Ontario to get 21 more seats in Commons: McGuinty

[Smallc]

Okay, so why should the rest of the nation be punished for the growth of Ontario?

No one is being punished for the growth of Ontario. I don't see seats being taken away (even though they should be, but that would require a constitutional amendment).

Alberta isn't a victim here.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Who said we were a victim? Ontario has far too much power and influence in confederation. Without Senate reform the rest of us have no chance of ever being heard from in a meaningful way.

The design of the Senate should have been to balance representation by population with representation by region. All provinces are supposed to be equal within confederation, that is what the Constitution says, but it also prevents that equality by stacking the deck. Each province should have five Senators, each elected for a ten year single term of office. That would provide equality in the upper house. No province should have more say or votes than any other in the Senate.

[Smallc]

Who said we were a victim? Ontario has far too much power and influence in confederation.

As it should. It has over 1/3 of the population. I'm not opposed to senate reform, but it seems that no one can agree on what should be done.

Edited December 28, 2008 by Smallc

[bluegreen]

Who said we were a victim? Ontario has far too much power and influence in confederation. Without Senate reform the rest of us have no chance of ever being heard from in a meaningful way.

The design of the Senate should have been to balance representation by population with representation by region. All provinces are supposed to be equal within confederation, that is what the Constitution says, but it also prevents that equality by stacking the deck. Each province should have five Senators, each elected for a ten year single term of office. That would provide equality in the upper house. No province should have more say or votes than any other in the Senate.

In what respect should PEI have precisely the same weight as Ontario, or Alberta in the upper house? There is no reason that I can think of. Nationalism doesn't justify it, population doesn't justify it, the only justification is that a historical accident established PEI, and the other provinces as seperate colony's. In short, the only rationale for allowing all 10 provinces equal representation irrespective of merit is that it will give considerable unearned power to the periphery, at the expense of the vast majority of the population.

And what the heck is the point of electing those 5 senators in this case? To make it more 'democratic? puhlease.. It's a pretty thin fig-leaf for a base power grab. Why not state honestly that you want the tail to wag the dog, and screw democratic principles that get in the way?

[Smallc]

That's not what our senate is really about anyway. Its about sober second thought in regards to the country as a whole. Regional representation is taken into account right now. There are 4 regions with 24 seats each. The only anomaly is Newfoundland and Labrador. I would actually like them to be combined with the maritime provinces and form the atlantic region with 6 senators each, but in the absence of that, the thing actually works quite well now.

What do we really need to do with the senate? We need to get all politics out of it. The Prime Minister's advice is only taken as a courtesy. That courtesy should stop. The Senate should be picked in a similar way to Order of Canada recipients. No politics should be involved at all.

[bluegreen]

That's not what our senate is really about anyway. Its about sober second thought in regards to the country as a whole. Regional representation is taken into account right now. There are 4 regions with 24 seats each. The only anomaly is Newfoundland and Labrador. I would actually like them to be combined with the maritime provinces and form the atlantic region with 6 senators each, but in the absence of that, the thing actually works quite well now.

What do we really need to do with the senate? We need to get all politics out of it. The Prime Minister's advice is only taken as a courtesy. That courtesy should stop. The Senate should be picked in a similar way to Order of Canada recipients. No politics should be involved at all.

That's about the most sensible thing I've read so far here. As far as changing New Foundlands representation, it would require a constitutional amendment, so it isn't in the cards. Can you imagine Danny Williams reaction LOL! It doesn't really matter much how Senators are selected, so long as they continue to hold no real power beyond delaying and frustrating knee jerk legislation. As it stands, it's a somewhat anachronistic way to reward Party loyalists. So our polity has a few warts? Such is the price of tradition, and a settled way of getting things done. Like the GG the senate only matters once in awhile, and even then it's power is severely curtailed, by tradition, and law. As Smallc said, what the hell, if it works....

[Smallc]

Like the GG the senate only matters once in awhile.

That isn't completely true though. The committee work that the Senate does is very important. The very small changes that they make to the wording of bills is also important. They do serve an important purpose. I agree with all of your other points though.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Should the provinces be equal partners in confederation or not? Under the current system they are not, that is a fact.

[bluegreen]

That isn't completely true though. The committee work that the Senate does is very important. The very small changes that they make to the wording of bills is also important. They do serve an important purpose. I agree with all of your other points though.

Even those small changes though are a courtesy allowed by the commons. (presumably because they work). I guess you are right though. Perhaps the senate should be stuffed with partisan lawyers then, who can presumably improve the wording? From all the pol's I know an almost unreal proportion are lawyers by training, so if you tallied up all the Senators, you'd probably find that most of the 'edits' are made by lawyer-Senators anyway.

[Smallc]

Even those small changes though are a courtesy allowed by the commons. (presumably because they work). I guess you are right though. Perhaps the senate should be stuffed with partisan lawyers then, who can presumably improve the wording? From all the pol's I know an almost unreal proportion are lawyers by training, so if you tallied up all the Senators, you'd probably find that most of the 'edits' are made by lawyer-Senators anyway.

I like the Senate. I like what they do. I like that they are there to watch over the commons and make these small and arguably necessary changes. I'm glad they are there to think so that we don't act rashly. I simply wish they were a little less political, that's all. Overall the thing works well though. I say, leave it alone...and at most, keep politics out of future appointments.

Edited December 28, 2008 by Smallc

[Smallc]

Should the provinces be equal partners in confederation or not? Under the current system they are not, that is a fact.

the provinces are equal partners. We're talking about the Federal government right now though.

[bluegreen]

Should the provinces be equal partners in confederation or not? Under the current system they are not, that is a fact.

