Justin Trudeau kicks all "Liberal" Senators out of Caucus.

[cybercoma]

The Liberals don't want much to change in the Senate. JT even said himself it gives a great deal of power to Quebec.

Which is also BS. It doesn't give any more power to Quebec than it does to any of the other regions. It's designed for balanced regional representation.

[cybercoma]

So he’s proposing fixing the democratic deficit within the Senate by appointing a committee, to appoint Senators…….Brilliant!!!!

He can't take the power of appointing senators away from the Queen. He can talk about forming a committee to make recommendations to the Governor General for appointment, but isn't that essentially what the Queen's Privy Council is anyway?

[cybercoma]

those Independent Senators won't be privy to or participate in what goes on in those meetings

Not according to them. According to them they just won't be in attendance. They'll still be in constant communication, know what's going on, and likely have a say in the meetings by proxy through Liberal MPs.

[Guest Derek L]

He can't take the power of appointing senators away from the Queen. He can talk about forming a committee to make recommendations to the Governor General for appointment, but isn't that essentially what the Queen's Privy Council is anyway?

Sounds that way........so in effect, he's doing nothing different.

[waldo]

Not according to them. According to them they just won't be in attendance. They'll still be in constant communication, know what's going on, and likely have a say in the meetings by proxy through Liberal MPs.

I thought you said you didn't see much purpose in continuing this 'back & forth'? You're reaching - big time! Stretch it any way you'd like... they won't be there, they won't be able speak... or vote. Oh wait, you're dreaming of proxies, right?... are those like fairies?

[cybercoma]

Clearly a Triple-E Senate.....but of course, this topic is on the Trudeau Liberals faux "Senate reform".

Frankly, Triple-E senate is a terrible idea, imo.

[cybercoma]

I thought you said you didn't see much purpose in continuing this 'back & forth'? You're reaching - big time! Stretch it any way you'd like... they won't be there, they won't be able speak... or vote. Oh wait, you're dreaming of proxies, right?... are those like fairies?

I'm not dreaming of proxies. I'm thinking about the practicalities of how it will work. They won't be there. They won't vote. But you're dreaming if their opinion won't be heard in caucus. It's nothing but sheer fantasy if you don't think they'll be in constant communication with the party and have their concerns known and even brought up by members that do sit in caucus meetings.

[Guest Derek L]

Frankly, Triple-E senate is a terrible idea, imo.

And on the flip side, I feel abolition is also a bad idea……..None the less, no Senate or an elected Senate are both populous proposals put forth by the two largest parties within the House of Commons……..A stark contrast to the dung Trudeau is shovelling……..

I wonder how many Canadians that have some expectation of Senate reform would lean to Trudeau’s position, i.e. nothing but smoke and mirrors?

[Boges]

I guess you can tailor the hypothetical selection process any way you'd like. One would think that if you were truly for Senate reform you would be speaking of positive ways/means to structure a possible selection process.

Only speaking for myself here, but my problems with the Senate have nothing to do the fact that Senators play the party politics game JT is apparently trying to eliminate.

My problem with the Senate are that, once appointed by whatever means, they are no longer really accountable to anyone. AND that the distribution of Senators don't, in any way, resemble an equitable way to represent Canadians as a whole. Equally dividing the Senate into 4 regions is an archaic way of dividing up the Upper Chamber and needs to be changed. But as previously posted JT likes that inequity because it benefits Quebec.

But to fix both problem would require a change to a constitution and Harper is awaiting a ruling by the Supreme Court, but we've gone through that already.

[cybercoma]

Dividing the senate by province is worse, don't you see? That would mean New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island would have the same say as Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia combined.

[waldo]

I'm not dreaming of proxies. I'm thinking about the practicalities of how it will work. They won't be there. They won't vote. But you're dreaming if their opinion won't be heard in caucus. It's nothing but sheer fantasy if you don't think they'll be in constant communication with the party and have their concerns known and even brought up by members that do sit in caucus meetings.

hey, whatever floats your boat... or abolishes your Senate!

[Boges]

Dividing the senate by province is worse, don't you see? That would mean New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island would have the same say as Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia combined.

That's what is done in the US. Not trumpeting the US model but at least the two chambers represent people differently.

The current method is ham-fisted and doesn't really accomplish the intended purpose.

If they tried to have the Senate represent people by population then it's completely redundant, with the HOC already doing that. This is why I'm more on the side of Senate abolishment than reform.

Edited February 3, 2014 by Boges

[Guest Derek L]

Dividing the senate by province is worse, don't you see? That would mean New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island would have the same say as Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia combined.

Are you serious? My sarcasm meter is broken…..I would think the smaller Provinces having an equal say would be a net benefit.

[cybercoma]

hey, whatever floats your boat... or abolishes your Senate!

I don't want the Senate abolished. Have you read my posts? I think Mulcair's idea is "insane".

[cybercoma]

Are you serious? My sarcasm meter is broken…..I would think the smaller Provinces having an equal say would be a net benefit.

