The senate

[g_bambino]

To that end I suggest a proposal to be put forward that would open the document for the specific purpose of Senate Reform. The proposal should merely indicate the desire of the House of Commons to approach the Provinces with a request for cooperation to reform the Senate. A single simple vote at a first Ministers conference will determine the outcome.

A resolution passed by the Senate is required for a constitutional change affecting the powers of the Senate and selection of senators to be proclaimed by the governor general. Further, resolutions of the legislatures of 2/3 of the provinces that have at least 50% of the population of all the provinces are needed. A vote by provincial premiers and the House of Commons is insufficient.

[ed.: +]

Edited August 14, 2013 by g_bambino

[Icebound]

We are making way too much of this.

The Senate is useful and it does not need any "substantial" reform and certainly not abolition. (I have already mentioned the reason governments want Senate abolition by referring you to the 1919 fledgling political movement in Europe..look it up)...

And it works pretty well because most Senators have loosened their ties to their original political masters, and actually do the "reviewing legislation" job that they SHOULD be doing.

The greatest problems have occurred with Senators who were assigned.... not to be proper Senators.... but simply party hacks and bagmen.

Weed them out and move on. Overall, it does a necessary and reasonable job.

...

[Topaz]

Well, Lib.Mac Harb, has resign and will pay back over $200,000. and will get his full pension, until he's 90, which is over 5 million, because he's been in government since 1988. http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/mac-harb-resigns-from-senate-repays-eight-years-worth-of-expenses-1.1427436%C2'>

[cybercoma]

He should get his full pension and so should any of the others who resign or are dismissed. Taking someone's pension is dirty as hell when they're relying on that for retirement.

[Bryan]

Which is a good thing, since many or most people would be voting on a matter they know very little to nothing about (with misunderstanding only being fostered by public figures making loud and populist, often classist, but still ill-considered statements), thus increasing the likelyhood the majority would vote for a detrimental change.

That's the rationale usually given when a dictatorship is established.

[Topaz]

He should get his full pension and so should any of the others who resign or are dismissed. Taking someone's pension is dirty as hell when they're relying on that for retirement.

I don't think anyone pension should be taken away but if you break the rules knowingly, then you should have your pension, at least, reduced. Most Canadians pension are are around 2000-2500 monthly, are you telling me these senators couldn't live on reduce pensions?

Edited August 27, 2013 by Topaz

[g_bambino]

That's the rationale usually given when a dictatorship is established.

What? Most dictators become such if not by coup then through misleading the majority of the mostly ignorant population into believing his destruction of those institutions and practices required for democracy to exist and function is actually what's best for the the country and its people.