences of such drug use in other jurisdictions as being overstated, insisting the drug is harmless; gives a fortune to terrorist killers and enemies of Canada, well, just because he wanted to; and most recently, shows off by committing $50,000,000 to a cause supported by some comedian who, in my experience anyway, isn’t even funny; has decimated an entire industry, an industry which was the engine of the Canadian economy; one who bows to the altar of overzealous environmentalists, minority special interest groups and myriad of insatiable Indigenous tribes; and does all of these things at the expense and wellbeing of the citizens of a country he is seized with the responsibility of protecting.

How long do you think this type of leader would last in the United States?