Senate Reform

TheNewTeddy · August 28, 2012

More reason to get rid of the Senate. Gee looks like the NDP have been right all along waste of our money.

One way or the other, eh? Nothing in between?

How about reforming the Senate? Seems to me that abolishing it would be missing an opportunity to have more citizen input into our political process.

I guess, if you love top down bureaucracy, it sounds like a great idea to abolish it!

No an elected Senate would hurt our Federation. You think it is hard for Alberta to build a pipeline now, or Newfoundland to exports its energy now just wait till this is the break down of our elected upper house.

British Columbia 6

Alberta 6

Ontario 24

Quebec 24

Manitoba 6

Saskatchewan 6

Nova Scotia 10

Newfoundland and Labrador 6

New Brunswick 10

Northwest Territories 1

Prince Edward Island 4

Yukon 1

Nunavut 1

Look at that the Martimes that have little of the countries population have a third of the seats. Not to mention the West has almost no seats. The only reason it has worked for this long is because it was just a place to give a job to your parties most loyal members. So they never slowed down anything a government of representation by population passed. Wait till they do. You think Quebec is bad just wait until a minority of the country is given the majority voice. We would be trading a smaller problem for a bigger one. The best idea is to get rid of them.

Sorry punked. It's been so long since we've debated the Senate that maybe you younger guys are new to the topic!

The Reform party thrashed all this out over 25 years ago, calling for a Triple E Senate. This means Equal, Elected and Effective.

Every other parliamentary in the free world that has an Upper House structures it differently than is other House. The Commons is "rep by pop" which means states or provinces with more people tend to have more seats and more power.

The Senate, or Upper House, runs on "rep by region" where Rhode Island has as many Senators as California or New York.

This is a deliberate attempt to have a check and balance government. Smaller regions would have the power to block anything unfair to them being rammed through by regions of larger population power in the lower House.

It seems to work reasonably well for everybody else in the world. That was also how we started out in Canada, similar to the British House of Lords. Of course, being Canadian we had to screw it up! Each province does NOT get the same number of Senators! The Senate also can't do much but obstruct legislation from the Lower House, usually for partisan reasons.

If the Senate was Triple E it would go a long way to making Canadians in smaller provinces feel more equal. If you live in PEI you have a totally different attitude towards Ottawa than someone in Ontario.

The scenario you describe would be truly pointless. You would simply be duplicating the Commons, which of course would be of no value.

Yah thanks but no thanks. I don't want Canada be run like the US nothing ever changes down there, and that is great when policy is good but when it is bad all the upper house does is either get in the way or ransom their their votes. "Sure I will vote for you to save our country you just need to spend 10 Billion dollars on putting a base in Goosebay who cares if it is a good idea."

Thanks but no thanks. My party has fought and debated over this one to. Know what conclusion we came to? The west wants in, time to get rid of the Senate. If you make it Elected you are asking for a whole world of hurt I promise you that.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=21307&view=findpost&p=823535

I'm going to start a topic just about senate reform, and quote the above, as this really deserves it's own discussion - and, it's been a pet project of mine for over a dozen years; and I'm only 28!

TheNewTeddy · August 28, 2012

SENATE REFORM, the "big 3 issues"

Represnetation

How many seats should the provinces have?

Selection

How should Senators be chosen?

Powers

What kind of Power should the Senate have?

In General, any discussion of Senate Reform needs to focus on these three issues. There are others, but these are good guideposts!

TheNewTeddy · August 28, 2012

REPRESENATION

History

In 1867, Canada came to be. Not exactly breaking news, but what many do not know is that while 45% of the time spent discussion confederation was spent discussion the powers of the provinces VS the federal government, another 45% was spent discussing the Senate. The other issues were non controversial and were settled easily, but "Senate Reform" has been a hot topic of discussion since before the Senate was created.

The delegates agreed to use the US system, of equal representation per state. Except, a problem. NB and NS had such small populations compared to Ontario and Quebec, that they agreed on a slightly modified US system, rather than equal number of Senators per province, it would be equal per region.

24 to Ontario

24 to Quebec

and 24 to the Atlantic Provinces

Problem 2. Newfoundland, originally planned to be part of this "Atlantic" region, decided to sit out the final negotiation. So they modified the plan. Now it would be 24 Senators for the 3 Maritime provinces.

Problem 3. PEI also decided to sit out. The plan was further modified seeing NB and NS each start off with 12 senators.