The smaller provinces having an equal say is one thing. The Maritime provinces being able to outvote Ontario and Quebec combined is quite another. Regional representation mitigates that kind of problematic imbalance.

[waldo]

I don't want the Senate abolished. Have you read my posts? I think Mulcair's idea is "insane".

your personal position aside, until I read otherwise, I will continue to speak to the official position of the NDP; one that calls for abolition of the Senate. Not reform; rather, abolition.

[Boges]

The smaller provinces having an equal say is one thing. The Maritime provinces being able to outvote Ontario and Quebec combined is quite another. Regional representation mitigates that kind of problematic imbalance.

I'll give you the Atlantic because it's rather sparsely populated and culturally similar. BUT I cannot reconcile Ontario and Quebec each being a region but Alberta and BC both being part of the same reason.

Edited February 3, 2014 by Boges

[cybercoma]

I'll give you the Atlantic because it's rather sparsely populated and culturally similar. BUT I cannot reconcile Ontario and Quebec each being a region but Alberta and BC both being part of the same reason.

How would you divide it then, I wonder? I'm open to the idea that BC and Alberta aren't similar enough to be included in the same region, but BC itself isn't big enough to be on equal footing with Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan combined, nor Ontario alone, nor Quebec alone, nor the entire Maritimes. It might not be entirely ideal, especially as BC and Alberta's populations continues to grow, but I don't think it's reached a point yet where it's a serious issue. I just don't see an ideal or fair solution for it yet. If BC truly doesn't share a regional identity with the rest of the West, then perhaps it should be on its own, while Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan remain a region to themselves with combined interests. The problem there is that I don't think BC deserves to be on equal footing with Ontario and Quebec, and I certainly don't think it should be the equivalent to all of the Maritimes combined, nor the Midwest provinces combined. Perhaps it could be something like the Maritimes + Newfoundland, where the Midwest is worth the same as the Maritimes, but BC is worth as much as Newfoundland, an amount that is less than Quebec or Ontario alone.

Yeah...that's a bunch of rambling. I'm just thinking out loud here.

Edited February 4, 2014 by cybercoma

[Argus]

so... when Harper did it/does it... are you fooled?

Harper doesn't do it.

[Argus]

no - again, what has changed, is the newly designated Independent Senators will no longer be able to caucus with the official Liberal Party caucus. Apparently, you believe that's insignificant.

Completely so.

[Argus]

no - I didn't ignore anything you wrote. Those newly minted Independent Senators may... or may not... belong to the Liberal Party. If it gives you comfort, feel free to personally label them "Independent Senators who may... or may not... belong to the Liberal Party". However, when you take that personal solace, please make sure to emphasize those "Independent Senators who may... or may not... belong to the Liberal Party", do not caucus with the official Liberal Party caucus.

So what you're saying is the official Liberal party senate caucus does not officially meet with the official Liberal party House caucus?

[Mighty AC]

Frankly, Triple-E senate is a terrible idea, imo.

I agree. I think the current regional divide is acceptable until Alberta and BC grow in population. I'm not big on the idea of electing senators anymore either. I think I would like to see them appointed by an all party committee, with equal representation from all parties with elected members.

[Vancouver King]

Trudeau's move means henceforth the Senate will be considered the Conservative Senate, with all the brand damage and stink that goes along with it.

[Boges]

How would you divide it then, I wonder? I'm open to the idea that BC and Alberta aren't similar enough to be included in the same region, but BC itself isn't big enough to be on equal footing with Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan combined, nor Ontario alone, nor Quebec alone, nor the entire Maritimes. It might not be entirely ideal, especially as BC and Alberta's populations continues to grow, but I don't think it's reached a point yet where it's a serious issue. I just don't see an ideal or fair solution for it yet. If BC truly doesn't share a regional identity with the rest of the West, then perhaps it should be on its own, while Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan remain a region to themselves with combined interests. The problem there is that I don't think BC deserves to be on equal footing with Ontario and Quebec, and I certainly don't think it should be the equivalent to all of the Maritimes combined, nor the Midwest provinces combined. Perhaps it could be something like the Maritimes + Newfoundland, where the Midwest is worth the same as the Maritimes, but BC is worth as much as Newfoundland, an amount that is less than Quebec or Ontario alone.

Yeah...that's a bunch of rambling. I'm just thinking out loud here.

I think the 3 Prairie provinces could each be their own region ditto with Newfoundland/Labrador. I only think you'd need to merge Nova Scotia/New Brunswick/PEI and The Territories.

Sure they won't like it but tough toodles. They already represent a far greater proportion of the HOC compared to their population. The fact that Each Territory has its own seat and PEI as FOUR! is, quite frankly, an a front to representative democracies. There are cities of 100,000 people that share their MP with a portion of another city/town.

So they'll have to get over it if they have to share a group of Senators.

[Boges]

Trudeau's move means henceforth the Senate will be considered the Conservative Senate, with all the brand damage and stink that goes along with it.

So even if "former" Liberals are found to have been corrupt, the CPC will have to wear it because JT has washed his hands of them?