Icebound Posted July 27, 2015 Report Posted July 27, 2015 Is the second order to implement proportional representationMussolini's principles did indeed include proportional representation, but the more important thing was to separate the authoritarian government from the people to an extent such that decisions were pretty much made in secret. Government by surprise, so to speak.No.... things like national symbolism, obsession with national security and crime, and supremacy of military are all way higher priority. Quote
Evening Star Posted July 28, 2015 Report Posted July 28, 2015 No problem: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/13614/index.do This stuff is hard on my phone. Ah, thanks. I see: In practice, constitutional convention requires the Governor General to follow the recommendations of the Prime Minister of Canada when filling Senate vacancies. Also, I see that they spelled out just how difficult abolition would (and imo should) be: The abolition of the Senate requires the unanimous consent of the Senate, the House of Commons, and the legislative assemblies of all Canadian provinces Quote
Icebound Posted July 28, 2015 Report Posted July 28, 2015 Anything other than abolition is unacceptable and immoral or inefficient. Having a situation where people in PEI have over 50 times as much representation per capita as people in BC violates the concept of democratic equality. Having an unelected body where people just appoint their political friends results in corruption. Even if you rectified both of these problems, at best you would have a duplicate of the house of commons, which would make the senate a pointless waste of money. . "Democratic equality" happens in the Commons, not the Senate.Since the Senate does not pass legislation on its own, the so-called excessive representation for PEI does not mean much... Except to help ensure that the more numerous BC legislators in the House of Commons do not do something that is outright detrimental to the less-populous PEI. There would be nothing particularly problematic about appointing friends, providing they were intelligent and interested in serving their Country. The problems start when they serve their appointer instead. The two chambers need to be more independent, that's all. Quote
Icebound Posted July 28, 2015 Report Posted July 28, 2015 [quote name="-1=e^ipi" post="1073838" timestamp= Prior to the USA civil war, the slavery abolitionists tried to isolate and punish the non-compliant states in order to get rid of slavery. Were the abolitionists unjust extortionists that deserved to go to jail. Big difference intimidating you to observe basic human rights.... Versus intimidating you to comply with a political idea... Quote
Icebound Posted July 28, 2015 Report Posted July 28, 2015 (edited) Congratulations, they produced a report. You know there are cheaper ways to produce reports, right? Hire civil servants or fund universities or think tanks. You would get far more and better quality reports per dollar spent.Perhaps.Or more likely that you get studies that say what the contracting government wants to hear... A way for me to be sure that I get the next contract. The Senate is already a "think tank" that has the resources and time to investigate issues in as great a detail as any contractor. It is not at all clear that you would get "better", elsewhere. .. Edited July 28, 2015 by Icebound Quote
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.