cybercoma Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 At first, you might think there's a storm brewing over the senate. The tories were caught red-handed obstructing parliamentary processes. Therefore, it stands to reason that a senate made up of mostly Conservatives, particularly failed candidates and partisan hacks, would obstruct legislation from a Liberal commons. We saw how Senators Tkachuk and Stewart Olsen of the Conservatives tried to interfere with the independent audit of Senators at the behest of the party bureaucrats in the Prime Minister's Office, so we know it's not above them to play dirty.The good news is that it's not going to happen. Stephen Harper, for all of his flaws, actually did a service to the incoming Liberal government. He left 20 vacancies in the upper house. Currently there are 50 Conservative Senators and 29 Liberal Senators. After appointing the 20 vacancies, the upper house will be nearly tied. In addition there is one Progressive Conservative, who refused to sit as a Conservative senator, and 6 independents who include Patrick Brazeau, Pamela Wallin, and Mike Duffy. Patrick Brazeau voted for Justin Trudeau. Stephen Harper could have made things impossible for the next government. Knowing that there's always a possibility of losing the next election, he could have packed those seats full of Conservative senators, but he didn't. As a result, Trudeau will be able to appoint Liberal senators and we'll have a functioning parliament. For all the hate Harper gets, he actually did something good for the country on his way out the door. Quote
Bryan Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) Trudeau said that their are no Liberal senators. Are you saying he lied? Edited October 21, 2015 by Bryan Quote
Smallc Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 Trudeau said that their are no Liberal senators. Are you saying he lied? He won't appoint senators until his process is set up. Hopefully, that can happen by the time Parliament gets going in the new year. Quote
Topaz Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 Since the Tories said they either wanted it reformed or gone, we'll have to see if they agree with Justin if he decided to have elections of the senate, so they have the same rules as Parliament. Perhaps it could have election every other time we have election for PM with no party connection, just a group of senators representing Canadians. There's such a mess with the senate and the PMO, I don't know if 4 years is enough time to get it done. Quote
PIK Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 The conservatives have always wanted the senate fixed. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Scotty Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 I don't remember the Liberal Party ever having a problem with jamming the senate with party bagmen. They've done it most of my life and never expressed any issues with the place until Harper took over. I assume now that he's gone their issues are, as well. They'll appoint as many senators as they can and welcome back the senators Trudeau booted out in his PR stunt. I bet the loyal liberals are already jostling each other to get at those well-paid cash-for-life jobs. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Smallc Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 The conservatives have always wanted the senate fixed. That must be why they did nothing about it - one of their areas of disappointment for me. Quote
Smallc Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 I don't remember the Liberal Party ever having a problem with jamming the senate with party bagmen. Paul Martin didn't - but then he didn't have very long. At the moment, there isn't much we can do but take Trudeau at his word. He's already begun the process to keep at least a couple of his promises (cabinet gender parity and pulling our F-18s out of the middle east - both promises I'm not all that fond of). Quote
sharkman Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 So what battle then is this thread title referring to? Quote
cybercoma Posted October 21, 2015 Author Report Posted October 21, 2015 A battle that some people were expecting but is not going to happen. Harper did Trudeau a favour. Quote
Guest Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 I don't remember the Liberal Party ever having a problem with jamming the senate with party bagmen. They've done it most of my life and never expressed any issues with the place until Harper took over. I assume now that he's gone their issues are, as well. They'll appoint as many senators as they can and welcome back the senators Trudeau booted out in his PR stunt. I bet the loyal liberals are already jostling each other to get at those well-paid cash-for-life jobs. I also don't remember the Liberal senate actually killing a piece of legislation passed during Harper's reign. Some bills were delayed and they suggested changes, but nothing was ever killed. However, the Conservatives did use the unelected senate to kill a piece of climate changes legislation passed by the elected house, in a snap vote, without debate. Harper had hoped to let the senate die on the vine. Thankfully, that will prevent the conservative stacked upper chamber from killing more pieces of legislation. Rather than abolishing the senate, I would like to see it reformed into an elected chamber with longer term limits. Simply, excluding senators from caucus meetings is not enough as this will not prevent future PMs from using them like servants of the PMO, as Harper did. Quote
ToadBrother Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 Since the Tories said they either wanted it reformed or gone, we'll have to see if they agree with Justin if he decided to have elections of the senate, so they have the same rules as Parliament. Perhaps it could have election every other time we have election for PM with no party connection, just a group of senators representing Canadians. There's such a mess with the senate and the PMO, I don't know if 4 years is enough time to get it done. That would require constitutional reforms. One of the things I was in most accord with the Liberals was not tearing open the Constitution. The selection process will likely resemble how Life Peers are recommended to the British government, by a committee. Quote
