Topaz Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Over the radio I heard that Harper is telling the Senate to smarten up or he'll get rid of the Senate!!!! He's angry because they aren't passing some of his bills and they don't like the term limits he's put out for them. I do know that some of the Conservatives think that 8 year term is too short. As I was watching last year, a female Conservatives said she thought 8 years was too short and rather have 12 years. The Cons said they will being forth a bill to abolish the senate and if he can get Layton on his side he will able to do it and split up the coalition. I think right now though Layton isn't too happy with Harper. But politicans being politicans, they always change their minds! Quote
Mr.Canada Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Over the radio I heard that Harper is telling the Senate to smarten up or he'll get rid of the Senate!!!! He's angry because they aren't passing some of his bills and they don't like the term limits he's put out for them. I do know that some of the Conservatives think that 8 year term is too short. As I was watching last year, a female Conservatives said she thought 8 years was too short and rather have 12 years. The Cons said they will being forth a bill to abolish the senate and if he can get Layton on his side he will able to do it and split up the coalition. I think right now though Layton isn't too happy with Harper. But politicans being politicans, they always change their minds! Divide and conquer. I'd love to see Layton vote against abolishing the Senate if it comes up, he'd be done as leader of the NDP. I doubt it will though, just some sound bites. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
punked Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 As an member of the NDP I think Layton has to be on board but I don't think you can get ride of the Senate with out opening the Constitution. Layton can be against that. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 As an member of the NDP I think Layton has to be on board but I don't think you can get ride of the Senate with out opening the Constitution. Layton can be against that. LOL, yeah right. He wants the Senate abolished but wont open the Const.? Gimme abreak. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
punked Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 LOL, yeah right. He wants the Senate abolished but wont open the Const.? Gimme abreak. I wouldn't open the Const. It is the dumbest think Mulroney ever did. That whole debate killed him. No one in the right mind would try. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 I wouldn't open the Const. It is the dumbest think Mulroney ever did. That whole debate killed him. No one in the right mind would try. Well, then Layton should drop abolishing the Senate from his platform cause given the chance he wouldn't, you said. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
punked Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Well, then Layton should drop abolishing the Senate from his platform cause given the chance he wouldn't, you said. No you see Layton as PM would not appoint members to the Senate if all PM's did this the Senate would die out to a point where every province would have to agree to do something to have representation of some sort. Although Harper does not have the spine to do this. It takes all parties to agree on this. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 No you see Layton as PM would not appoint members to the Senate if all PM's did this the Senate would die out to a point where every province would have to agree to do something to have representation of some sort. Although Harper does not have the spine to do this. It takes all parties to agree on this. Layton as PM? OK now I know you've gone crazy. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
punked Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Layton as PM? OK now I know you've gone crazy. One can dream about a better world maybe some day we will be the country that gets it. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 One can dream about a better world maybe some day we will be the country that gets it. Socialists are destroying Europe, we won't make the same mistake. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
punked Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Socialists are destroying Europe, we won't make the same mistake. Yah the Euro is worth so little and seeing how the European Union is only 31% of the total world economic output they are just terrible over there. Ohhh not to mention the worlds lowest unemployment rate of the EU god I would hate for Canada to be like that. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Yah the Euro is worth so little and seeing how the European Union is only 31% of the total world economic output they are just terrible over there. Ohhh not to mention the worlds lowest unemployment rate of the EU god I would hate for Canada to be like that. Socialists are allowing Muslims to take over Europe. Hopefully this will reverse at some point. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Smallc Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Socialists are allowing Muslims to take over Europe. Hopefully this will reverse at some point. Oh, so its the evil-secu-socialist-trotskyist-marxist-communist-liberal-muslims now...I get it. Quote
punked Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Oh, so its the evil-secu-socialist-trotskyist-marxist-communist-liberal-muslims now...I get it. This guys is crazy eh Quote
Smallc Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 This guys is crazy eh No no, it all makes sense now. I can't beleive you don't see what's right in front of your face....lol... Sarcasm. Isn't it wonderful? Quote
Mr.Canada Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 No no, it all makes sense now. I can't beleive you don't see what's right in front of your face....lol...Sarcasm. Isn't it wonderful? I just look beyond what the CBC tells me. I like to go beyond that and find the truth as it really is not how the CBC wants us to view it. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Jerry J. Fortin Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 I would like to know how you abolish the senate without opening up a constitutional nightmare. Don't get me wrong, I want to see that document opened up. I want federal and provincial powers reformed. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 I would like to know how you abolish the senate without opening up a constitutional nightmare. Don't get me wrong, I want to see that document opened up. I want federal and provincial powers reformed. You don't that's why I found the argument funny. punkd wants the Senate gone but not open the constitution. It's just a scare tactic anyhow it's not a big deal to open it anyways. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Jerry J. Fortin Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Opening up the constitution is a VERY big deal. That little piece of paper can fix a lot of things wrong with the system, but the problem is that there are more than a few who what to do a little social engineering with it. Abortion is one example of the things many would like to talk about in the case of opening up that document. The only way to deal with this situation properly is to get unanimous consent from the provinces and Premiers to only go where they need to go with it. Limit the format, limit the discussion. Address the issues that need to be addressed, not everything under the sun. Quote
punked Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 Referendum. As a country I think we have only had three but the results of such a binding. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted December 21, 2008 Report Posted December 21, 2008 That is one way. Another is to introduce them during ballots in general elections. But that does not address the issue of opening the constitution. How can it be done? Quote
Bryan Posted December 24, 2008 Report Posted December 24, 2008 Referendum. As a country I think we have only had three but the results of such a binding. We should have more of them on major issues. A party/government can them propose whatever is their ideal plan, and let Canadians decide what they want. Quote
Smallc Posted December 24, 2008 Report Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) We should have more of them on major issues. A party/government can them propose whatever is their ideal plan, and let Canadians decide what they want. Problem is though, that most of the time, Canadians have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. If they're going to be asked to vote on important issues, I want them to be informed about them, and since that isn't going to happen for the most part, I don't want them marking any decisions for me regarding important matters. They have to choose the Commons, there's no way around that, but that's far enough. More democracy doesn't necessarily equal better democracy. Edited December 24, 2008 by Smallc Quote
Boydfish Posted December 27, 2008 Report Posted December 27, 2008 The biggest stumbling blocks to constitutional reform by referendum are that it doesn't address the issue of complexity/clarity and it doesn't seem to be the way we've agreed to do amendments to the constitution. If you made the referendum question specific to the actual question, the only people who could understand it ad how it would affect would be constitutional scholars. For example, if we put a question to the public "Shall we add to s.92 a 17th clause stating "All provinces shall have absolute interjurisdictional immunity in all of their areas of authority under the constitution.", unless you happen to know what that means, the bulk of the voters will go "Um...no? Yes? Maybe?". As well, if we're talking about a large amendment, the individual ballots will be 95 pages long. On the other hand, if you allow them absolute freedom on drafting the referendum question, you'd see questions like "Do you support motherhood, freedom and democracy?", and it turns out the amendment is actually an amendment ordering the internment of all British Columbians and Albertans. Finally, you'd have to amend the amending formula to do that. Kind of a paradox, isn't it? Quote
Smallc Posted December 27, 2008 Report Posted December 27, 2008 (edited) . Edited December 27, 2008 by Smallc Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.