TheNewTeddy Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/02/26/pol-senators-refuse-to-answer-questions.html Many Senators, it seems, do not live where they are supposed to. If I understand the constitution correctly - and I'm not a constitutional lawyer, so I may not - that's grounds to fire them. I'm wondering if this, perhaps, was not the plan all along. To fill the Senate with people to be fired, creating a nationwide gap in the Senate. With at least 1 vacant seat in each province, Harper could then call a "Senate Election" and thus, implement his Senate Reform. Quote Feel free to contact me outside the forums. Add "TheNewTeddy" to Twitter, Facebook, or Hotmail to reach me!
g_bambino Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 With at least 1 vacant seat in each province, Harper could then call a "Senate Election" and thus, implement his Senate Reform. Nonsense. Quote
Boges Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/02/26/pol-senators-refuse-to-answer-questions.html Many Senators, it seems, do not live where they are supposed to. If I understand the constitution correctly - and I'm not a constitutional lawyer, so I may not - that's grounds to fire them. I'm wondering if this, perhaps, was not the plan all along. To fill the Senate with people to be fired, creating a nationwide gap in the Senate. With at least 1 vacant seat in each province, Harper could then call a "Senate Election" and thus, implement his Senate Reform. An elected Senate would be a mess in Canada. You can't have someone who gets elected by the 12 million people in Ontario have and equal vote as someone from 150,000 PEI. An Ontario Senator would have the largest official mandate of anyone in Canadian history. They do it in the US, but they have 50 States, we only have 13 Provinces and Territories. The Senate should be scrapped it's a sinkhole of money and is only useful for patronage. Edited February 26, 2013 by Boges Quote
TheNewTeddy Posted February 26, 2013 Author Report Posted February 26, 2013 http://www.cbc.ca/news/interactives/senators/ Alberta and Manitoba are the only provinces without Senators who have not confirmed. Quote Feel free to contact me outside the forums. Add "TheNewTeddy" to Twitter, Facebook, or Hotmail to reach me!
g_bambino Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 They do it in the US, but they have 50 States, we only have 13 Provinces and Territories. Which rather proves wrong your claim that it can't be done. The number of divisions is irrelevant. The Senate should be scrapped... Rhetorical statements like that should be scrapped. Quote
Boges Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 Which rather proves wrong your claim that it can't be done. The number of divisions is irrelevant. Rhetorical statements like that should be scrapped. It can be done, it just would be stupid. Quote
g_bambino Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 It can be done, it just would be stupid. Electing senators or abolishing the Senate? Quote
Boges Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 Electing senators or abolishing the Senate? Electing them. The Senate in both countries are redundant. Quote
g_bambino Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 Electing them. The Senate in both countries are redundant. Then the upper chambers in all federations are redundant. Yet, they all have one.... Quote
Boges Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) Then the upper chambers in all federations are redundant. Yet, they all have one.... And I disagree with all of them. I'm not familiar with how the House of Lords works in the UK but I know in the US it just allows more complication to trying to find agreement in the legislative branch. The will of the Senate is useless if the House disagrees; you still see a stalemate. The Senate makes itself even more irrelevant because ultimately you need 60 seats to avoid a potential fillibuster. You have Senators in New York and California that represent a huge number of people having no more say than someone from Alaska, it seems anti-democratic. I understand the idea initially when the US was essentially a bunch of different countries. But now it seems unneeded. Edited February 26, 2013 by Boges Quote
TheNewTeddy Posted February 26, 2013 Author Report Posted February 26, 2013 I'm not debating the merits of electing them, I'm debating if Harper had planned this - to make the Senate look like a bunch of idiots so he could reform it. Also this. Number of Senators who refused proof, or have yet to answer, by province, east to west. NL - 1 PE - 1 NS - 2 NB - 3 QC - 8 ON - 7 MB - 0 SK - 1 AB - 0 BC - 1 Ters - 1 Quote Feel free to contact me outside the forums. Add "TheNewTeddy" to Twitter, Facebook, or Hotmail to reach me!
g_bambino Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) And I disagree with all of them. Fair enough. But, I will take the opinions of the framers of the constitutions of every federation on the planet over yours. No offence meant, of course. Balanced regional representation in an upper chamber works against unbalanced popular representation in the lower house. The members of upper chambers are also less driven by political whims. I understand the idea initially when the US was essentially a bunch of different countries. But now it seems unneeded. A bunch of different countries is essentially what federations are. [ed.: +] Edited February 26, 2013 by g_bambino Quote
Boges Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) Fair enough. But, I will take the opinions of the framers of the constitutions of every federation on the planet over yours. No offence meant, of course. Balanced regional representation in an upper chamber works against unbalanced popular representation in the lower house. The members of upper chambers are also less driven by political whims. But the Lower House is based on regional representation. It's just cut up equally amongst separate ridings. If you want to have a proper regional representation then do as the US. Have 2 seats for each province for each and territory. PEI and the Yukon get 2 seats and so does Ontario. The current system seems inconsistent regarding how the seats are assigned. But ultimately it's irrelevant because all the senators are appointed and have no real power to overturn a bill passed in the House of Commons, if you allow an elected Upper House then they should be able to. Edited February 26, 2013 by Boges Quote
cybercoma Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 Then the upper chambers in all federations are redundant. Yet, they all have one....The provinces had upper chambers too at one point. Quote
TheNewTeddy Posted February 26, 2013 Author Report Posted February 26, 2013 Upper chambers in all federations ensure that pure rep-by-pop does not over-ride interests of the less populated states. Quote Feel free to contact me outside the forums. Add "TheNewTeddy" to Twitter, Facebook, or Hotmail to reach me!