When PEI joined in 1873, (or was it 1876?) it was given 4 Senators was originally planned, while NB and NS were reduced to 10.

--Fun fact, Newfoundland was originally to also get 4 Senators, with NB and NS at 8--

As new provinces joined, they were assigned Senators... seemingly at random.

Manitoba was originally given 2, in 1887 that increased to 3, before increasing to 4 in 1892.

BC was given 3 in 1871 and kept that number.

The Northwest Territories - in particular, those parts destined to become SK and AB, were given 2 in 1887, and finally 4 in 1903.

In 1905, when Saskatchewan and Alberta were created, they were each given 4 senators.

The total Senators at this time was as follows.

Ontario - 24

Quebec - 24

Maritime - 24

West - 15

In 1915, PEI sued the federal government. They tried to give them 3 MPs, but PEI said they should not have fewer MPs than Senators. They won. The federal government decided to restructure the laws and created a new "region" with 24 senators, the West, thereby bumping each western province up to 6 Senators each. At this time, Ontario and Quebec had a huge share of the national population, but were now tied in the Senate with the Maritimes and the West, both areas without large populations.

Not much changed since then. In 1999, Nunavut gained a Senator, in 1975, Senators were added for the other 2 territories. In 1949, Newfoundland joined. Rather than go by the original idea, they decided Newfoundland would not become part of the Atlantic region, but rather, be a province without a Senate region, having 6 Senators on to it's own.

This is where we stand today.

Population growth in the west has made the current distribution untenable. BC and Alberta alone have more people than Quebec. New Brunswick, at one time having a larger population by itself than all of the west, now has a population roughly equal to Winnipeg. The province, however, keeps it's 10 Senators.

TheNewTeddy · August 28, 2012

Selection

Part of the issue of selection is when the term ends. This is the only Senate Reform we have actually had so far in Canada. Senators must now retire at age 75. Prior to this they would serve until death or resignation.

This is usually the focus of Senate Reform proposals. Elected is a popular option. Other options include allowing the Premiers to appoint the Senators, and/or having a "term limit" of 12, 9, 8, or 6 years.

Included within this is usually some discussion of what method of elections to use (block vote, STV, PR)

Powers

The Senate of Today has the same Powers as it did when it was created. It can stop just about any law, and create just about any law. The only limitations are as follows. The Senate can not stop a constitutional amendment. They can also not initiate a money bill. Beyond that, the Senate really is free to do what it wants. Part of the reason it does not is that it is not elected, and thus, not "legitimate" in the eyes of many in the public. Part of the problem is that if we move to an elected, or to a more democratic selection method for Senators, they may become inclined to use their powers, and thus, cause a divide between the two houses.

madmax · August 28, 2012

I think Canada will be fine if we Abolish the Senate.

Provinces got rid of their upper chamber and I could only imagine what deadlock and upper chamber for the Provinces would create. Same with the Senate.

The Senate has always been a place for Patronage. It remains so and will remain so.

I see no reason to have the gridlock like in the US.

WWWTT · August 28, 2012

Maybe some here are not aware of this.

I believe that all the provinces would have to unanimously come to an arrangement to abolishing the senate and how procedure would be replaced.

As well the cost would be astronomically high!

I would venture a guess at 25-30 billion!

WWWTT

Newfoundlander · August 29, 2012

Maybe some here are not aware of this.

I believe that all the provinces would have to unanimously come to an arrangement to abolishing the senate and how procedure would be replaced.

As well the cost would be astronomically high!

I would venture a guess at 25-30 billion!

WWWTT

But what about all the unemployed union workers?

Topaz · August 29, 2012

IN my view, Senate Reform should be reforming the people who get picked. It doesn't matter HOW they got there, its WHO THEY ARE and would they do a good job for Canadians and Canada and NOT the person that sent them there. I say, keep the Senate, put time linits in, which I think the Tories have and lets bury this topic once and for all.

TheNewTeddy · August 29, 2012

Several provincial governments, including Quebec, and McGunity's Ontario, have come out in favour of abolition yes. Others, such as Alberta, support reform.

Smallc · August 29, 2012

Several provincial governments, including Quebec,

I don't think so.

TheNewTeddy · August 29, 2012

My view on the 3 issues.

