Harper to appoint Brown as Elected Senator

[Michael Bluth]

Another small step that will appease the base and goes to prove Harper means what he says.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper will name a long-time senate reform advocate as his first elected senator.

Harper told the House of Commons towards the end of Wednesday's question period that he will name the "senator in waiting" from Alberta to the upper chamber.

Brown will replace Sen. Dan Hays, a Liberal who announced Tuesday that he intends to retire by the end of June.

Brown, a farmer from Kathyrn, Alta., once plowed the message "Triple-E Senate or Else" into a barley field. Triple-E means equal, elected and effective.

In Alberta's third Senate election in 2004, Brown captured the most votes.

Definitely a step in the right direction for Senate reform. Brown knows a lot about the Senate and has been working on the issue for many, many years.

Link.

[sharkman]

Wow, a blow for democracy in Canada, the country that loves a soft dictatorship.

[scribblet]

The first step towards a more democratic and elected Senate...good stuff

[geoffrey]

It's all rather meaningless long-term, but it's a good symbolic gesture by Harper.

[hiti]

Well Fortier is still in the senate............

And Brown says he's not running again but staying in the senate until he is 75.

EEE my donkey.

[Figleaf]

Well Fortier is still in the senate............

And Brown says he's not running again but staying in the senate until he is 75.

EEE my donkey.

You've nailed it. This is a token gesture from Steve the same as the SSM motion. Maybe we should be grateful to some extent that his base can be pacified with such gestures.

[M.Dancer]

Abolish the senate......

[Michael Bluth]

Well Fortier is still in the senate............

And Brown says he's not running again but staying in the senate until he is 75.

You conveniently forgot to add that Brown is 69 years old. A six year term is among the proposals for elected Senators.

Interesting how in Dion's criticisms he addressed the subject of the Maritimes being over represented compared to the west in the Senate.

[M.Dancer]

Should Canada's senators be elected, appointed or phased out?

Elected (9%) 4006 votes

Appointed (3%) 1445 votes

Phased Out (87%) 37502 votes

Total votes: 42953

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/

My opinion is shared......

[hiti]

Well Fortier is still in the senate............

And Brown says he's not running again but staying in the senate until he is 75.

You conveniently forgot to add that Brown is 69 years old. A six year term is among the proposals for elected Senators.

Interesting how in Dion's criticisms he addressed the subject of the Maritimes being over represented compared to the west in the Senate.

So what did Dion compare the over representation of the Maritimes to?

And what about Fortier? Nothing to add?

And wasn't Steve going to have a senate election every two years or was it every four years? That would mean Brown would need to hit the hustings at 73.

[rover1]

A foolish gesture, a waste of time, in my view.

[madmax]

Should Canada's senators be elected, appointed or phased out?

Elected (9%) 4006 votes

Appointed (3%) 1445 votes

Phased Out (87%) 37502 votes

Total votes: 42953

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/

My opinion is shared......

I thought I was the broken record on abolishing the Senate.

Regardless these poll numbers surprise the heck out of me. I could understand if it was a region in Quebec, to have results like this. In General, many people in Quebec don't want the Senate.

From what I see above, Harper has managed to attract all 12% of the voters opinion. He appointed Fortier and appointed the "elected" Brown.

This is a surprising poll.

[Michael Bluth]

So what did Dion compare the over representation of the Maritimes to?

And what about Fortier? Nothing to add?

And wasn't Steve going to have a senate election every two years or was it every four years? That would mean Brown would need to hit the hustings at 73.

Dion compared it to the under representation of the West.

Fortier? There are 1/3rd as many appointed Conservative Senators as appointed Liberal Senators. Pick any three, defend their appointments and I'll talk about Fortier.

Prime Minister Harper hasn't come up with specifics about election timing.

One of the models you might be talking about would have Senators elected for six years, with elections for 1/3rd of the Senate seats held every two years.

Brown has won two Senate elections. Clearly Albertans want him to be in the Senate. How many years is that worth by your arithmetic?

[hiti]

Fortier was appointed to the senate so he could be a minister in Steve's government without accountability to the House of Commons making him an unelected minister in the government. No other Liberal senator has that kind of role.

Dion said that "the prime minister wants an elected Senate without clarifying what dispute mechanism will be used to settle disputes between the two chambers” He also said that bringing in a form of an elected Senate without addressing the inequalities in the number of seats assigned to each province is a serious mistake.

In 2004 when Brown became a senate elect, so many voters rejected or refused senate ballots that Brown only received 14% of the votes, 714,709 ballots in total were cast for all senate candidates.

And actually Betty Unger received more votes than Bert Brown in 2004 so why did Steve not appoint her? Is it cause she is a women?

[Michael Bluth]

And actually Betty Unger received more votes than Bert Brown in 2004 so why did Steve not appoint her? Is it cause she is a women?

No she didn't. Why must you lie?

Candidate Party Votes # Votes % Ballots % "Elected"

Bert Brown PC 312,041 14.3% 43.7% X

Betty Unger PC 311,964 14.3% 43.6% X

Source Elections Alberta

[hiti]

And actually Betty Unger received more votes than Bert Brown in 2004 so why did Steve not appoint her? Is it cause she is a women?

