Will Canada ever have an elected Senate?
The Prime Minister discusses the status of two Senate reform bills to elect Senators and limit their terms to 8 years.
Bill S-4 (term limits) has been held up in the Liberal dominated Senate since May 2006; Bill C-43 (elected Senators) is also expected to be opposed by the Liberal Party which would lose its majority control over the upper chamber.
So the plan is to replace appointed senators, leaders who need not spin with the media (whose process of accountability is to bury bullshit with more bullshit) with some other application of elected representatives? Not in the best interests of people who have seen how contrived fear and panic have caused ridiculous legislation south of the border. Can I interest anyone in 9 trillion dollars worth of debt? How about we forget due process? Time to take a sober second thought.
Ruralta
November 1, 2009 at 2:56 pm
You want to hear more pathetic news coming from the chamber of sober second thought? Today, they gutted the 2-for-1 jail credit crime bill, even though it was passed unanimously by the house.
The Conservatives and the NDP both came out condemning this move, but yet Iggy is all like “let’s play nice.” Bob Rae was even worse, as he said it wasn’t his job to “criticize the Senate.” Hello, what happened to serving the people?
To the Liberal Senators: get it right or get out!
lkcwu
October 7, 2009 at 7:30 pm
each provincal gov should be a senator they are most intuned with each province and would have the best opinion and to make it fair ontario vote would be worth more then yukon
893160007
July 28, 2009 at 2:42 pm
“With Mr. Dion there is simply nothing to attack.” Now THAT’S a joke. As enviro minister he failed Canadians with the Kyoto Accord, he ran Canada into a scandal as intergov minister, and he’s only the 2nd Liberal leader NOT to become PM. Nothing to attack? How about gross incompetence?
BTW, where’s the answer to my question? What’s the Liberal position to democratic reform? Still refusing to say because you have none, and are afraid of getting ridiculed, so you rely on more smears? Pathetic!
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 9:41 pm
With Mr. Dion there is simply nothing to attack. He has served Canada with truth,honour, & distinction.His Constitutional prowess is renound and he should be given the Order of Canada when they strip it from Mulroney!
I can only guess why Harpazoid having slagged the separatists months ago is now divising a plan to share his Birthday cake with them ?lol
What a hypocrite,
I truly hope the Tory Party does not come to it’s senses & shows Harper all loyalty he has never shown anyone.else
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Dion is just as hypocritical. When he was young he was involved in the sovereignty movement, and did his Master’s Thesis on the electoral tactics of the Parti Quebecois. But you don’t see me or Harper attack his separatist ties.
Admit it, you’re just running out of arguments and you’re resorting to name-calling. You’re afraid that the Liberals have no platform on democratic reform (or other issues) that you’re just smearing.
Maybe Rick Mercer’s song on the Liberals is right after all, LOL!
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Come out of the closet Gillhoolee. “The Liberals are not against Senate reform.” That’s not even an answer to my question “Do they even have a plan at all?”
Attacking Harper on separatism is kind of like McCarthyism. You take all the past dirt from a part politican and smear them with it. I though Liberals were beyond this type of negative campaigning. You sure railed against it during the election, didn’t you? Now you employ the same technique?
To quote yourself: “A hypocrite I say.”
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Drink from the same well? How amusing. Last time I checked, with the exception of the NDP, who are for ABOLISHING the senate, there is no provincial party that is completely linked to their federal counterparts.
The Alberta Liberals, the Quebec Liberals, and the BC Liberals are ALL separate from the federal Liberals. Also, right wing provincial parties like the Sask Party are separate from the federal Tories.
Admit it: you either lied or you’re clueless. Pretty plain to see, isn’t it?
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 3:00 pm
“# In 2001, two Alliance MPs attended the founding convention of the Alberta Independence Party (on which here)
# Bert Brown (who was at that time one of Alberta’s “senators-in-waiting”) attended the same meeting, actually spoke to its delegates,* and is quoted as wishing them “every success” (reports here and here and in many places in the printed press). Harper appointed Brown to the senate in July, 2007.”
Give me a break!
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 2:14 pm
The Liberals are not against Senate reform.
They do however recognize Mr. Harper for what he is , a divisive small minded individual who fails to grasp the grandeur and scope of this Nation, choosing instead to wallow in his partisan, political regionalism to serve what ever desire he may hold.
He yammered about Separatists but did he check the record of His appointee Senator Burt Brown before hand? A man who wished ‘every success’ to The Alberta Independence Party ?