They are already equal, or superior jurisdictions in many local affairs. They have complete jurisdiction in many of the things that are most important to their citizens, like municipal governance, highways, etc. and the administration of Justice. They share jurisdiction with the federal gvt. in some other areas. If we weight the upper house by Provinces, then we are really distorting things away from a viable constitutional model. That is why a triple E senate is a non starter. It is very detrimental to the interests of about half the country, and is therefore not viable over the long term. There is no way to compel Ontario to accept this chalice under our constitution, so there's not much point bellyaching about it is there?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

the provinces are equal partners. We're talking about the Federal government right now though.

That is not true, we are not equal in confederation! Confederation is supposed to be based on the reality of equal representation at the federal level. All provinces should therefore have an equal number of representatives in a house supposedly based on regions instead of populations, and that is simply not the case in the Senate..

[Jerry J. Fortin]

They are already equal, or superior jurisdictions in many local affairs. They have complete jurisdiction in many of the things that are most important to their citizens, like municipal governance, highways, etc. and the administration of Justice. They share jurisdiction with the federal gvt. in some other areas. If we weight the upper house by Provinces, then we are really distorting things away from a viable constitutional model. That is why a triple E senate is a non starter. It is very detrimental to the interests of about half the country, and is therefore not viable over the long term. There is no way to compel Ontario to accept this chalice under our constitution, so there's not much point bellyaching about it is there?

A viable constitutional model? You must be joking! What we now have is complete dominance of the nation by folks who occupy less than 30 % of the land! The current model is detrimental to the other half of the country!

[Smallc]

That is not true, we are not equal in confederation! Confederation is supposed to be based on the reality of equal representation at the federal level. All provinces should therefore have an equal number of representatives in a house supposedly based on regions instead of populations, and that is simply not the case in the Senate..

The regions actually do have equal representation with Newfoundland and Labrador being the only anomaly because of it being a late addition to Confederation. The provinces don't have equal representation, but no one has suffered as a result.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The regions actually do have equal representation with Newfoundland and Labrador being the only anomaly because of it being a late addition to Confederation. The provinces don't have equal representation, but no one has suffered as a result.

All of Western Canada gets the same number of seats as Ontario and that is fair? Eight provinces have the same voting power as two and that is fair? You are applying population to a regional setup and that is fair?

This type of mindset is what fuels separation!

On the other hand, that works well for me because I am a separatist!

[Smallc]

All of Western Canada gets the same number of seats as Ontario and that is fair? Eight provinces have the same voting power as two and that is fair? You are applying population to a regional setup and that is fair?

This type of mindset is what fuels separation!

On the other hand, that works well for me because I am a separatist!

8 provinces, with fewer people than the two other provinces. The 8 provinces actually have more votes though. I'm applying regions to the regional setup. West, Ontario, Quebec, East. Maybe the west should get 6 more Senators then? If there were a real reason to open the constitution then maybe it would be worth it, but as it stands, it's not.

So you're a separatist. Well, too bad, because separation isn't happening any time soon. The constitution and the clarity act make sure of that.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

8 provinces, with fewer people than the two other provinces. The 8 provinces actually have more votes though. I'm applying regions to the regional setup. West, Ontario, Quebec, East. Maybe the west should get 6 more Senators then? If there were a real reason to open the constitution then maybe it would be worth it, but as it stands, it's not.

So you're a separatist. Well, too bad, because separation isn't happening any time soon. The constitution and the clarity act make sure of that.

Each province should have an equal say, that would be fair. The entire notions of regions in the Senate is declared null and void with Ontario and Quebec being declared regions even though they are only provinces.

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Bring on the "cap and trade" system and see how well Alberta responds to it.

[bluegreen]

A viable constitutional model? You must be joking! What we now have is complete dominance of the nation by folks who occupy less than 30 % of the land! The current model is detrimental to the other half of the country!

The implication of what you are saying is that Nunavut, with 29,000 people, and over 2,000,000 square kilometers should dominate our political landscape? I suppose you are right. It is very detrimental to Nunavut that they should not be able to exercise an effective veto over tens of millions of people.

The viability of our constitutional model should be quite clear to anybody with a basic grasp of history. Can you possibly doubt that we are one of the richest, and happiest populations in the world? Has this position not been built over hundreds of years, the last 130 or so under this self same constitutional model?

Just out of curiosity, how do you propose to force 18 million people to hand a veto over our shared affairs to 5 or 6 million at the periphery? Our constitution and traditions protect the other 'half' of the country from despicable behaviour. The other 'half' (actually third) controls it's own affairs, and shares the governance of our common affairs.

By this argument, it's detrimental to me that I cannot have the contents of your' bank account. I want them! Now!

[Smallc]

Each province should have an equal say, that would be fair. The entire notions of regions in the Senate is declared null and void with Ontario and Quebec being declared regions even though they are only provinces.

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Bring on the "cap and trade" system and see how well Alberta responds to it.

Well, its possible that what you want for the senate might be better....or it might be worse. We really don't know. I don't want a political gong show like in Washington. I want something that....and what we currently have works.

On your second point, I'm really not sure how the people of Alberta will react to the Prime Minister who is from Alberta bringing in cap and trade. What I do know is that the clarity act makes it almost impossible for a province to separate.

[DrGreenthumb]

I like the senate too, and I oppose my party's position on it. The Ndp wants to abolish the senate but i think we need it to stay how it is. The senate serves to protect the public from the will of a tyranical majority. Even if the majority of voters want to do something that does not mean it is right or constitutionally valid. The senate should always remain unelected so they never have to fear doing the right, unpopular thing.