You Wanna Be A Senator?

[Smallc]

So being a Senator isn't a real job. I guess we all know that.

It's certainly not a normal job. It might not even be what I'd classify as a job. I wouldn't classify being an MP as a normal job, either.

[?Impact]

Using the term "merit" is a perversion of the word.

I understand what you are getting at, but it is not outside the scope of the word. Merit is about deserving or being entitled to something. I understand that we commonly associate it we something earned by your deeds, but that is not an exclusive definition. Not only people merit something, it can be applied to inanimate objects or concepts as well. I agree however it is a poor choice of wording. I suggest they should have used terms like "preference", or "special consideration", etc.

[poochy]

No it's not. That person brings more to the table.

Hey look, racism.

[jacee]

Don't be ridiculous. If I got a job simply because I was a white male, would you say I got it on merit? I sure wouldn't.

They used to think so. Lol

There is merit in bringing the perspective, experience and issues of being Aboriginal, female, or a person of colour in Canada.

There ... I've muddied the water. Lol

.

[Wilber]

They used to think so. Lol

There is merit in bringing the perspective, experience and issues of being Aboriginal, female, or a person of colour in Canada.

There ... I've muddied the water. Lol

.

I don't disagree that it gives a different perspective and experience of being an Aboriginal, female or person of colour, or that it is valuable. But then every Aboriginal, female or person of colour could make that claim. That has nothing to do with merit, and everything to do with who your parents were.

[jacee]

I don't disagree that it gives a different perspective and experience of being an Aboriginal, female or person of colour, or that it is valuable. But then every Aboriginal, female or person of colour could make that claim. That has nothing to do with merit, and everything to do with who your parents were.

That's not the only criterion:

Qualifications Related to the Role of the Senate

An individual must demonstrate one of the following criteria:

a high level of experience, developed over many years, in the legislative process and public service at the federal or provincial/territorial level; and/or,

a lengthy and recognized record of service to ones community, which could include ones Indigenous, ethnic or linguistic community; and/or,

recognized leadership and an outstanding record of achievement in the individuals profession or chosen field of expertise.

.

[Wilber]

That's not the only criterion:

Qualifications Related to the Role of the Senate

An individual must demonstrate one of the following criteria:

a high level of experience, developed over many years, in the legislative process and public service at the federal or provincial/territorial level; and/or,

a lengthy and recognized record of service to ones community, which could include ones Indigenous, ethnic or linguistic community; and/or,

recognized leadership and an outstanding record of achievement in the individuals profession or chosen field of expertise.

.

Understood but birth doesn't endow merit. To maintain it does just sanctions racism. I don't question the reasoning behind selecting minorities but using the word merit as a justification is a very poor choice.

[jacee]

Understood but birth doesn't endow merit. To maintain it does just sanctions racism. I don't question the reasoning behind selecting minorities but using the word merit as a justification is a very poor choice.

I was hoping we could move on.

The most interesting thing is that until now, Senators were patronage appointments.

This is the first time anybody could apply.

I'll be interested to see how it turns out.

.

[BC_chick]

No it isn't, if you insist on using race as a basis of determining merit, you are a racist my friend. It may be a qualification and that's OK with me but it has nothing to do with merit Using the term "merit" is a perversion of the word.

Deserve to be worthy, second definition. Bringing diversity to the table fits very much under that definition.

[BC_chick]

That's not the only criterion:Qualifications Related to the Role of the Senate

An individual must demonstrate one of the following criteria:

a high level of experience, developed over many years, in the legislative process and public service at the federal or provincial/territorial level; and/or,

a lengthy and recognized record of service to ones community, which could include ones Indigenous, ethnic or linguistic community; and/or,

recognized leadership and an outstanding record of achievement in the individuals profession or chosen field of expertise.

.

Exactly. And if you meet those qualifications, merit will be give to those that bring the additional quality of diversity to the table.

