Senate reform or abolition

jbg · November 8, 2007

A two point swing to the Conservatives wouldn't entail a major change of support but it would be enough for a majority.

From what I've read CPC support usually rises after a writ drop. That should be particularly true this time, given the unappetizing choice of leader/PM in waiting.

Fain · November 8, 2007

Since you are not a Liberal member, I fully expect that you haven't see the movement to either change or abolish the Senate.
The position of the Liberals in recent years is that they do not want to tear the country apart in a constitutional debate (also a huge expenditure) over something like Senate changes. The Tories cannot abolish the Senate by an act of House of Commons legislation. They have to go to the provinces.

And the Liberals are not going to support elections if the system doesn't offer balance in seats.

The position of the liberals is keeping the senate as it is. No change, no budge in the way things are.

I don't have to be a Liberal to see there's no "real" movement in the party to abolish the senate.

Should maybe try a referendum maybe on the next election ballot.

fellowtraveller · November 8, 2007

As an MP, he voted against the Tory plan for Senate reform which was for elections which would entrench an imbalance in representation. If the Tories want to reform the Senate, they should open up the Constitution.
As for abolition, many Liberals support the idea.

Utter bollocks, and revisionist bollocks at that.

Nodody cares what rank and file Liberals think about abolishment, and no Liberal leader has proposed abolishing it in my lifetime.

Do you just make up this nonsense as you go?

The only reason Dion has expressed any interest NOW and only NOW in abolishing the Senate is he can see he is being outflanked yet again, this time by both his worst enemies.

Dion has played his game knowing that he may be able to slow down Tory business in Parliamentary commttees, and when they finaly get through those the Senate is available to do his bidding, acts he does not have the political courage or capital himself.

Unfortunately for him, that too is blowing up in his face.

It must just totally chap his ass too that Harper and Layton aren't - as is the Liberal way- asking the Supreme Court in advance what they should do in governing the country.

They are asking the people. Oh, the horror......

jdobbin · November 8, 2007

The position of the liberals is keeping the senate as it is. No change, no budge in the way things are.
I don't have to be a Liberal to see there's no "real" movement in the party to abolish the senate.

Should maybe try a referendum maybe on the next election ballot.

The Tories had no real movement to abolish the Senate until this week either.

Smallc · November 8, 2007

The Tories had no real movement to abolish the Senate until this week either.

You didn't hear the PM speak in Aus. He said either change or go. He has been saying that for a very long time. I liked the Lib governments too, but tehre is no reason to bend the truth.

jdobbin · November 8, 2007

Utter bollocks, and revisionist bollocks at that.
Nodody cares what rank and file Liberals think about abolishment, and no Liberal leader has proposed abolishing it in my lifetime.

Do you just make up this nonsense as you go?

The only reason Dion has expressed any interest NOW and only NOW in abolishing the Senate is he can see he is being outflanked yet again, this time by both his worst enemies.

Dion has played his game knowing that he may be able to slow down Tory business in Parliamentary commttees, and when they finaly get through those the Senate is available to do his bidding, acts he does not have the political courage or capital himself.

Unfortunately for him, that too is blowing up in his face.

It must just totally chap his ass too that Harper and Layton aren't - as is the Liberal way- asking the Supreme Court in advance what they should do in governing the country.

They are asking the people. Oh, the horror......

I never said anything about a Liberal leader supporting abolition.

Dion has not commented one way or the other on the Senate abolition proposal of the NDP. No Tory leader has had a position on abolition until the week either.

I think you forget that the House of Commons cannot unilaterally abolish the Senate even if Dion and his Senate caucus support abolition. It still has to go to the provinces.

jdobbin · November 8, 2007

You didn't hear the PM speak in Aus. He said either change or go. He has been saying that for a very long time. I liked the Lib governments too, but tehre is no reason to bend the truth.

Do you have a link for when he said that before the Australia trip?

Edited November 8, 2007 by jdobbin

Fain · November 8, 2007

The Tories had no real movement to abolish the Senate until this week either.