Representation

Having PEI have as many Senators as Ontario is just insanity. Any suggestion that they are somehow "Equal partners in confederation" does not stand up to the smell test due to our confederation having equalization and many other equalizing programs. In addition, PEI has 130,000 people while Ontario has 13,000,000 (with some rounding) Compare this to the USA where Wyoming has 500,000 and California has 35,000,000 and also note that the latter has 50 sub national units while we have 10, or, 13 at most.

The original idea, from 1867, of "Equal Regions" is the best idea, but dare I say, the regions change over time, and we must change with them.

I therefore have a few similar proposals to get things running smoothly.

A - Convince Nova Scotia and New Brunswick that for the good of the country, they must give up 3 Senators each. This would mean that the Maritime region is abolished and replaced with the Atlantic region, saving us 6 Senators on the whole. NB and NS would now have 7 Senators each.

B - This is the fall-back option should we be unable to do the above.

I - Create two new "regions" out of the west.

II - Create one new "region" out of the west, and remove some provinces from the western region.

1 - Have BC be a region

2 - Have Alberta be a region

3 - Have BC and Alberta be a region

4 - Have the Prairies be a region.

Now we mix and match.

My personal fav is AII3

12BC 12AB 7SK 7MB 24ON 24QC 7NB 7NS 4PE 6NL 3TR

I think this would balance things fairly

Another example (so you can see how this would all work) is BII3

12BC 12AB 10SK 10MB 24ON 24QC 10NB 10NS 4PE 6NL 3TR

AI12 may be good for the long-term future

24BC 24AB 10SK 10MB 24ON 24QC 10NB 10NS 4PE 6NL 3TR

BI14 has been suggested by a Liberal Senator (from BC)

24BC 12AB 6SK 6MB 24ON 24QC 10NB 10NS 4PE 6NL 3TR

I think using these guidelines will help find the fastest solution that is suitable to all.

Another idea is to just add more Senators to deal with the east having too many. A simple doubling would result in

12BC 12AB 12SK 12MB 48ON 48QC 10NB 10NS 4PE 6NL 3TR

From here making BC and AB regions would be easier

24BC 24AB 12SK 12MB 48ON 48QC 10NB 10NS 4PE 6NL 3TR

This balance, as a balance, would likely be acceptable to just about everyone. The problem is this is 201 Senators! Even I think that's too many.

As I mentioned, I've been working on the idea for Senate Reform for over a dozen years, and I'm only 28. Some ideas from when I was younger that might have merit:

A formula giving each Province 5 "Free" Senators, and 50 nationwide based on population.

12BC 10AB 7SK 7MB 24ON 17QC 6NB 6NS 5PE 6NL 3TR

A formula where each province has 1 more Senator than the next one in terms of population

11BC 10AB 8SK 9MB 13ON 12QC 6NB 7NS 4PE 5NL 3TR

Smallc · August 29, 2012

A simple fix (that would satisfy only a few), for me would be this.

West:

BC - 6

AB - 6

SK - 6

MB - 6

Ontario: 24

Quebec: 24

Atlantic:

PEI - 6

NS - 6

NB - 6

N + L - 6

or, replace Ontario and Quebec with Central, and give them 12 senators each.

eyeball · August 29, 2012

I think Canada will be fine if we Abolish the Senate.

I'd feel even finer if an asteroid fell on Ottawa and took out the whole shebang.

TheNewTeddy · August 29, 2012

A simple fix (that would satisfy only a few), for me would be this.

West:

BC - 6

AB - 6

SK - 6

MB - 6

Ontario: 24

Quebec: 24

Atlantic:

PEI - 6

NS - 6

NB - 6

N + L - 6

or, replace Ontario and Quebec with Central, and give them 12 senators each.

Taking away Senators is much harder than adding them.

Newfoundlander · August 29, 2012

So PEI shouldn't get the same number of senators as Ontario because eventhough they are both provinces they're still not equal, yet Ontario and Quebec should have the same number of senators?

madmax · August 29, 2012

So PEI shouldn't get the same number of senators as Ontario because eventhough they are both provinces they're still not equal, yet Ontario and Quebec should have the same number of senators?

This is the Problem. Some provinces will be more equal then others.

Its like we have to create a 2nd parliment and for what reason????

People are sick to death of elections... and thats just Federal, Provincial and Municipal.

While good on paper and theory, the practice of a 2nd chamber "elected" under the pretense of regional equality just won't fly and we will continue to see voter turnout decline even faster....as people tune out vs tune in.