No she didn't. Why must you lie?

Candidate Party Votes # Votes % Ballots % "Elected"

Bert Brown PC 312,041 14.3% 43.7% X

Betty Unger PC 311,964 14.3% 43.6% X

Source Elections Alberta

Don't call me a liar......... you pathetic...........

Candidate Party Votes # Votes % "Elected"

Betty Unger Progressive Conservative 308,014 14.3% X

Bert Brown Progressive Conservative 307,444 14.3% X

http://www.answers.com/topic/alberta-senat...e-election-2004

You sound like your leader....... nasty, nasty, nasty. Do you wear mascara?

[Michael Bluth]

Don't call me a liar......... you pathetic...........

Candidate Party Votes # Votes % "Elected"

Betty Unger Progressive Conservative 308,014 14.3% X

Bert Brown Progressive Conservative 307,444 14.3% X

http://www.answers.com/topic/alberta-senat...e-election-2004

So your "source" is somehow more accurate than Elections Alberta?

It appears you have posted the preliminary results and I posted the official results. Nice try though.

You sound like your leader....... nasty, nasty, nasty. Do you wear mascara?

Was that meant to be homophobic or sexist? You appeared to hit both in one post. Good work sir!

[hiti]

Not only was Brown in a dead heat with Unger but nearly one in five ballots spoiled in Alberta Senate elections. More than 170,000 Albertans, or nearly 19.3 per cent of the total number of those who went to the polls on Nov. 22, rejected or spoiled their ballots. Total waste of $3 million.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2004/12/02/...tors041202.html

Steve's Bill C-43 continues this made in Alberta pseudo democratic reformism. It is all about appearances not real Senate reform. First Harper appoints an unelected Montrealer to be in Cabinet as Public Works Minister by appointing him to the Senate. Thus his minister can avoid public questioning in the house.

Next he calls for term limits for Senators, then he calls for a bill that would encourage the PM to appoint elected senators, when only one province has made this an issue and ever held an election. The rest of Canada could care less. And for good reason.

[geoffrey]

Thus his minister can avoid public questioning in the house.

Poor argument. He can be held as much to account in the Senate. Just because you don't watch Senate proceedings (I don't either, but I also don't care) isn't anyone's fault but your own.

There has been Senator Ministers in the past too.

[madmax]

Thus his minister can avoid public questioning in the house.

Poor argument. He can be held as much to account in the Senate. Just because you don't watch Senate proceedings (I don't either, but I also don't care) isn't anyone's fault but your own.

That may be true. What is interesting is that the vast majority are suggesting that they would rather have the Senate phased out, then carry on with perceived waste of time and money. The problem is that people don't want the Senate but their is little we can do about it without opening the constitution. The same is true with "real" senate reform vs this dog and pony show that Stephen Harper is conducting for his electoral base.

No Party is ready to touch the constitution to change the Senate one way or another.

There has been Senator Ministers in the past too.

Most definitely.

[Michael Bluth]

The same is true with "real" senate reform vs this dog and pony show that Stephen Harper is conducting for his electoral base.

Dog and pony show?

Reforming an institution is an incremental thing.

Of course people would like to see a major change to the Senate in one fell swoop, be it EEE or something else.

That's not human nature.

If Harper can build a critical mass of elected Senators then we could see other, bigger, reforms.

What if John Tory wins in the Fall? Then he could call an election for Ontario's two open seats. Then Gordon Campbell could call an election for BCs open seat....

[madmax]

Of course people would like to see a major change to the Senate in one fell swoop, be it EEE or something else.

if Harper can build a critical mass of elected Senators then we could see other, bigger, reforms.

What if John Tory wins in the Fall? Then he could call an election for Ontario's two open seats. Then Gordon Campbell could call an election for BCs open seat....

The Senate is a waste of resources.

I don't want "more" elections I want less. Electoral burnout, constant campaigning, and in the end, it is just a sham.

Phasing out the Senate is the best way to proceed forward.

[Guest chilipeppers]

Bert Brown deserves this appointment. He has devoted more of his own time and money to reforming the Senate over the years than I bet anyone. He has stuck by the cause of democratizing this pork trough very tenaciously as he cares deeply about this issue.

Bert Brown has stood for election to the Senate three times and won twice so has a more legitimate claim to be appointed than anyone. This is a start in much needed reform, unless of course we can abolish it.

[jdobbin]

Phasing out the Senate is the best way to proceed forward.

I agree. If upper houses were such a great idea, why did the provinces get rid of theirs?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_house

[Michael Bluth]

Bert Brown has stood for election to the Senate three times and won twice so has a more legitimate claim to be appointed than anyone. This is a start in much needed reform, unless of course we can abolish it.

Yes, Bert Brown will make a good Senator.

He understands and cares about the Red Chamber. How many people can really say that?

I don't know what drives a man to make Senate reform the issue of his life, but good on Brown for achieving a major step along the road to significant reform.