Senate reform or abolition

[jdobbin]

Ladies and gentlemen, we're opening the constitution. What is Harper thinking?

Oh wait. I know. This will never pass the Senate and it gives Harper an excuse to call an election (Liberals refusing to hear the voices of Canadians... sounds SOOOO good).

Brilliant move Steveo, brilliant move.

The Liberal opposition has never opposed a referendum on the subject. They opposed piecemeal changes that the Tories proposed.

Over the years, the Liberals have debated triple E Senate as well as abolition but the stumbling block has always been re-opening the constitution.

I have no problem with an abolition referendum. I doubt Dion would either. It basically would take the issue off the block until after an election.

Edited November 6, 2007 by jdobbin

[geoffrey]

he makes an insulting remark about something.

I'm much more worried about Dion or his aides making stupid and insulting remarks.

What was it now? "If I hire more French, I'll have to hire more Chinese?"

The CPC warmacht is disciplined, it's arguably the slickest, best run political machine in North America, maybe surpassing the Republicans. They have money, they have marketing talent and grassroot support. It's a winner.

I won't vote for Harper next election because I don't agree with the manner in which he has increased spending and the reach of the government.

But I admire the CPC for their organziation and amazing political machine that will surely bring home a majority against a shattered and leaderless Liberal party.

[geoffrey]

I have no problem with an abolition referendum. I doubt Dion would either. It basically would take the issue off the block until after an election.

Does Dion have control over his Senators to push the issue through?

It just takes one day of hold ups to give Harper a legit excuse. He just is looking for an excuse.

I'm unconvinced Dion has the power to tell his Senators no, don't give him that excuse.

[jdobbin]

Does Dion have control over his Senators to push the issue through?

It just takes one day of hold ups to give Harper a legit excuse. He just is looking for an excuse.

I'm unconvinced Dion has the power to tell his Senators no, don't give him that excuse.

They sit in caucus and follow Liberal policy just as Tories in the Senate follow Tory policy.

There has never been a Liberal policy not to allow a referendum on the future of the Senate. Not one. I have no doubt that if Dion and the caucus support the referendum that it will pass in the Senate.

[luvacuppajoe]

I suspect any referendum would include that as an option.

That's how I would like to see a referendum set up is with some options -- abolition, Triple E, limited terms, minimum mandatory attendance, etc.

It would be a hell of a thing to see an appointed Senate overrule the direct voice of the citizenry should a nationwide referendum choose to limit or abolish their powers.

It's going to be an interesting ride, this one...and frankly I think it's time has come.

[Higgly]

He said either change or go away. It looks like its go away.

Hopefully there will be a choice that says something to the effect "abolish an unelected senate in favour of an elected senate". As powerless as it is, the senate provides at least some small check on Parliament. With Harper's campaign against the judicary, we could end up with a government that gives absolute power to one body (Parliament). This is just too vulnerable to human folly.

What we really need is an elected senate that has some power, and not just the ephemeral stalling power it has now.

[geoffrey]

It would be a hell of a thing to see an appointed Senate overrule the direct voice of the citizenry should a nationwide referendum choose to limit or abolish their powers.

In that case, I'm sure Harper would be allowed to appoint a majority of CPC Senators.

[jbg]

There has never been a Liberal policy not to allow a referendum on the future of the Senate. Not one. I have no doubt that if Dion and the caucus support the referendum that it will pass in the Senate

In view of the likelihood of a CPC majority I doubt the Liberals will willingly allow the one thing they can use to obstruct legislation be modified or abolished. I think they'd rather take the position that a referendum or HofC vote cannot change the Senate, and that any changes are relegated to the (unworkable) amending formula under the Constitution Act of 1982.

[Higgly]

In that case, I'm sure Harper would be allowed to appoint a majority of CPC Senators.

All at once? How long do you think the guy's going to be able to stay in power?

[Topaz]

Have any of you gone to the Senators website and see how many senators are retiring in 2008 and 2009??? Harper has nothing to complain about because he could have a better chance by HIM appointing than by elections of getting more Cons in than Libs. Even though some people may not totally believe in the SPP, by getting rid of the senate and other chances he does may well point of Canada becoming the country of North America. Canadian need to educated themselves and always to an open mind and watch what our gov't wants to do and that goes for the Libs because they are also for SPP. The NDP have never talked about this and I wish the media would start asking all parties about this topic.