g_bambino Posted February 27, 2013 Report Posted February 27, 2013 (edited) The provinces had upper chambers too at one point. That's true. So did New Zealand. And the Australian state of Queensland. They're also not federations. [ed.: +] Edited February 27, 2013 by g_bambino Quote
Paradox Posted February 27, 2013 Report Posted February 27, 2013 I don't understand the suggestion that the prime minister could, if each province had a Senate vacancy, call some sort of "Senate election." There is no such thing as a Senate election, as the method of appointing senators is set out, quite expressly, by section 24 of the Constitution Act, 1867. This method is that our honourable senators are appointed by the Governor General. This method of selection cannot be changed except through an amendment to the constitution made pursuant to section 42(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, through resolutions of the Senate and Commons, consented to by seven provincial legislatures, accounting for a majority of the population. There is no provisions in the Constitution Acts, 1867-1982, nor in the Parliament of Canada Act, for the election of senators. This clearly amounts to a substantive change in the method of selection for senators and, therefore, cannot be made except through a properly-conducted amendment to the constitution. The prime minister has started to wake up to the fact that even many of his Conservative senators are not prepared to accept a Senate reform bill that is contrary to the constitution, and this is why the seven questions on Senate reform have been referred to the Supreme Court of Canada for its opinion. The prime minister cannot "call" Senate elections, period. Quote
shortlived Posted February 27, 2013 Report Posted February 27, 2013 (edited) I think if anything this is about weakening the governor general even more, because it is the GG that appoints not the prime minister, an election would more or less destroy the governor generals ability to deny senate appointments as a reserve power. This would change the senate from a place for capable people (as it is suppose to be) to a place of popular people where media will probably sway the uneducated masses to vote for any idiot with a good PR campaign. Edited February 27, 2013 by shortlived Quote My posts are sometimes edited to create spelling errors if you see one kindly notify me. These edits do not show up as edits as my own edits do, so it is either site moderation, or third party moderation. This includes changing words completely. If a word looks out of place in a message kindly contact me so I can correct it. These changes are not exclusive to this website, and is either a form of net stalking by a malicious hacker, or perhaps government, it has been ongoing for years now.
August1991 Posted February 27, 2013 Report Posted February 27, 2013 I'm wondering if this, perhaps, was not the plan all along. The plan, if there was one, was to bring the Senate into utter disrepute in preparation for its reform, or abolition. I see a similar "plan" behind the PBO and Kevin Page. Have you noticed how the public debate has shifted to controlling government spending? The left-wing media (eg. CBC) appears happy to see Harper uncomfortable with Senators and Page while in effect, the media is doing what Harper wants: the public debate is now about Harper's agenda. Trudeau said that a democracy requires counterweights: then he created them - in his own image: (public sector unions, human right tribunals, research groups, independent commissions). Harper seems to have imitated Trudeau, but to shift the public debate. Quote
PIK Posted February 27, 2013 Report Posted February 27, 2013 Not the hidden agenda thingy again. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
g_bambino Posted February 27, 2013 Report Posted February 27, 2013 I think if anything this is about weakening the governor general even more, because it is the GG that appoints not the prime minister, an election would more or less destroy the governor generals ability to deny senate appointments as a reserve power. Since, until the constitution is amended or some act of parliament passed, the governor general will still appoint senators at the direction of the prime minister, the governor general's reserve power to refuse the prime minister's advice will remain. Sure, an appointee who was elected as a candidate for appointment would have that "democratic legitimacy" behind him or her. But, I don't see how that prevents the governor general from doing his job, should he have to. The governor general is empowered to and may have to, in certain circumstances, dismiss an "elected" government. This would change the senate from a place for capable people (as it is suppose to be) to a place of popular people... That is a problem, yes. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted February 28, 2013 Report Posted February 28, 2013 If Harper has a secret plan, he's keeping it so secret even he doesn't know about it: Harper assures HoC that all senators meet residency requirements "All senators conform to residency requirements. That is the basis on which they are appointed to the Senate and those requirements have been clear for 150 years," Harper said. How does he know this? Can he personally vouch for the living arrangements of each senator? Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Bryan Posted February 28, 2013 Report Posted February 28, 2013 The senate should be like jury duty. You get randomly drafted into it. That way the house of sober second thought truly is a random sample from across Canada with no specific political, business, or populist agenda. Quote
TheNewTeddy Posted March 11, 2013 Author Report Posted March 11, 2013 (edited) Updated list of those who did not respond or refused: YK All yes NW All yes NU No Proof- 1 Con BC All yes (One Vacancy) AB All yes SK No Proof- 1 Con MB All Yes ON No Proof- 3 Con No Proof- 1 Lib QC No Proof- 4 Con No Proof- 2 Lib NB No Proof- 3 Con NS No Proof- 2 Con PE No Proof- 1 Con NL No Proof- 1 Con TOTAL No Proof- 16 Con No Proof- 3 Lib (Plus 1 Vacancy) Potential new total vacancies: 20 Edited March 11, 2013 by TheNewTeddy Quote Feel free to contact me outside the forums. Add "TheNewTeddy" to Twitter, Facebook, or Hotmail to reach me!
Peanutbutter Posted March 11, 2013 Report Posted March 11, 2013 The senate should be like jury duty. You get randomly drafted into it. That way the house of sober second thought truly is a random sample from across Canada with no specific political, business, or populist agenda. Randomly drafting child molesters and rapists into the Senate? No thank you, I don't want that. Quote Ah la peanut butter sandwiches! - The Amazing Mumferd
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.