Step to Senate Reform

Wilber · December 14, 2006

What a joke. Equal representation or dump it, one or the other.

I agree. This is not a compromise. It lacks legitimacy as it still requires a prime minister approval.

Getting rid of it probably is better policy for Canadians.

That would require a change to the Constitution. There is no way that Provinces with large numbers of Senators per capita are going to agree to equality. Harper should sound out the Premiers to see if he could get enough support to abolish it. If not, this is about all that can be done.

blueblood · December 14, 2006

So does partisan politics, I only need to refer to the present mandate of the CPC to confirm that. At least without parties there is somewhat of a chance.

Doubtful. I don't know that I ever heard of a government that didn't have allegiances resembling political parties.

You might have allegiances, but they are a hell of a lot more flexible and less "dictorial" than a politcal party, if you don't agree with something you can disagree without being punished. It's a much better principle.

jdobbin · December 14, 2006

That would require a change to the Constitution. There is no way that Provinces with large numbers of Senators per capita are going to agree to equality. Harper should sound out the Premiers to see if he could get enough support to abolish it. If not, this is about all that can be done.

I agree again.

I don't seeing bypassing the Constitution as a viable plan.

Wilber · December 14, 2006

On second thought, abolishing it would amount to equality so that is probably a non starter as well.

blueblood · December 14, 2006

What a joke. Equal representation or dump it, one or the other.

I agree. This is not a compromise. It lacks legitimacy as it still requires a prime minister approval.

Getting rid of it probably is better policy for Canadians.

That would require a change to the Constitution. There is no way that Provinces with large numbers of Senators per capita are going to agree to equality. Harper should sound out the Premiers to see if he could get enough support to abolish it. If not, this is about all that can be done.

i thought the house of commons was about equal representation of the population, as geoffrey puts it if it reflected regional interests, then it would be better. Something that serves population and regional interests is the most fair.

Wilber · December 14, 2006

i thought the house of commons was about equal representation of the population, as geoffrey puts it if it reflected regional interests, then it would be better. Something that serves population and regional interests is the most fair.

Population per MP by Province

Alberta 59,000

BC 61,000

Manitoba 42,000

New Brunswick 38,000

Newfoundland 37,000

Nova Scotia 42,000

Ontario 60,000

PEI 17,000

Quebec 51,000

Sask 45,000

Nowhere in our system do we have either and BC comes out short changed the most in both houses.

mikedavid00 · December 14, 2006

Population per Senator by Province
Alberta 587,000

BC 709,000

Manitoba 196,000

New Brunswick 83,000

Newfoundland 103,000

Nova Scotia 133,000

Ontario 597,000

PEI 46,000

Quebec 345,000

Sask. 165,000

What a joke. Equal representation or dump it, one or the other.

I agree. How about one elected senator from Each province... or would that be 'too American' for everyone?

(actually I think each state gets 2 senators)

Canadian Blue · December 14, 2006

It's two senator's per state. I'd support something along the line's of 5 senator's per province, all of whom would be elected through PR in each province.

Wilber · December 14, 2006

It's two senator's per state. I'd support something along the line's of 5 senator's per province, all of whom would be elected through PR in each province.

Sounds fair but what powers would they have?

mikedavid00 · December 14, 2006

It's two senator's per state. I'd support something along the line's of 5 senator's per province, all of whom would be elected through PR in each province.

If you think about it, only 1 is really required. It's only a senator of a province. The US is much different when it comes to state powers vs. provincial powers.

Also keep in mind that our senators are natorious for not showing up to work and cost us a lot of money for them to pretty much do nothing. It's basically a job for friends of politicians.

I feel they could work more closely with each other and something useful might come out of it. We should be able to elect in our senator. For instance, we elect our premier and senator during the same time.

But this non democratic way of doing things has got to stop in this country.

mikedavid00 · December 14, 2006

It's two senator's per state. I'd support something along the line's of 5 senator's per province, all of whom would be elected through PR in each province.

Sounds fair but what powers would they have?

They can just be the liason between the Premier and Federal gov't regarding legislation. Or htey can just recommend revisions to legislation so that it agrees with their represented province.

scribblet · December 14, 2006

I give him credit for starting the democratic process of electable senators, how can anyone oppose that. I also understand (I'm away and behind on my news) that Harper will be putting foward legislation allowing the Canadian voters to decide, through a referendum, whether they wish to elect their Senators.

Bill for term limits here

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/P...=2334114&file=4

Sounds good to me.