[fellowtraveller]

Oh, well, let's not forget that the Conservatives were only elected by about 36% of the electorate, and their approval rating hasn't increased all that much. I think many Canadians wouldn't have a problem with the Senate stalling anything that passes because they don't want the Conservatives screwing up the country. Moreover, and election would only result in another minority government, so calling an election is apt to piss off more people than Harper would like.

Oh, so you actually do agree that it is an issue? Thanks for the clarification.

I'm going out on a limb here and guess that the Tories have reviewed the polls,and still want an election. So do the NDP and Bloc, though for different reasons.

That leaves the Liberals.

What is your estimate on how long Dion can tolerate being forcefed turd sandwiches until he gives up and concedes that an election is going to happen?

[fellowtraveller]

There is no consensus on the Senate. Quebec by itself can't veto it but with some provinces wanting abolition and others wanting a triple E Senate, you are not going to be able to get that far with a referendum nationally.

There is no need for consensus.

The Cons need a lever to force an election, and the Senate obstruction of legislation is a very good one.

[jdobbin]

In view of the likelihood of a CPC majority I doubt the Liberals will willingly allow the one thing they can use to obstruct legislation be modified or abolished. I think they'd rather take the position that a referendum or HofC vote cannot change the Senate, and that any changes are relegated to the (unworkable) amending formula under the Constitution Act of 1982.

I haven't seen a poll yet that says a Tory majority is a likelihood.

As for your opinion that the Liberals will not allow Canadians to voice their feeling on the upper house, I doubt they would oppose that measure. There are many Liberals who have been advocating for the removal of the Senate for a very long time.

There is debate about whether the House of Commons can abolish the Senate all on its own. Some experts say yes, some experts say no. It is something that should be referred to the Supreme Court in any event.

There is also some question as to what the deciding number for abolition should be. Some say over 50 per cent nation-wide. Others say that is to little for a decision of this kind. Some say it should also be a majority in every jurisdiction that has Senators appointed. If it does come to 50% nation-wide, it could very well split the country regionally anyways. For example, if a huge majority of Albertans support Senate abolition and a huge majority of Quebecers don't, the referendum will go against Senate reform.

If a majority of Canadians support abolition and the Supreme Court says the House of Commons can act unilaterally on the matter, the Senate will be abolished.

There are a lot of "depends" in the whole subject of Senate reform. It isn't as black and white as Harper might think. If he did manage to get support in the House of Commons for Senate reform or abolition, he still might find that he has a provincial challenge to those changes. Even piecemeal changes could face a provincial challenge. This is why I think a Supreme Court opinion is necessary.

As for your contention that the amending formula is unworkable, is not as difficult to make changes to the U.S. constitution? Should it be easy to change things whenever the winds of opinion change? Meech and Charlottetown failed in part because there was a lot on the table at once.

The system was set up so that something could not be rammed down one the country's throat without a lot of consensus on the subject.

[fellowtraveller]

The Tory strategy becomes clearer:

Announce a referendum on the Senate tied to an election.

Soon after, announce that he is obliged to advance the date of an election to 'immediately' because of Senate obstructionism of leisaltion passed by Parliament..

The Liberals in the House would be decimated in an election.

The Liberals in the Senate would eventually be gone after a referendum

If the Liberals in the Senate suddenly see the light and start to behave themselves, Harper still wins since he can act as a majority indefinitely.

This guy is scary smart.

[Michael Bluth]

Have any of you gone to the Senators website and see how many senators are retiring in 2008 and 2009??? Harper has nothing to complain about because he could have a better chance by HIM appointing than by elections of getting more Cons in than Libs.

There are sixteen Senators facing mandatory retirement in 08 and 09. One is a Conservative.

The CPC could net 15 seats due to retirements and 12 due to filling all the current vacancies. They would still be short of a majority.

Besides, Harper keeps his promises. I wouldn't doubt we see a vote on Senate reform. Abolition vs. wholesale reform. No half way. You never know, abolition could be a good step towards creating a newer, better upper house.

[jdobbin]

There is no need for consensus.

The Cons need a lever to force an election, and the Senate obstruction of legislation is a very good one.

And I have seen no evidence that the Liberals would oppose a referendum on the subject. In fact, many would welcome it.

[jdobbin]

The Tory strategy becomes clearer:

Announce a referendum on the Senate tied to an election.

Soon after, announce that he is obliged to advance the date of an election to 'immediately' because of Senate obstructionism of leisaltion passed by Parliament..

