- Reaction score
- 1,671
- Points
- 1,060
Does the PM even have to be elected?
Our Cabinet choices are constrained unlike the US so I dont see the comparison other than as an academic exercise. We chose to elect the drama teacher
US Presidential Election 2024 - Trump vs Harris - Vote Hard with a Vengence
- Thread starter kkwd
- Start date
Our Cabinet choices are constrained unlike the US so I dont see the comparison other than as an academic exercise. We chose to elect the drama teacher
- Reaction score
- 18,751
- Points
- 1,280
So what takes precedence? Being an SME, being loyal to the Constitution, or doing their duty for the C-in-C? One can be loyal to the Constitution and not the C-in-C, such as in the case of unlawful orders.
Because as I have mentioned before, US military officers swear the oath to the Constitution, not to the C-in-C. I would assume that the federal public servants do something similar.
@KevinB may be able to clarify.
- Reaction score
- 1,509
- Points
- 1,260
"Sure. We'll have Fascism here. But, it will come as an anti-Fascist movement."
"When Fascism comes to America it will be on a program of Americanism."
U. S. Senator Huey Long ( LA )
( Incidentally, Long and RFK are the only two U.S. senators to be assasinated. )
- Reaction score
- 21,931
- Points
- 1,260
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
Constitution first, President (as CinC) second, then superior officers.
- Reaction score
- 21,931
- Points
- 1,260
The LEO OOS is similar.
I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the Office I am about to enter. So help me God.
*same for elected officials (except President) and public service employees.
Presidential Oath of Office
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the Office I am about to enter. So help me God.
*same for elected officials (except President) and public service employees.
Presidential Oath of Office
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
- Reaction score
- 18,751
- Points
- 1,280
To reattack:
I would suggest that the CJCS is an SME of sorts, loyal to the Constitution first. Or, if the “fire anyone in Milley’s orbit” is to be trusted, that is a whole whack of SMEs loyal to the constitution.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,189
- Points
- 1,160
The Cat has been chucked amongst the Pigeons...
Hegseth, advocate for firing 'woke' military leaders, picked for defense secretary
- Hegseth has expressed disdain for 'woke' policies in Pentagon
- Hegseth could clash with Joint Chiefs Chairman Brown
- Hegseth has opposed roles for women in combat roles
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has picked as his secretary of defense Pete Hegseth, a Fox News commentator and veteran who has expressed disdain for so-called "woke" policies of Pentagon leaders, opposed women in combat roles, and questioned whether the top American general was in his position because of his skin color.
If confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Hegseth could make good on Trump's campaign promises to rid the U.S. military of generals who he accuses of pursuing progressive policies on diversity in the ranks that conservatives have rallied against.
- Reaction score
- 18,751
- Points
- 1,280
Remember - Trump called Milley “woke”.The Cat has been chucked amongst the Pigeons...
Hegseth, advocate for firing 'woke' military leaders, picked for defense secretary
- Hegseth has expressed disdain for 'woke' policies in Pentagon
- Hegseth could clash with Joint Chiefs Chairman Brown
- Hegseth has opposed roles for women in combat roles
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has picked as his secretary of defense Pete Hegseth, a Fox News commentator and veteran who has expressed disdain for so-called "woke" policies of Pentagon leaders, opposed women in combat roles, and questioned whether the top American general was in his position because of his skin color.
If confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Hegseth could make good on Trump's campaign promises to rid the U.S. military of generals who he accuses of pursuing progressive policies on diversity in the ranks that conservatives have rallied against.
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,553
- Points
- 1,160
Abbott and Bowell were both Senators.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,189
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 21,931
- Points
- 1,260
There are many things I disliked about the former CJCS Gen Milley, but to call him woke was a little ridiculous.
The CJCS is the President’s Military Advisor, they have no real command role in DoD.
- Reaction score
- 8,295
- Points
- 1,160
And in both cases there is the presumption of free will. Opinions matter and adjudication is required. The judge might not agree with the opinion.
The constitutional requirement to be the PM is that your government can retain the confidence of the house. There is no explicit requirement for the PM to be an MP.
Mackenzie King lost his seat in the 1945 general election, but remained PM. Eventually one of his backbenchers was encouraged to resign and Mackenzie King won the resulting byelection, getting him back into the house.
Cabinet ministers are also not required to sit in the Commons, but there is a convention that they should. Our late WW2 Minister of Defence (McNaughton) never sat as an MP - he lost two consecutive elections.
- Reaction score
- 27,466
- Points
- 1,090
His grandson, on the other hand...
One was a Minister but couldn't get a seat. The other got a seat, but didn't get named as a Minister.
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,553
- Points
- 1,160
And yet, it was King who launched a non confidence motion in 1926 three days after the Conservatives formed government, when Meighen chose not to go through with a ministerial byelection (a convention at the time where cabinet would resign their seats and run for reelection in their riding), which he only did because doing so would leave them vulnerable to a non confidence motion.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,734
- Points
- 1,040
The US has public employees that run the agencies. The cabinet secretaries are political deputies of the president. They are not there to run the agencies; they are there to see that the president's policies are given form and function by the employees. Sensibly, obedience to the law (constitution) is a first requirement of political appointees, but the requirement to be faithful to the president's directives follows closely.
In any government, partisan civil employees can do a lot of damage if they can obstruct the political leadership with impunity. Their latitude for disobedience ought to be analogous to disobeying manifestly unlawful (unconstitutional) directives. The political leadership ought to be able to fire, or at least transfer, obstructionist employees quickly.
Does anyone really believe that if we were a country of 400 million we would collapse into disarray if we continued to routinely select ministers from among elected MPs instead of reaching outside the government for "experts"?
In any government, partisan civil employees can do a lot of damage if they can obstruct the political leadership with impunity. Their latitude for disobedience ought to be analogous to disobeying manifestly unlawful (unconstitutional) directives. The political leadership ought to be able to fire, or at least transfer, obstructionist employees quickly.
Does anyone really believe that if we were a country of 400 million we would collapse into disarray if we continued to routinely select ministers from among elected MPs instead of reaching outside the government for "experts"?
I can only imagine the confusion of people in 1926 who didn't follow the newspapers too closely.
"We are having an election."
"Mackenzie King asked for an election?"
"Yes, but the GG refused to call one."
"I'm confused...you said there is going to be an election?"
"Yes, PM Meighen lost a confidence vote."
"What? When did he become PM?"
"Couple of days ago."
Similar threads
