Jump to content

Liberal Senators amend Crime Bill


Recommended Posts

So this is the idea behind 2 for 1, move it or lose it.

The problem is drag it and discount it.

The Senate represents the conscience of Canada, and if it is Liberal dominated, it's because Canada is Liberal dominated as is clear throughout our political history. Thats what we are and thats what most people want.

Historically, Canada has been a country in which the people have wanted to be tough on crime. When Mulroney held a vote in the House, what the majority of people wanted was the death penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

To my mind the Senate is exercising their legal rights, as they should. The fact that the person gets "2 for 1" is also an impetus for the courts, to move their asses and get some work done, not leave people languishing in jails without a trial. So this is the idea behind 2 for 1, move it or lose it.

Hogwash. The reason 2 for 1 came about traces its roots to the Don Jail in Toronto. The jail dated to the 1860's, was infested with rats and was over-crowded. This was where some prisoners were remanded. As a result, a certain judge took it on himself to credit prisoners who were remanded there with 2 for 1. Of course, that became a precedent that mutated into any perceived "hardship" such as being remanded more than a bus ride away from family - and then that became the precedent...until we were faced with an automatic 2 for 1 in most cases and on exception - 3 for 1. Naturally, the lawyers had a field day with this.......but it all traces back to the Don Jail and judges who thumb their nose at the will of the people in the name of "case law" - not slow courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Mulroney held a vote in the House, what the majority of people wanted was the death penalty.

And now a majority of people in Canada oppose it. Some of that has probably occurred because of the amount of people who have been convicted that were later found innocent based on things like DNA.

As for the delay, you can blame the defence if you want but the simple truth is we are short of Crown Proscutors and the provinces are to blame for that.

Edited by jdobbin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so. The Senate could have passed the bill that sailed through the house with the full support of all four parties but the Liberal Senators wanted to play games instead. Now you want the Tories to vote on their own bill...again? That's highly insulting sir.

The NDP opposed the bill in the House. We just think it should move with out change because we don't believe the Senate should exist at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Afraid not. The Tories refused to let the vote proceed and pass this week in the Senate.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...1009?hub=Canada

All we see is a lot of huffing and puffing from the Tories but they are the ones who delayed the bill and are now playing games.

Uhm The Senate changed the entire bill dobbin. It was was supposed to go from 2 for 1 as it is now to 1 for 1 time served. Instead the Liberal Senators changed the bill to 2 for 1.2. This is outrageous. If that's not soft on crime I don't know what is.

Even the NDP and Jack Layton support the 1 for 1 Bill. He was even pissed at the Senate for changing the bill. That should tell you something. This bill is non partisan and serves all Canadians.

Don't worry, your Liberal time is coming to an end sir. I'm not even upset, just laughing at the pathetic Liberal Senators lunging for one last power grab before January when the Tories will control the Senate. Then we'll pass whatever we want and those haughty Liberal Senators will have to sit there and sulk for the next 10-15 years. Our just desserts are going to be oh so sweet.

I'm sure we'll see dobbins posts going on about the Conservative upper house and how convicted criminals are actually serving their entire sentences and have earned parole! Oh the horror!

Edited by Mr.Canada
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhm The Senate changed the entire bill dobbin. It was was supposed to go from 2 for 1 as it is now to 1 for 1 time served. Instead the Liberal Senators changed the bill to 2 for 1.2. This is outrageous. If that's not soft on crime I don't know what is.

It's worse. They changed it from 2-1 to 2-1.5 - not 2-1.2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so. The Senate could have passed the bill that sailed through the house with the full support of all four parties but the Liberal Senators wanted to play games instead. Now you want the Tories to vote on their own bill...again? That's highly insulting sir.

The senate isnt supposed to rubber stamp legislation based on what party they belong to. Its a GOOD thing that the Senators dont just blindly follow party leadership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree that the changes in this case don't seem to have a justifiable reason, but it's important to point out that the Senate hasn't approved any changes, and that this is just a committee recommendation. I fully expect that the full Senate will pass the bill with very few changes, probably just those that are necessary (legal and constitution friendly wording for example).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhm The Senate changed the entire bill dobbin.

Um, the amendment was made in committee. The Liberals moved to push it to a full vote that looked to defeat that amendment but the Tories refused.

It is Tories playing games. The amendment would have been defeated and the legislation passed yesterday were it not for Tory games.