No No No, you got backed in a corner and instead attacked another party. Try defending your original stance.

I'm with Layton on this one.

Smallc · November 8, 2007

Do you have a link for when he said that?

This is only two months ago, but I know he has said it before.

And Canadians understand that our Senate, as it stands today, must either change or, like the old Upper Houses of our provinces, vanish.

The Office of the Prime Minister of Canada

Smallc · November 8, 2007

I want the senate to stick around. So much of the ceremony would have to be changed without it.

jdobbin · November 8, 2007

This is only two months ago, but I know he has said it before.
The Office of the Prime Minister of Canada

Sorry, I updated my post before you responded here. I have not seen anything prior to the Australian trip. Not one thing.

Edited November 8, 2007 by jdobbin

jdobbin · November 8, 2007

No No No, you got backed in a corner and instead attacked another party. Try defending your original stance.
I'm with Layton on this one.

Until this past week, the only thing the Tories had done was muse in Australia about the Senate's demise.

The Liberal leader has not had an official position on the subject and still hasn't spoken on it.

Smallc · November 8, 2007

Sorry, I updated my post before you responded here. I have not seen anything prior to the Australian trip. Not one thing.

I'm sure he has said something about it before, but i could be wrong. Like I said, I want the senate to stay, but as a better sober second thought. I don't care if tehy are elected or not, but I think party politics should be removed.

Smallc · November 8, 2007

Until this past week, the only thing the Tories had done was muse in Australia about the Senate's demise.
The Liberal leader has not had an official position on the subject and still hasn't spoken on it.

Stephan Dion doesn't have a position on anything :lol:

jdobbin · November 8, 2007

I'm sure he has said something about it before, but i could be wrong. Like I said, I want the senate to stay, but as a better sober second thought. I don't care if tehy are elected or not, but I think party politics should be removed.

I looked into this at the time of the Australian speech and it caught quite a few people by surprise when he said it. It is not in any policy manifesto and I can't find it any writings by Harper prior to being elected or during his tenure as PM. Until this week, all he did was muse on the subject the one time.

Many supporters of Senate reform are warning that an election referendum could be fraught with problems.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/National/home

Mr. Harper, who sources say backs a proposal to ask Canadians whether they would support abolishing the Senate, was told Tuesday by experts in the field not to move before voters can get all the information they need to make a proper decision.
And athough Senate reform stalwarts like former Reform Party leader Preston Manning supported the idea, they also warned any campaign needs to have a strong educational component. Others, including Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion, said a referendum would be a waste of money and the result could be indecipherable.

“I think it's premature to put it on the table,” said Roger Gibbins, the president of the Calgary-based Canada West Foundation, a long-time proponent of Senate reform.

Related Articles

“It hasn't been an issue in a national election campaign [for the government] to move in such a fundamental way without any kind of electoral discussion or any kind of serious public debate,” Mr. Gibbins said.

jdobbin · November 8, 2007

Stephan Dion doesn't have a position on anything

One would have thought that Harper would have stuck to his Triple E policies so one could say his position is very changeable.

Dion has not said what he favours for the Senate but has said that the referendum would probably be a waste of money.

Some third parties who are not Liberals agree it would probably not decide the issue since it would still have to go to the provinces afterwards.

Edited November 8, 2007 by jdobbin

Smallc · November 8, 2007

One would have thought that Harper would have stuck to his Triple E policies so one could say his position is very changeable.

I even wanted Stephan to win the leadership as I was a Liberal and I liked who he seemed to be. That night when he won, he seemed very good. It all went down hill from there.

jdobbin · November 8, 2007

I even wanted Stephan to win the leadership as I was a Liberal and I liked who he seemed to be. That night when he won, he seemed very good. It all went down hill from there.

I didn't support anyone in the leadership campaign as I truly was undecided. I liked Hall-Findlay and Gerard Kennedy but knew that both had to be stronger in their language skills and/or experience. I didn't know Bob Rae as a Liberal and thought he had to earn his stripes. I thought Ignatieff had baggage from his academic career and I thought Dion would never be able to undo how some Quebecers felt about him in regards to the Clarity Act.

