Senate appointments

[Mr.Canada]

Not really what he said, although he wasn't able to keep the promise that he was making either. He wanted to get every province on the HST, but many wouldn't agree to it.

Anyway, Harper never should have said what he did as many times as he did. it makes him look like a liar.

Quite the opposite in fact smallc. He said it many times and tried many times but was constantly voted down by the opposition. So he has even more ammunition to ask for a majority with. Trust me, all these things will be back in the next election race. These are HUGE cards to play, far too valuable to play when we're not in an election officially. This wiol be used to show that the Liberals don't want or like an elected Senate responsible to voters, that the Liberals would rather have Senators "Entitled to their Entitlements". Or at least that's what I think he should do.

Edited December 13, 2008 by Mr.Canada

[fellowtraveller]

18.13% of the popular vote..

and about 9% of the seats.

if there were an election today, they'd get around 12% of the vote.

I have this sneaky feeling that Jack won't claim to be running for PM again.

[kuzadd]

Fill all 18 vacancies on a Friday late at night?

He will fill them asap, just like any other opportunistic politician......

Is this rocket science or something?

[Mr.Canada]

He will fill them asap, just like any other opportunistic politician......

Is this rocket science or something?

Precisely. At least Harper tried to get some Senate reform passed but was blocked by the Liberal led, Separatist backed, NDP brokered coalition. So since none of these parties think that an accountable/elected Senate is a good thing our PM will have to try to bring about change from the inside by taking control of the Senate.

He is a very brave man to believe in an accountable and elected Senate so strongly, to push ahead in spite of perhaps having his budget defeated. Yet he perseveres and pushes forward, does what is right and just, in being accountable to the Canadian people in the face of this winter storm brought on by The Liberals, The NDP and the separatist Bloc.

Stephan Harper, PM and a true Canadian.

[punked]

Precisely. At least Harper tried to get some Senate reform passed but was blocked by the Liberal led, Separatist backed, NDP brokered coalition. So since none of these parties think that an accountable/elected Senate is a good thing our PM will have to try to bring about change from the inside by taking control of the Senate.

He is a very brave man to believe in an accountable and elected Senate so strongly, to push ahead in spite of perhaps having his budget defeated. Yet he perseveres and pushes forward, does what is right and just, in being accountable to the Canadian people in the face of this winter storm brought on by The Liberals, The NDP and the separatist Bloc.

Stephan Harper, PM and a true Canadian.

WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN??

He had a reform bill HARPER KILLED IT, by calling an election.

[Smallc]

He also doesn't realize that the LIBERAL SENATE has been trying to reform itself by giving more power to the west for a while. They want BC to have 24 seats and become its own division and they want to up the numbers for each of the other western provinces....of course, since the senate is Liberal controlled, their motives have to be evil.....

[punked]

The problem is instead of reading up on the Bills out there he just listens to his party and makes the rest up.

[Mr.Canada]

WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN??

He had a reform bill HARPER KILLED IT, by calling an election.

Bill S-4 - first reading, May 30, 2006 An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (Senate tenure)

Liberal Senators blocking another Senate Bill

The list goes on and on and on...

Is there any more proof you guys would like?

Edited December 14, 2008 by Mr.Canada

[jdobbin]

The list goes on and on and on...

Is there any more proof you guys would like?

Harper had a simple remedy to this: Refer it to the Supreme Court to see if was constitutional. He didn't.

[Mr.Canada]

Harper had a simple remedy to this: Refer it to the Supreme Court to see if was constitutional. He didn't.

Uh yeah right. Then you would say that Harper doesn't respect the Senate and blah blah blah. You know it.

So if he had went to the Supreme CC you would give Harper praise?

[jdobbin]

Uh yeah right. Then you would say that Harper doesn't respect the Senate and blah blah blah. You know it.

You didn't read the article. The Liberals in the Senate asked Harper to refer it the court. So how does that disrespect the Senate?

Harper disrespects the Constitution, it seems. Why not refer it to the court?

So if he had went to the Supreme CC you would give Harper praise?

Yes. It was a simple question: Are the changes by the House alone constitutional?

[punked]

You didn't read the article. The Liberals in the Senate asked Harper to refer it the court. So how does that disrespect the Senate?

Harper disrespects the Constitution, it seems. Why not refer it to the court?

Yes. It was a simple question: Are the changes by the House alone constitutional?

He really is trying to villainize them and is having a hard time doing it.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Under the current system, Harper has both the right and responsibility to appoint Senators to the Upper House. He can however appoint people at the pleasure of the provinces, nothing to prevent that at all.

[Argus]

I am sorry but that is just so closed minded. Based on a pure lucky roll of the dice... Viola! You are now born in Canada.. In addition, you are entitled to be "more Canadian" than everybody else.. Woohoo

Assimilation.. Ever hear of that word?