Remiel · December 14, 2006

I think we need election reform before we even think about voting for Senators. We need a better system, not to compound the problem with the current one.

g_bambino · December 14, 2006

If the Senate is abolished, I'd like to see a majority of Premiers siding on a bill before it's past. So have the 10 Premiers act as the Senate. That'd preserve regional interests.

Wow, I think this thought has potential for discussion. I mean premiers are supposed to be busy folk and all, but there is something in this Idea I like.

Doesn't have to be the Premiers, but political reps that stand for the provinces.

Each bill would have to have regional and general population approval. Nice.

So, each province, aside from having to work on their own legislation, would now have to read, debate, and approve federal legislation as well? Why bother having a federal Parliament at all if that's to be the case?

g_bambino · December 14, 2006

For those good senators that take their jobs seriously, there is a good argument to be made for appointed.

Wow you just don't get the concept of democrocy do you?

Democracy doesn't solely work through popular election.

bk59 · December 14, 2006

For those good senators that take their jobs seriously, there is a good argument to be made for appointed.

Wow you just don't get the concept of democrocy do you?

Closing your eyes to the pros and cons of both sides of the debate does not mean that you understand democracy or the complexities of our government. Instead of engaging in the debate you have done what many politicians would do - point your finger and spew rhetoric about how I must not understand democracy. It's attitudes like that which will cause more problems than they solve, even if your intentions are supposedly good and democratic.

They can just be the liason between the Premier and Federal gov't regarding legislation. Or htey can just recommend revisions to legislation so that it agrees with their represented province.

People here seem to be advocating that the Senate become representatives of the Premiers or representatives of the official governments of the Provinces. This seems to me to be a horrible idea. Should we create provincial senates, where representatives of the federal government can make amendments, introduce and pass provincial legislation? The answer is no. Likewise, the Provincial governments should have no say in federal legislation. Please note the capital P. The provinces, that is the people in different regions of the country, should be represented in the Senate. But not the Provinces.

Our Constitution divides powers between the Provincial governments and the federal government for a reason. Blurring the line between them is a guaranteed way to cause more problems than we have right now with an appointed federal Senate.

bk59 · December 14, 2006

Democracy doesn't solely work through popular election.

Exactly. Just look at how a US Presidential election works. A plurality of popular votes does not make one President.

g_bambino · December 14, 2006

Democracy doesn't solely work through popular election.

Exactly. Just look at how a US Presidential election works. A plurality of popular votes does not make one President.

(delete my own inane comment. Sorry!)

MightyAC · December 14, 2006

I support PR in the house and an equal (8 senators per prov/territory), elected senate. Then the house would proportionally represent the population and the senate would provide protection for regional interests.

Anyway, here is a statement by the Green party on this issue that I happen to agree with. Tindal makes a good point that changes to our system of democracy should be decided upon by the people not the leader of a party that received barely more than 1/3 of the vote.

Ottawa, Dec. 14 - The Conservative government is overstepping its bounds by attempting to unilaterally change this country's democratic systems, Green Party of Canada democratic reform advocate Chris Tindal said today.
"Democracy isn't just another political issue," said Tindal. "Our democratic systems need, by definition, to be determined by citizens, not just politicians. They especially shouldn't be dictated by a Prime Minister whose party received just a little more than a third of the vote in the last general election."

The Canadian Senate, while in need of reform, has traditionally played an important role in Canadian politics as a place of sober second thought and long-term planning. Any good ideas that the government's proposal may include, such as a move towards proportional representation, lack legitimacy unless they come directly from citizens.

"The Senate is just one piece of the very complicated web that makes up our democracy," added Green Party leader Elizabeth May. "To tinker with it in isolation from other democratic systems, and without an appreciation for the many functions and long history of the Senate, is dangerous to say the least."

The Green Party of Canada recognizes the need for democratic reform, including Senate reform. Greens support the creation of a Citizens' Assembly to determine what Senate reform is necessary, similar to the Citizens' Assembly dealing with proportional representation that is currently under way in Ontario.

mikedavid00 · December 14, 2006

"Democracy isn't just another political issue," said Tindal. "Our democratic systems need, by definition, to be determined by citizens, not just politicians."

YES THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING.

our leaders have been overstepping their bounds and it's time to move away from a sytem that may work well in the UK. It doens't suite Canada very well and residing in North America.

Saturn · December 14, 2006

Harper's plan is such a pathetic joke!

If we start "electing" our senators and if the PM approves of our choices and actually appoints them to the Senate, we will have an "elected" senate by 2050.

