Icebound Posted October 21, 2015 Report Posted October 21, 2015 The conservatives have always wanted the senate fixed. They wanted it "fixed" when they were not in the majority. But the priority seemed to go away once they were. Quote
Smeelious Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 They wanted it "fixed" when they were not in the majority. But the priority seemed to go away once they were. To be fair to the Conservatives, It's not easy to make priorities...I mean, It's not easy to change the senate. Quote
Scotty Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 Ha ha..priceless. In your experience is a whipped senate, calling a secret, surprise vote, without any debate on the bill normal? Is it normal for the opposition to pass a bill over the wishes of the government? No. Is it legal. Yes. Is it legal for the Senate to do what it did? Yes. So what's your problem? 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
Scotty Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 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? I'm not sure what you're talking about. Do you? It looks like you're reading into things that people on the right are calling for the Senate to overturn or block Trudeau legislation. Do you have the slightest shred of evidence to support that? 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 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 I'm not sure what you're talking about. Do you? It looks like you're reading into things that people on the right are calling for the Senate to overturn or block Trudeau legislation. Do you have the slightest shred of evidence to support that? I'm sure there are a few who would love a Conservative Senate to mess with a Liberal government, but I see no reason to expect it. Beyond that, I think the Senate has been chastened by the recent expense scandals, and it will restrain itself simply out of an instinct for self-preservation. The Senate will not interfere any more with legislation than it did before, and indeed I suspect for the next few years will be a very good little boy and mot muck about at all. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 22, 2015 Author Report Posted October 22, 2015 To be fair to the Conservatives, It's not easy to make priorities...I mean, It's not easy to change the senate. They didn't even try. Quote
Big Guy Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 There are currently 22 vacancies in the Canadian Senate. Personally, I believe that Canada needs a Senate for many reasons and especially as a check and balance. The recent problems have not been the structure but the character of those appointed. Constitutionally, the PM must make those appointments. I suggest that Trudeau create an arms length committee which suggests possible candidates to him and he then chooses from that pool. One criteria for being a candidate would be a recipient of the Order of Canada or some other award of merit that has indicated a love of this country. The other criteria be a process by which all candidates are well vetted. There are many Canadians out there who love this country, have been valuable citizens, have been successful in their fields and could be a needed "sober second thought" for partisan legislation. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
cybercoma Posted October 22, 2015 Author Report Posted October 22, 2015 The Order of Canada is as political as anything else. Quote
ToadBrother Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 The Order of Canada is as political as anything else. And I'm not quite sure why that should be a requirement. I think it would be wiser to pick people from various walks of life; lawyers, accountants, scientists, business people, doctors, former diplomats, volunteers, and so on and so forth. A PM could start the process of transforming the Senate into a Chamber of Experts. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 22, 2015 Author Report Posted October 22, 2015 Frankly, I don't care who's picked. I think they should be suggested by the premiers/lieutenant governors and appointed by the prime minister/governor general. This way they're less open to partisan manipulation. Trudeau is never going to do that though. That means he would have to give up control of the senate. He'll have control by a razors edge if he appoints all Liberals in the next batch. The following round of appointments is far more likely where he'll make changes, if he's going to at all and I doubt it. Quote
Smallc Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 I like the idea of a committee advising the PM. It should make for far better appointments. Quote
Smallc Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 Frankly, I don't care who's picked. I think they should be suggested by the premiers/lieutenant governors and appointed by the prime minister/governor general. This way they're less open to partisan manipulation. Trudeau is never going to do that though. That means he would have to give up control of the senate. He'll have control by a razors edge if he appoints all Liberals in the next batch. The following round of appointments is far more likely where he'll make changes, if he's going to at all and I doubt it. I think I'll give him a chance to break his promises first. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 22, 2015 Author Report Posted October 22, 2015 I think I'll give him a chance to break his promises first. It's not exactly breaking them. It would be delaying them. I can't see him implementing these ideas right away because he would lose control of a Senate that is filled with party faithful from a party that has a handbook on obstruction. After he gets his numbers, I would expect him to keep his promise, but not before. Quote
Smallc Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 I expect he'll keep it right away, even if it frustrated his agenda for a couple of months. There's not all that much going to happen before January anyway. Quote
Scotty Posted October 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 The Senate will not interfere any more with legislation than it did before, and indeed I suspect for the next few years will be a very good little boy and mot muck about at all. I would agree. The only possible impetus for them to try to fight the Liberals will be if they perceive the Liberals are attempting to change the way MPs are elected in a manner calculated to enhance their own chances of becoming a permanent governing party. And I see the likelihood that happening as being fairly high. 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 22, 2015 Report Posted October 22, 2015 (edited) I would agree. The only possible impetus for them to try to fight the Liberals will be if they perceive the Liberals are attempting to change the way MPs are elected in a manner calculated to enhance their own chances of becoming a permanent governing party. And I see the likelihood that happening as being fairly high. So you are one of the people that imagines the Conservative Senators will interfere with Liberal legislation. By the time any changes to the electoral system happen, there won't be enough Conservative Senators to do what you clearly hope they will do. And you can thank Stephen Harper for not doing his constitutional duty in appointing new Senators for that. Edited October 22, 2015 by ToadBrother Quote
Smeelious Posted October 23, 2015 Report Posted October 23, 2015 So you are one of the people that imagines the Conservative Senators will interfere with Liberal legislation. By the time any changes to the electoral system happen, there won't be enough Conservative Senators to do what you clearly hope they will do. And you can thank Stephen Harper for not doing his constitutional duty in appointing new Senators for that. I don't think you can blame Harper for being principled on this. You could argue that it would have been political suicide to appoint senators given the current climate though. Quote
Smallc Posted October 23, 2015 Report Posted October 23, 2015 He could have appointed better senators. Quote
Smeelious Posted October 23, 2015 Report Posted October 23, 2015 I suppose he could have appointed non-partisan experts in fields that are relevant. Quote
Scotty Posted October 23, 2015 Report Posted October 23, 2015 So you are one of the people that imagines the Conservative Senators will interfere with Liberal legislation. By the time any changes to the electoral system happen, there won't be enough Conservative Senators to do what you clearly hope they will do. You are assuming there will be no electoral system changes, I take it? You're free to do so. I'll thank you not to make baseless assumptions about what I 'clearly' hope'. 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
Scotty Posted October 23, 2015 Report Posted October 23, 2015 He could have appointed better senators. Like the Liberals did? 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
Scotty Posted October 23, 2015 Report Posted October 23, 2015 I suppose he could have appointed non-partisan experts in fields that are relevant. That would have been nice, though no one has ever done so. 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 23, 2015 Report Posted October 23, 2015 Like the Liberals did? Paul Martin was the only one who did that - but, Harper was the one that promised change. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 23, 2015 Author Report Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) 10 years of Reform government and they did nothing to come even remotely close to fulfilling their policy promises on the Senate or much of anything else for that matter. Edited October 23, 2015 by cybercoma Quote
Scotty Posted October 23, 2015 Report Posted October 23, 2015 Paul Martin was the only one who did that - but, Harper was the one that promised change. True. I would say, though, that his senate appointments did tend to be a little different in that they were usually not life long politicians or party bagmen, which was the previous tradition. In fact, he might have been better had he retained that position since lifelong politicians seem less likely to get into trouble than journalists and the like. 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
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.