The Liberals in the House would be decimated in an election.

The Liberals in the Senate would eventually be gone after a referendum

Here is a Liberal strategy: Support the referendum and support abolition. Support referring the matter to the Supreme Court about whether the House of Commons can act unilaterally in the matter. If it does, support the decision of the people on the matter.

[jbg]

The Tory strategy becomes clearer:

Announce a referendum on the Senate tied to an election.

Soon after, announce that he is obliged to advance the date of an election to 'immediately' because of Senate obstructionism of leisaltion passed by Parliament..

The Liberals in the House would be decimated in an election.

The Liberals in the Senate would eventually be gone after a referendum

If the Liberals in the Senate suddenly see the light and start to behave themselves, Harper still wins since he can act as a majority indefinitely.

This guy is scary smart.

One thing I've noticed; you seem to have a rather original, and I think rather good take on Harper's strategy, from this post to the strategy of passing the Liberals "crap sandwiches".

[Visionseeker]

f

No consensus among governments but it would be interesting to see what the public thinks. You might find that there is among the people.

Indeed. You'll find another issue that divides us irrevocably. Maybe Harper isn’t happy with a fire-wall; he’s bent on destroying the country.

[Visionseeker]

Only result in a minority?

The Conservatives definitely have a shot at a majority next time around. That's why Steph is bending over and allowing the Conservatives to do what they want in order to avoid the election.

The only people who would be pissed off by an early election are the Liberals and their supporters.

The Senate issue will kill the Conservatives in Quebec, hence, no majority.

I'm stunned the Conservatives would even play this card. When Segal mouthed-off, I figured it was just another MMP thing.

Seems like someone's drinking the kool-aid.

[Visionseeker]

Ladies and gentlemen, we're opening the constitution. What is Harper thinking?

Oh wait. I know. This will never pass the Senate and it gives Harper an excuse to call an election (Liberals refusing to hear the voices of Canadians... sounds SOOOO good).

Brilliant move Steveo, brilliant move.

Unless the Liberals welcome the initiative.

[Visionseeker]

The CPC warmacht is disciplined, it's arguably the slickest, best run political machine in North America, maybe surpassing the Republicans. They have money, they have marketing talent and grassroot support. It's a winner

Ein, Zwei, Drei, Fier!

Where's the beer hall?

[Visionseeker]

This guy is scary smart.

No, he's quite stupid. Walking right into a trap he is.

[fellowtraveller]

Here is a Liberal strategy: Support the referendum and support abolition. Support referring the matter to the Supreme Court about whether the House of Commons can act unilaterally in the matter. If it does, support the decision of the people on the matter.

Liberal 'strategy' doesn't matter here, they are the guy walking behind the elephant with a shovel at this parade.

They've been upstaged by Harper and Layton on the Senate.

What the public sees from the Liberals, and what Harper is going to make sure is front and center really soon, is that the

Liberal controlled Senate, filled to the brim with Liberal Party hacks, is defying the will of Parliament in duly passing legislation in a timely manner.

.

Dion can cry that the Senate is not under his control, but nobody will believe that it is nothing more than petulance at not being allowed to govern, as they see their Natural Right. Expressions of support won't mean anything, the horse has already left the barn. If the Liberals wanted to enact change, they had an opportunity in over a decade of majority govt. See, the 'do-nothing' attituide of Chretien comes back to haunt....

Harper, I hope and pray, won't revert to the practice the Liberals loved of referring things to the Suipreme Court so they could make laws. They, like the Senate , are unelected and that is not their job.

But all of this is secondary anyway.

Harper has no burning desire to reform the Senate.

What he wants is to call an election ASAP. This is a great, safe issue and an obvious lever to do what the Liberals wont' do - force an election. So: refer legislation - more of it, lots of it- to the Senate- and hope they continue their current obstruction. First whiff of it, declare a constitutional crisis, dissolve his own govt and go to the polls. Oh yeah, tack on a Senate referendum.

[fellowtraveller]

One thing I've noticed; you seem to have a rather original, and I think rather good take on Harper's strategy, from this post to the strategy of passing the Liberals "crap sandwiches".

Thanks, and I think that Dion is a proud man and sooner rather than later will recognize that he is channelling Bill Murray in the movie 'Groundhog Day'. It just won't get any better for him , so he may as well get it over with. How long can anybody take the repeated shame of saying one thing(decrying everyhting the govt does), then doing the opposite (voting for it).