So if all the IFs are satisfied, in 2050 we'll have an elected Senate with most of the senators having been elected decades ago. If Mr. Smith is "elected" and appointed to the senate in 2015 at the age of 35, he will still be in the senate in 2050 and most of the people who "elected" him will have passed away. That's some real good democracy there.

madmax · December 14, 2006

Harper's plan is such a pathetic joke!
If we start "electing" our senators and if the PM approves of our choices and actually appoints them to the Senate, we will have an "elected" senate by 2050.

So if all the IFs are satisfied, in 2050 we'll have an elected Senate with most of the senators having been elected decades ago. If Mr. Smith is "elected" and appointed to the senate in 2015 at the age of 35, he will still be in the senate in 2050 and most of the people who "elected" him will have passed away. That's some real good democracy there.

It's not a joke, it is a gimmick for re-election. Something to hit the Liberals over the head with.

I have been watching alot of shows and Harper is before the Senate now, and the commentary often goes back to people talking more about Abolishing the Senate, as opposed to commenting on the gimmick.

This may just backfire on Harper.

But, maybe we can get rid of more government inadvertantly.

No more Senate, except on the ICE.

I don't want those Senators abolished, that happened in the early 1900s, took nearly 90 years to get them back on the ICE.

I want those other Senators, Squashed. Liberal and Conservative alike.

Save tax payers money. Abolish the Senate.

Saturn · December 14, 2006

It's not a joke, it is a gimmick for re-election. Something to hit the Liberals over the head with.
I have been watching alot of shows and Harper is before the Senate now, and the commentary often goes back to people talking more about Abolishing the Senate, as opposed to commenting on the gimmick.

This may just backfire on Harper.

But, maybe we can get rid of more government inadvertantly.

No more Senate, except on the ICE.

I don't want those Senators abolished, that happened in the early 1900s, took nearly 90 years to get them back on the ICE.

I want those other Senators, Squashed. Liberal and Conservative alike.

Save tax payers money. Abolish the Senate.

Yes but that would mean that Harper has to do a lot of work and no real changes are possible right now. If he rolled up his sleeves and did real work he would not be able to advertise his work as a "new era in Canadian democracy" because he would have achieved nothing before the election. It's much easier to write up a BIG poster with empty words and advertise it as a real change. Some may be fooled.

rbacon · December 15, 2006

Why would any adult Canadian man or woman reject this modest proposal for a small step towards righting the democratic wrongs in this country....Be they ever so small.....Canada is an International Embarassment....Always chiding and lecturing but when you strip away the facade and pomp, this is what you have......A man elected by an average of 30,000 voters, the PM who appoints our Head of State...He appoints all of the Heads of States of the Provinces....He appoints 50% of the Government system, all the Senators, who serve until 75 years of age or infirm....He appoints every judge both high and low and far and wide....So that if you live 3,000 miles away the correct local tone is set and the correct values from 3,000 miles away are imposed.....He appoints all of the archaic Privy Council....These are the guys who pass Orders in Council to spent taxdollars raise taxes, create instant law on the spot....All of which is beyond the eyes and review of Parliament and even the Senate.....He appoints the Heads of Hundreds of Crown Corporation, the Golden Trough....He is Elected Royalty.....They all serve at his whim....The elected Parliament, our MP's will lie and promise anything to get elected...Once elected they serve another master, the PM....They will be whipped as he desires and they will do as he tells them not as we desire or want.....On democratic rights Canada is medieval..Even the voting system for the elected part is stacked and packed..PEI with a population less than most Canadian mid sized towns has 4 mps and 4 Senators.....Alberta with 4,000,000 souls gets 28 mp's and 6 senators.....It takes 4 Alberta votes to equal one PEI vote.....Finally we have a man who promiss modest reforms, actually a model on Alberta's Senate Election Process...And Canadians are aghast....The sky is falling.....We are not qualified to vote.....The sky is falling.....Canadians who pay more in taxes than they do for food, shelter, clothing and transportation combined reject the right to start controlling the Leviathan that has evolved over the last 100 plus years... All I can say is pathetic....You all deserve "To Serve At The Oars Of The Slave Ship Canada." the rest of your natural lives.....You are pathetic wretched human beings.....No stirring "Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death"....No master we prefer "The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves." Better men and woman all over the world down through the years and centuries have fought and died to get the boot of big government off their necks.....Canadians tug their forelocks and kneel and assist with their own hands the placing of the boot on their and their families own necks....."A Slave Is A Man That Waits Upon Another To Set Him Free." Slave, Slavish Pining Slaves.....Pining for the boot up the ass from the Master.....That sums up this generation of Canadians......