Yes, just don't see it in action much, particularly with regard to Muslims.

Edited December 14, 2008 by Argus

[Argus]

Harper disrespects the Constitution, it seems. Why not refer it to the court?

Perhaps he disrespects the Court? Plenty of reason to. Most of them are hacks with little talent other than sucking up to politicians.

[jdobbin]

Perhaps he disrespects the Court? Plenty of reason to. Most of them are hacks with little talent other than sucking up to politicians.

Like it or not, the bill he proposes on term limits might not have been constitutional. The only way to tell is by going to court.

If he disrespects the court so much, why does he resort to it all the time for his personal troubles?

[Mr.Canada]

Good so I've finally convinced you all that Harper's tries at Senate Reform were blocked by the Liberals and the Liberal led Senate. We need to try to push ahead with Senate Reform. If we need to change the Constitution in order to make them accountable to us, the voter, then lets do it. Why are people so afraid of making Senators accountable?

Ah yes I forgot, these are the same people that think ADscam was a great thing. I have my answer.

[punked]

Good so I've finally convinced you all that Harper's tries at Senate Reform were blocked by the Liberals and the Liberal led Senate. We need to try to push ahead with Senate Reform. If we need to change the Constitution in order to make them accountable to us, the voter, then lets do it. Why are people so afraid of making Senators accountable?

Ah yes I forgot, these are the same people that think ADscam was a great thing. I have my answer.

NO you convinced me you wear blinders and refuse to actually look at subjects for what they are.

[Mr.Canada]

NO you convinced me you wear blinders and refuse to actually look at subjects for what they are.

punked, I'm sorry if the facts anger you. I'm just trying to give the facts to the people, not rhetoric or finger pointing. LEt us accept what I say as many have done and move on. We need to work together to bring about accountability to the Senate. I don't like it that they get to sit on it til they're 75 and accountable to no one.

[punked]

punked, I'm sorry if the facts anger you. I'm just trying to give the facts to the people, not rhetoric or finger pointing. LEt us accept what I say as many have done and move on. We need to work together to bring about accountability to the Senate. I don't like it that they get to sit on it til they're 75 and accountable to no one.

What facts? You have given one article that says Harper would not send a bill to the court after the Senate asked him too. Nice. Other then that you have given opinion.

[Mr.Canada]

What facts? You have given one article that says Harper would not send a bill to the court after the Senate asked him too. Nice. Other then that you have given opinion.

Why are you against an accountable Senate? Needing to be voted in therefore answering to the electorate and not party hacks.

[punked]

Why are you against an accountable Senate? Needing to be voted in therefore answering to the electorate and not party hacks.

I am against a Senate period. The problem you get with an accountable Senate is it legitimizes it, than you get Senators which hold up budget bills and so on. We have problem as is in Canada there has not been one piece of legislation passed in 9 months. Now we are prorouged so there wont be one passed until the budget. That will make it a full year. This problem is only blown up by making the Senate a place of real election politics. GET RIDE OF IT!!!!

[jdobbin]

Good so I've finally convinced you all that Harper's tries at Senate Reform were blocked by the Liberals and the Liberal led Senate.

Actually, no. It was Harper who blocked chnages by not referring it to the court.

We need to try to push ahead with Senate Reform. If we need to change the Constitution in order to make them accountable to us, the voter, then lets do it. Why are people so afraid of making Senators accountable?

You are actually proposing to open up the Constitution? And you think you can limit it to just this one issue? Good luck with that.

Why is Harper so afraid to refer this to the court? Doesn't he want to find out is he doing something unconstitutional?

[Mr.Canada]

Actually, no. It was Harper who blocked chnages by not referring it to the court.

You are actually proposing to open up the Constitution? And you think you can limit it to just this one issue? Good luck with that.

Why is Harper so afraid to refer this to the court? Doesn't he want to find out is he doing something unconstitutional?

Alright jdobbin, I'm going to answer it directly if I can. I don't in any way speak for Harper, obviously but I can guess which is what we're all doing.

If he goes to court and they rule that it is then that's t it's over. No one will ever be able to change it without opening the const. He wants to do it w/o opening with Const which would be very difficult.

I personally don't understand why everyone is afraid of changing the COnst. What's the big deal.

[punked]

Alright jdobbin, I'm going to answer it directly if I can. I don't in any way speak for Harper, obviously but I can guess which is what we're all doing.

If he goes to court and they rule that it is then that's t it's over. No one will ever be able to change it without opening the const. He wants to do it w/o opening with Const which would be very difficult.

I personally don't understand why everyone is afraid of changing the COnst. What's the big deal.

The big deal is you need half of Canada do it. When was the last time anything got half of Canada's approval? Not only that you need something like 7 provinces that means you are going have to buy off 7 provinces with other things. Not to mention there are many things that people would want to put into or take out of the Const when you start and then you have the same problem. It is a can of worms.