Scotty Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 I also don't remember the Liberal senate actually killing a piece of legislation passed during Harper's reign. Some bills were delayed and they suggested changes, but nothing was ever killed. Harper appointed 18 senators in one fell swoop in 2008 to fend off the Liberal majority joining its approval to the three amigos trying to unseat him. After that there was no Liberal senate. However, the Conservatives did use the unelected senate to kill a piece of climate changes legislation passed by the elected house, in a snap vote, without debate. You mean passed by the opposition against the will of the actual government? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
ToadBrother Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 Harper had hoped to let the senate die on the vine. Thankfully, that will prevent the conservative stacked upper chamber from killing more pieces of legislation. Rather than abolishing the senate, I would like to see it reformed into an elected chamber with longer term limits. Simply, excluding senators from caucus meetings is not enough as this will not prevent future PMs from using them like servants of the PMO, as Harper did. An elected Senate is a long ways off, if it happens ever. It would require a constitutional amendment, and that means a lot of trouble, and the potential for considerable disruption. For the moment I'll be satisfied with a more open process. The Senate itself, I think, knows the public mood at this time, and will not be obstructionist. In fact, it rarely has. While it infrequently modifies bills, there are very few times in the history of Confederation that the Senate has ever moved to actively block a bill. Quote
Smallc Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 The selection process will likely resemble how Life Peers are recommended to the British government, by a committee. Or to bring it home, Order of Canada recipients. Being that Trudeau will have to deal with the mess that is the Senate right now, I'm hoping he works quickly to set it up. Quote
Smallc Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 You mean passed by the opposition against the will of the actual government? Like, the way the house is supposed to work, you mean? Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 It doesn't have to happen if the Conservatives are reasonable. Quote
ToadBrother Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 It doesn't have to happen if the Conservatives are reasonable. With the likelihood of a lot of new Senators coming in, I'd suggest that Conservative Senators may not have the clout they have enjoyed. Quote
Guest Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 Harper appointed 18 senators in one fell swoop in 2008 to fend off the Liberal majority joining its approval to the three amigos trying to unseat him. After that there was no Liberal senate. You mean passed by the opposition against the will of the actual government? I mean passed by the elected parliament. Do you understand how our parliamentary system works? Quote
poochy Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 I also don't remember the Liberal senate actually killing a piece of legislation passed during Harper's reign. Some bills were delayed and they suggested changes, but nothing was ever killed. However, the Conservatives did use the unelected senate to kill a piece of climate changes legislation passed by the elected house, in a snap vote, without debate. Harper had hoped to let the senate die on the vine. Thankfully, that will prevent the conservative stacked upper chamber from killing more pieces of legislation. Rather than abolishing the senate, I would like to see it reformed into an elected chamber with longer term limits. Simply, excluding senators from caucus meetings is not enough as this will not prevent future PMs from using them like servants of the PMO, as Harper did. Yea, they only delayed things to the point that there wasn't enough time to pass them, but that's different, being as they are liberals. Quote
Scotty Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) I mean passed by the elected parliament. Do you understand how our parliamentary system works? You guys on the left seem to think technicalities are very important when the opposition uses them to pass bills against the government's will but using technicalities is somehow immoral when the government uses its majority in the senate to quash the bill. Hey, the senate turning down a bill is how our parliamentary system works too. Edited October 21, 2015 by Scotty Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Guest Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 Hey, the senate turning down a bill is how our parliamentary system works too. Ha ha..priceless. In your experience is a whipped senate, calling a secret, surprise vote, without any debate on the bill normal? Quote
ToadBrother Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) Hey, the senate turning down a bill is how our parliamentary system works too. It is, to a point. I see no foul play in a minority government whipping its Senate caucus to defeat a bill. It probably is a nuclear option that should be used infrequently, but other than on a few points, the Senate is equivalent to the Commons. However, if the Tories in Opposition were to use their current Senate advantage to defeat a majority government's bills for the intent of being obstructionist, I think it raises the possibility of blow back for both the Tories and the Senate. The Senate lacks democratic legitimacy, so necessarily its interventions are supposed to be rare, and outright defeat of a bill that has passed in the House of Commons should be used exceedingly sparingly. And yes, I'm well aware of the Liberal-dominated Senate's attempt to squash the GST legislation in 1991. Good thing we have Section 26 of the British North America Act, which is what Mulroney used to get enough Tory senators to assure passage. Edited October 21, 2015 by ToadBrother Quote
The_Squid Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 The Senate does not have the moral authority to thwart the will of the elected representatives. That is wholly undemocratic. It used to be that Harper and his CPC Party believed this as well. CPC supporters used to believe this too. What happened? Quote
cybercoma Posted October 21, 2015 Author Report Posted October 21, 2015 Didn't read the OP, eh? 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.