As for a Tory Senate, I expect it it be a rubberstamp for Tory policy. Then I expect the Tory senators to break their promise of stepping down in eight years. And you will think it is brilliant.

Edited by jdobbin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for a Tory Senate, I expect it it be a rubberstamp for Tory policy. Then I expect the Tory senators to break their promise of stepping down in eight years. And you will think it is brilliant.

Oh, you mean how the past Senate was for he Liberal Party for the last 2 decades? It's about time we had some balance in there sir. Criminals deserve to be where they are for the duration of their sentences not let free before their time is up or before they've earned parole. This automatic parole and 2 for 1 time has got to go.

You know what, the majority of Canadians agree with me on this so good luck trying to sell them on letting them go early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that this is going to work in Harper's favour for Senate reform. Some type of reform will probably happen now, once the Conservatives get their Majority. Hopefully, the reform will meet Constitutional requirements, or else we could have a Constitutional Crisis on our hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that this is going to work in Harper's favour for Senate reform. Some type of reform will probably happen now, once the Conservatives get their Majority. Hopefully, the reform will meet Constitutional requirements, or else we could have a Constitutional Crisis on our hand.

Maybe we need a crisis. Maybe that will wake people up from the socialist slumber we've been forced into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that this is going to work in Harper's favour for Senate reform. Some type of reform will probably happen now, once the Conservatives get their Majority. Hopefully, the reform will meet Constitutional requirements, or else we could have a Constitutional Crisis on our hand.

About the only reform would be the PM "lending" his appointment powers to the electorate. But even that isn't straightforward. As with all things, the the Queen or her vice-regent name Senators on the advise of Her ministers, so it's hard to envision how the legislation would look. There's no other possible reform than that, however, that wouldn't require changes to the Constitution. The Senate's makeup, the term limits of Senators and the Senate's powers are all defined in the Constitution.

We had our big chance to reform the Senate but blew it twenty years ago. As loathsome and arrogant a figure as Mulroney strikes, he seems to have been the last PM with sufficient clout in Quebec to deliver. I'll wager it will be at least another generation before meaningful Senate reform is possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we need a crisis. Maybe that will wake people up from the socialist slumber we've been forced into.

A constitutional crisis of this magnitude would likely destroy whoever instigated it. Politicians are not known for their suicidal tendencies.

And what the hell does socialism have to do with any of this? Since none of the proposed amendments to the Constitution deal with planned economies, I can only conclude that you're still trying to win some sort of non-sequitur contest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you mean how the past Senate was for he Liberal Party for the last 2 decades? It's about time we had some balance in there sir.

You mean a Tory majority which is fine. That is the right of the government to do when in power.

I certainly don't expect reform and the 8 year term will be out the window for a number of them, I'm sure.

Criminals deserve to be where they are for the duration of their sentences not let free before their time is up or before they've earned parole. This automatic parole and 2 for 1 time has got to go.

You know what, the majority of Canadians agree with me on this so good luck trying to sell them on letting them go early.

And a majority of the Liberals agree. Too bad the Tories didn't allow the vote to go through Thursday as the amendment would have been defeated and the legislation passed.

The Tories played games instead of having the vote. No use denying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the only reform would be the PM "lending" his appointment powers to the electorate. But even that isn't straightforward.

I know. That's what worrys me. This seed has been planted that some how the Senate is illegitimate and shouldn't be doing the job it's been tasked with.....and that concerns me. He'll try something, but it will probably only make the problem bigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know. That's what worrys me. This seed has been planted that some how the Senate is illegitimate and shouldn't be doing the job it's been tasked with.....and that concerns me. He'll try something, but it will probably only make the problem bigger.

That seed was planted two decades ago. Come on, everyone thought the way the Senate was constituted was anachronistic and undemocratic. I can't think of a time in my lifetime that anyone has ever referred to the Senate in terms of usefulness or effectiveness. Every once in a while CBC would have a little "This is the Senate" kind of stories, but other than that, either the Senate was ignored or the object of scorn.

But the whole thing boils down to this. To do any meaningful reform to the Senate requires a constitutional change. So even if everyone thinks the Senate is worthless or illegitimate, there is no one out there whose going to up the constitution. The last guy that did that sunk his party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please explain something to me. IF the Tories got a majority in the House and Harper replaces the leaving Liberals with Tories in the senate, what is stopping him from either doing away with the senate or changing the constitution. Wouldn't the Tories have all the power and do ANYTHING they want?? What if the power went to this guy's head and he turned into a Bush! I don't think any party should have that much power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...