I'm not sure why there is any confusion on this interpretation. Getting the job solely based on gender or ethnicity would be worded as *quota*, not merit.

Edited July 11, 2016 by BC_chick

[Wilber]

Deserve to be worthy, second definition. Bringing diversity to the table fits very much under that definition.

Having the right parents makes you deserve to be worthy. Got it.

[BC_chick]

Having the right parents makes you deserve to be worthy. Got it.

We've been over this, that's not what it's about. It's about bringing more to the table than other *qualifying* candidates.

[Smoke]

So you are saying that a person from one culture cannot represent those of other cultures? How racist.

[jacee]

Is anybody thinking of applying?

I think it's quite groundbreaking that any Canadian can apply to be a Senator.

[jacee]

So you are saying that a person from one culture cannot represent those of other cultures? How racist.

Unh ... no it isn't racist. It's reality.

And we're saying men can't represent women well either.

And it's unlikely that a Chinese-Canadian can represent Indigenous Canadians either.

Thus, the call for diversity in the Senate.

.

[jacee]

Exactly. And if you meet those qualifications, merit will be give to those that bring the additional quality of diversity to the table.

I'm not sure why there is any confusion on this interpretation.

There isn't any confusion. Just the same old misogynists and racists doing what they do on mlw - making every thread about those issues.

So ... Are you thinking of applying?

We've done a lot of complaining about the patronage and cronyism in the Senate.

Now's the time and opportunity for Canadians to step up and prove we can do it better.

[Wilber]

We've been over this, that's not what it's about. It's about bringing more to the table than other *qualifying* candidates.

OK, so it's a qualification not based on merit. That's what I have been saying. Qualifications don't have to be based on merit, I understand that. Just don't call it merit, because it isn't, in this case it is based on birth.

[Smallc]

Is anybody thinking of applying?

I think it's quite groundbreaking that any Canadian can apply to be a Senator.

If I were older I certainly would.

[Big Guy]

Is anybody thinking of applying?

I think it's quite groundbreaking that any Canadian can apply to be a Senator.

I have applied. Got two messages:

Message one - received your application. Thank you for applying.

Message two - Thank you for applying. We cannot process your application as per Amended Constitution Act 1965:

1. Section 29 of the Constitution Act, 1867 is repealed and the following substituted therefor:

29.

(1) Subject to subsection (2), a Senator shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, hold his place in the Senate for life.

(2) A Senator who is summoned to the Senate after the coming into force of this subsection shall, subject to this Act, hold his place in the Senate until he attains the age of seventy-five years.

Short title and citation of Part I. 2. This Part may be cited as the Constitution Act, 1965.[1]

Nice way of saying - Nice Try - Too Old!

Edited July 11, 2016 by Big Guy

[BC_chick]

There isn't any confusion. Just the same old misogynists and racists doing what they do on mlw - making every thread about those issues.

So ... Are you thinking of applying?

We've done a lot of complaining about the patronage and cronyism in the Senate.

Now's the time and opportunity for Canadians to step up and prove we can do it better.

I've been too much of a wild child in life to put my family through that kind of scrutiny should anything surface.

Nothing illegal, but lots of things immoral.

[?Impact]

The glass used to be 95% empty, and the partisans were happy. Now it is 85% full, and the partisans are unhappy.

[Argus]

Where does it say that?[/quote

Where it says 'priority will be given to those who bring balance'.

There are more female employees with the federal public service than males. Why is the government not concerned with this imbalance?

Edited July 11, 2016 by Argus

[BC_chick]

There are more female employees with the federal public service than males. Why is the government not concerned with this imbalance?

Care to show a study showing a disproportionate rate compared to public sector?

[jacee]

I've been too much of a wild child in life to put my family through that kind of scrutiny should anything surface.

Nothing illegal, but lots of things immoral.

?

Too bad.

[BC_chick]

Too bad.

Totally. I wouldn't mind being an MP either. Damn skeletons.