Boges Posted February 4, 2014 Author Report Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) No I am suggesting a committee with equal representation from all parties in the house. It would consist of just 5 members right now. Well that won't be happening. Giving the Greens and the Bloc an equal say on what Senators get appointed as the CPC, LPC and the NDP? I pray JT uses that platform in the next election. Stephane Dion's Greenshift would laugh at that type of political suicide. Edited February 4, 2014 by Boges Quote
cybercoma Posted February 4, 2014 Report Posted February 4, 2014 He was only compelled by his own fear that the opposition would take control the house. Thus he stacked the senate ahead of that possibility. Then of course he used the stacked senate to kill a bill passed by the democratically elected house.I'm not sure what you're saying here. Harper can only appoint Senators to vacant seats (there are circumstances where he can add Senators under strict guidelines). He only fulfilled his responsibilities by making recommendations to the Governor General. Was he supposed to never appoint a Senator? That would force the Crown to possibly do it unilateral, which would be unprecedented and I'm not even sure about the legalities of whether or not it can. Quote
cybercoma Posted February 4, 2014 Report Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) All that indicated was reality setting in. As Mulroney learned before him, if you have a liberal majority in the senate you're not going to get your legislation through. Harper had all sorts of vague hopes for reform, and held off appointing any senators for a while in hopes of getting agreements with the provinces for elections and such. That agreement didn't happen, wasn't going to happen, and in the meantime the senate was interfering with his legislation. So he appointed a bunch of people there. No big deal, as far as I'm concerned, except too many of them were losers.And we're going to have gridlock in the house for years to come if any other party gets a majority in the next 15 years. I suspect Harper's lackeys, who were given instruction to obstruct committees, are going to just dig in and obstruct every bit of legislation that comes out of a left-leaning House. Edited February 4, 2014 by cybercoma Quote
cybercoma Posted February 4, 2014 Report Posted February 4, 2014 It's a big deal because Harper did it. How dare he try to get his agenda through! You're right about one thing. It's a big deal because Harper did it. Why? Because he said he wouldn't and that he'd reform the Senate. He has been Prime Minister for nearly a decade and it hasn't happened. And don't give me crap about obstruction from the other parties. NDP wants it abolished and the Liberals are open to reform. If the Conservatives were smart, which they're not, they would be more open to working together for a positive solution. Instead, they try to ram their agenda through and go it alone. That's not the way democracy works. Quote
waldo Posted February 6, 2014 Report Posted February 6, 2014 Maybe because it's a cynical BS ploy that only fools the simpletons... so... when Harper did it/does it... are you fooled? Harper doesn't do it. say what? Of course Harper has removed members from the Conservative caucus! Just how fooled were you? Go troll elsewhere, Waldo. how is highlighting your most selective, self-serving view on removing a member from caucus... trolling? As before, you hold Harper's caucus removals up as legitimate and meaningful actions; however, you label Trudeau's action as a, "pretend publicity stunt". . Quote
Spiderfish Posted February 14, 2014 Report Posted February 14, 2014 It's quite the game Trudeau appears to be playing. First he boldly declares in June that he is going to be publishing all Liberal Senate expenses online in an effort to lead the march to increased transparency, and "hoping the other parties buy in". Justin Trudeau details plan to publish all Liberals' Senate expenses online “We’re not simply saying this is our proposal and we hope the other parties buy in,” Trudeau said in a press conference organized in front of Parliament Hill. “We are going to start action. As of this fall, our reports will be put online. We are going to be transparent about this approach. And we’re just going to start doing it, and not wait for the others to do it.” Now it seems that after a few details on a month's worth of Senator travel expenses were published for the month of October on the Liberal party website, the details of the expenses have mysteriously disappeared. Trudeau has made the assurance that the third quarter expenses of all Liberal senators who were part of the Liberal caucus will be online as of next week. However, the third quarter of the fiscal year reports will be the last of the senators' reports as they are no longer in the Liberal caucus. His solution to unethical and poor behavior appears to be to let the crap flow freely, make a sudden declaration of accountability, and then promptly disown the offenders and wash your hands of it, but not before you encourage everyone else to shake out the skeletons. What a true visionary...pure class. Quote
cybercoma Posted February 15, 2014 Report Posted February 15, 2014 There are no Liberal Senators, you see. So that's why their expenses haven't been made public. Quote
Spiderfish Posted February 15, 2014 Report Posted February 15, 2014 I guess it's easy to be bold and cocky if you've got no skin in the game. Not sure its the case if you're a snake and you've shed your skin. Quote
ConcernedCitizen Posted February 16, 2014 Report Posted February 16, 2014 It is the established Liberals' practice to publish expenses quarterly, not monthly. Those Liberals in the Senate will follow suit, which Trudeau says should be very soon. This will happen even though they are no longer members of the Liberal caucus in the House Of Commons. Trudeau made a smart and ethical move by removing Liberal senators from his caucus. It makes a clear division between Liberals in the two Houses and removes any appearance of an 'incestuous' relationship between the two, such as exists with the Conservatives who like to control everything (including the Senate). Quote
ironstone Posted February 17, 2014 Report Posted February 17, 2014 Yeah but the PM spent all that money to go to Israel so they're square. LOL! Kind of a big difference in my opinion.Trudeau is absent while Parliament is sitting,so he can charge groups(like CHARITIES!)a fortune for an hour or two of his precious time. As for he booting out Liberal Senators,it's mostly a meaningless symbolic gesture but it plays well to his base.One of his press agents at the Ottawa Citizen,Michael Den Tandt,calls it a master stroke . These (Liberal) Senators will still support the party in every way,just as Conservative Senators support their own party.Justin Trudeau does not believe in real reform for the Senate,because the status quo "is to our(Quebec's) advantage".Those are his own words. Quote "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." Thomas Sowell