Its non stop electioneering in the US, from one level to the next, I really don't see it as effective or efficient.

I have always prefered the Canadian model as we can turn on a dime, which is very useful when facing and economic crises or major policy change that is required. Its not so nice when the changes are idealogically driven but idealogs can be driven out of power just as quickly.

I only see a Senate getting in the way, and playing partizan politics.

The Senate today is a toothless almost useless body filled with patronage.

They don't get in the way as much in order to lay low and not expose their hypocrisy or comfy quarters.

My heart has been with reform of the Senate since I heard Preston Manning speak of it, but my Head prevails that the best thing is its abolishment.

Ironically,

One thing that could be different from the LPC and CPC if the NDP get elected is SOMETHING would HAVE to be done with the Senate, as the NDP would have difficulty appointing anyone to the Senate, (they don't allow NDP members to be part of the Senate)

Which means action would have to be take to either reform the Senate or Abolish and the debate on that would actually be REAL.

I think this is where the real change has to occur.

The CPC have had a Majority, and ran out of excuses

they have done nothing except prove they are better then the Liberals when it comes to Patronage.

It would appear that this populist reform element has arrived DOA in the Conservative Majority Government and Majority Senate.

I would suggest that is might be the biggest difference between Harper and Manning.

I think Manning believes more in open democracy and Harper believes more in total PMO government.

Smallc · August 29, 2012

So PEI shouldn't get the same number of senators as Ontario because eventhough they are both provinces they're still not equal, yet Ontario and Quebec should have the same number of senators?

In a perfect world, I'd love to see all provinces having the same number, but I think my first idea, combining Maritime and Newfoundland into one group - Atlantic, with 24 Senators, would be the easiest and most doable.

wyly · August 29, 2012

Its like we have to create a 2nd parliment and for what reason????

yes, it's pointless and unnecessary...

The Senate today is a toothless almost useless body filled with patronage.
They don't get in the way as much in order to lay low and not expose their hypocrisy or comfy quarters.

My heart has been with reform of the Senate since I heard Preston Manning speak of it, but my Head prevails that the best thing is its abolishment.

it's an ineffective and useless organization a retirement home for political suck-ups, has-beens and never-weres...that our governments have functioned quite nicely without an effective working senate is all the evidence required that we don't need one at all...

PIK · August 29, 2012

We could of have it 20 yrs ago.

madmax · August 29, 2012

We could of have it 20 yrs ago.

How so?

The PCs of 1992 had no intentions or policy of Senate Reform and they were a Strong Majority Government.

The Liberals have never campaigned for Senate Reform, like the PCs of the era.

The Reform party of whom were advocates of senate change held all of 1 seat.

The NDP of the 3rd party advoacate Abolish of the Senate but had never held government.

Even in 1993 the Libs had the Majority

The Reform Party was the 3 party

So, until 2006 could there have been any possibility of Reform of Abolishment.

And it appears there is no appetite for Senate Reform

Conservative Senators are entitled to their entitlements.

Newfoundlander · August 29, 2012

In a perfect world, I'd love to see all provinces having the same number, but I think my first idea, combining Maritime and Newfoundland into one group - Atlantic, with 24 Senators, would be the easiest and most doable.

I don't.

Smallc · August 29, 2012

I don't.

Why not? It would more evenly balance the regions.

PIK · August 29, 2012

How so?

The PCs of 1992 had no intentions or policy of Senate Reform and they were a Strong Majority Government.

The Liberals have never campaigned for Senate Reform, like the PCs of the era.

The Reform party of whom were advocates of senate change held all of 1 seat.

The NDP of the 3rd party advoacate Abolish of the Senate but had never held government.

Even in 1993 the Libs had the Majority

The Reform Party was the 3 party

So, until 2006 could there have been any possibility of Reform of Abolishment.

And it appears there is no appetite for Senate Reform

Conservative Senators are entitled to their entitlements.

Hey I could be wrong ,but I thought the charlottetown accord had something in it about senate reform, and that was a sore point with the quebec ministers, because it took the power out of there hands. Did that happen or am I dreaming?

TheNewTeddy · August 29, 2012

In a perfect world, I'd love to see all provinces having the same number, but I think my first idea, combining Maritime and Newfoundland into one group - Atlantic, with 24 Senators, would be the easiest and most doable.

In a perfect world we kick Quebec the hell out and move to EEE