I think Quebec continues to be the major problem for him because members there keep trying to undermine him. It doesn't help that Dion has how gaffes to worry about.

As far as the Senate goes, the Liberal position since Manning made Triple E a major policy plank was that it would have to be a constitutional change and that it shouldn't be done in dribs and drabs of elections for some, appointments for others.

Edited November 9, 2007 by jdobbin

fellowtraveller · November 8, 2007

Dion has not said what he favours for the Senate but has said that the referendum would probably be a waste of money.
Some third parties who are not Liberals agree it would probably not decide the issue since it would still have to go to the provinces afterwards.

Why hasn't Dion stated his position on abolishment?

It seems to be a straighforward question.

I'd expect the same question as the people will have: do you support abolishment of the Senate?

Yes.

No.

If it is yes, I'd expect the govt to pursue the issue as laid out in the constitution, consult the provinces and then take it to Parliament.

Stephane, do you support abol;ishment, yes or no? The rest of Canadas so-called leaders have spoken, why not you?

Of course a referendum would not decide the issue, but it would provide guidance to the govt. Much better than taking it the Liberal way, and begging the Supremes to tell us what to do.

jdobbin · November 9, 2007

Why hasn't Dion stated his position on abolishment?
It seems to be a straighforward question.

I'd expect the same question as the people will have: do you support abolishment of the Senate?

Yes.

No.

If it is yes, I'd expect the govt to pursue the issue as laid out in the constitution, consult the provinces and then take it to Parliament.

Stephane, do you support abol;ishment, yes or no? The rest of Canadas so-called leaders have spoken, why not you?

Of course a referendum would not decide the issue, but it would provide guidance to the govt. Much better than taking it the Liberal way, and begging the Supremes to tell us what to do.

I don't even think Harper has said if he support abolishing the Senate. He has only said he will support a referendum on the subject. So what is Harper's position? Has he given a clear answer on what he favours?

As far as the Supreme Court goes, the government will likely find that it will end up there in any event.

geoffrey · November 9, 2007

So what is Harper's position? Has he given a clear answer on what he favours?

Yes, he stated he favours reform but it's unlikely to happen. Opening up the issue to democratic process is always a good compromise position. When a minority government is stalled on an issue, a referendum actually makes sense.

jdobbin · November 9, 2007

Yes, he stated he favours reform but it's unlikely to happen. Opening up the issue to democratic process is always a good compromise position. When a minority government is stalled on an issue, a referendum actually makes sense.

Few of the experts on constitutional reform agree that it will solve anything.

geoffrey · November 9, 2007

Few of the experts on constitutional reform agree that it will solve anything.

Well you still will have to go to the provinces, which poses an issue.

However, it gives a massive chunk of leverage in the House when you have a referendum backing your position for change, whether that is reform or abolishment.

My opinion is that the Senate has become what Harper wants as his legacy. He wants his name behind killing the terrible institution that it is now, whether through reform or abolishment.

Either way, one of the two should happen and happen now. The status quo is simply not acceptable any longer, not really sure why it was ever tolerated.

fellowtraveller · November 9, 2007

You guys are reading way too much into this.

The whole affair is a collaboration and semi red herring by Layton and Harper to enable harper to fire himself and call an election.

It brings the focus on the Senate and how they are stopping Parlianment from doing their jobs.

Senate is the fall guy.....

Whatever the referendum decides, it will get pushed way back on the priority list - after the election.

jdobbin · November 9, 2007

Either way, one of the two should happen and happen now. The status quo is simply not acceptable any longer, not really sure why it was ever tolerated.

I'm afraid the status quo is exactly what you will see referendum or not.

Once you open that constitutional door, everyone piles on demands.

There is no agreement in Canada on what to do with the Senate and while Harper might get support to put the referendum on the ballot, it is something that some provinces will just refuse to discuss.

In my opinion, Quebec will react with hostility and this could affect a federal election.