PIK Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 I guess he better dump the general, for his over the top entitlements. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Argus Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 Trudeau made a smart and ethical move by removing Liberal senators from his caucus. It makes a clear division between Liberals in the two Houses and removes any appearance of an 'incestuous' relationship between the two, such as exists with the Conservatives who like to control everything (including the Senate). The Liberals in the senate have been solid party members for decades. Removing the 'appearance' of a relationship does not actually remove the relationship, and so would seem, to me, to constitute dishonesty. As I've said earlier, this is style over substance, meant to create an illusion. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
PIK Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 The Liberals in the senate have been solid party members for decades. Removing the 'appearance' of a relationship does not actually remove the relationship, and so would seem, to me, to constitute dishonesty. As I've said earlier, this is style over substance, meant to create an illusion.It is just to fool the low info voters. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
waldo Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 The Liberals in the senate have been solid party members for decades. Removing the 'appearance' of a relationship does not actually remove the relationship, and so would seem, to me, to constitute dishonesty. I don't recall reading anyone speaking to a party "relationship" uncoupling... other than removing the attendance/participation of Liberal Senators from the Liberal caucus, just what do you interpret the decision to be/to encompass? . Quote
PIK Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 Poorly thought out desicion by trudeau and his advisors, just like the weed desicion. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
The_Squid Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 It was a brilliant move. In 10 minutes, he has shown that he is more serious about reforming the senate than Harper has shown in 7 years. Quote
PIK Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 It was a brilliant move. In 10 minutes, he has shown that he is more serious about reforming the senate than Harper has shown in 7 years.To low info voters, but what has it done?? Nothing. And don't think everyone is stupid to fall for it. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Boges Posted February 18, 2014 Author Report Posted February 18, 2014 It was a brilliant move. In 10 minutes, he has shown that he is more serious about reforming the senate than Harper has shown in 7 years. It's easy to make such a move when not in power. All his proposals do is make a committee appoint Senators and not the PM. He hasn't said who'd appoint the committee. More government red tape to achieve the same result. Quote
The_Squid Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 To low info voters, but what has it done?? Nothing. And don't think everyone is stupid to fall for it. Hardly. It shows that the Liberal senators will have independance from the PMO if (when) he becomes PM. This has been a huge problem for the current PM... it has been shown that his office pulls the strings of his Conservative puppets in the senate. In one announcement, Trudeau has removed that issue and put it all on Harper. It shows that he has acted and taken leadership on the senate issue. Unlike Harper. So it knocks the whole "Trudeau can't lead... he just does what he's told by Liberal insiders" narrative right out of the park. Trudeau just made the senate a huge election issue... about appointments... about reform... about leadership. All the things Harper will not want to run on when it comes to the senate. It's easy to make such a move when not in power. All his proposals do is make a committee appoint Senators and not the PM. He hasn't said who'd appoint the committee. More government red tape to achieve the same result. But this move is for when he is also in power, so your statement makes no sense. England appoints senators by committee, so there are models and precedents. Quote
eyeball Posted February 18, 2014 Report Posted February 18, 2014 It's easy to make such a move when not in power. Except he is in power, vis a vis the Liberals. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Boges Posted February 18, 2014 Author Report Posted February 18, 2014 (edited) But this move is for when he is also in power, so your statement makes no sense. England appoints senators by committee, so there are models and precedents. All I mean is that his move is meaningless because he has no ability to make real reform. He can certainly run a this platform next year though. Who appoints the committee in the UK? Edited February 18, 2014 by Boges Quote
The_Squid Posted February 19, 2014 Report Posted February 19, 2014 Who appoints the committee in the UK? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords_Appointments_Commission Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 19, 2014 Report Posted February 19, 2014 It was a brilliant move. In 10 minutes, he has shown that he is more serious about reforming the senate than Harper has shown in 7 years. I think you are exactly right. One fels swoop and he can now sit back and think OK Harper, you wanna talk senate? Of course that's the last thing Harper wants to talk about. Such an easy move and it puts such a squeeze on the Conservatives. And of course now today the gov is trying to slag this retiring military general for his moving expenses. He may have taken advantage of the system to some extent, but so far it seems he did so quite iaw the system. It is also quite apparent that the big noise the Conservatives are making is spawned by the fact the general is becoming a liberal advisor. Quote
PIK Posted February 19, 2014 Report Posted February 19, 2014 But what did it do???? NOTHING!! Harper is doing what is right, finding out what legally he cxan do. Justin can play these games and I know it fools the low info voter which it seems this board is full of, into thinking he actually did something. LMFAO Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
eyeball Posted February 19, 2014 Report Posted February 19, 2014 I know it fools the low info voter which it seems this board is full of Why would someone as brilliant as yourself spend so much of your time hanging out with as many stupid people as you do? I just don't get that. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
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.