A hypocrite I say
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Oh Please,What colour is the sky in your world?
Are we that gullible? Do we need another ‘Fixed election date’ type document from Harper ? One that preteends to address an issue but in reality is nothing but a licence to distort reality & mislead the public?.
You know that both Provincial parties and Federal Parties ‘drink from the same well’ don’t you?
I didn’t fall of the turnip truck yesterday ‘my friend’ & you would be wrong to think so.
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 1:57 pm
I’d rather have a person who would say something I disagree with than have a person not say anything and run without a mandate.
Throughout our discussion, you’ve never even once addressed my point and stated the Liberal platform. You condemned, stomped, slandered, name-called, threw a temper tantrum, but still I don’t see the Liberals democratic reform plan. Do they even have one at all?
Better take your own advice, the same one you used to slander me, and “come out of the closet with it.”
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Harper would be wise to read what he has stated before he acts. If History is any indicator he will do the exact opposite.
Remember your talking about a man who shut down Parliament rather than face the Canadian people’s duly elected representatives so don’t even try to lecture me on his Parliamentary reform- I’ve seen enough!
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 1:33 pm
You just saw what happened when 18 Conservatives were appointed in one breath. And the same happened in the past with Chretien, Martin, Mulroney, Trudeau, you name it. They are nothing more than the PM’s lackeys. What sober second thought are you if you’re the PM’s parrot?
I already said, the PM cannot remove a senator by refusing their election. It’s up to the provinces to do that, so if anything, the PM WON’T castrate the senate’s powers.
Please read my comment carefully before you talk.
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 10:53 am
My question is this then: is a second house necessarily a bad thing? I hear it from Liberals all the time that it is, but shouldn’t there be a house to check the already powerful PM? The Senate, the way it is right now, cannot do that.
That’s a lie and you know it. In Harper’s plan, the parties approving the candidates won’t be federal, but PROVINCIAL ones. Provincial parties are responsible to the provincial elections officer, not the PMO.
You’re just filled with inaccuracies today.
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 10:52 am
He did ‘ASK’ & that’s all he could do.. Good point.
Think of a PM with the power to remove Senators by not allowing them to run again. think about the measure of ‘Sober second Thought’ we might get from someone who ‘s pension is at risk?
I say No to Harper’s Senate reform., another bad Idea!
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 10:28 am
Senators obey because they want to not because they have to.. It’s purpose is to Canada not her regions..
You seem blissfully unaware that any Senator viaing for an ‘elected’ seat would be subject to a vetting process by his/her party, twice, prior to being elected and once again before re- election. Electoral papers would be subject to the PMO’s approval.
Giving Harper this ‘club’ would undermine independence or compromise. It may even , duplicate the HofC &create a Constitutional crisis.
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 10:23 am
Didn’t Iggy himself ask the Senate to pass the Tory budget? And what did they do? Obeyed like the good little servants that they are!
The Conservative position is senatorial elections held by the provinces. We’ll have staggered elections with terms separate from the HOC so that there’ll never be one party having appointees at the exact same time as they rule.
Do research on the recent Consultations Act and you’ll get the same answer. Too bad you don’t check your facts before.
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 8:38 am
Chretien merely replaced financial deficit with infrastructural deficit. That’s why even with their booms, AB is stuck with poor infrastructure, and Sask is still short over a thousand nurses.
“Senate policy if implemented would castrate the Chamber and place it in the hands of the PMO.” Isn’t that the Liberal policy? Stack the chamber with their friends, make it the PM’s lackey, sap it of all legitimacy.
I think the only person inside a “hiding hole” is you, my friend.
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 8:35 am
Mulroney SHOULD get credit, because he championed free trade and the GST. Chretien ONLY got the deficit slayed because he broke BOTH his promises to GET RID OF BOTH of them.
It is slander, because you have no proof any of that existed. Shreiber’s own testimony was drawing more than enough questions on his credibility, so who can you truly trust?
Not only did Chretien gut EI, he slashed provincial money transfers. No financial deficit alright, but what about infrastructure deficit?
lkcwu
April 30, 2009 at 8:32 am
…as for giving Mulroney credit , I’ll leave that up to Harper- Oh wait , there not on speaking terms Gee I wonder why?
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 6:28 am
Slander.lol
You want Proof?Taty his own testimony in front of a Parliamentary Committee. Where have you been, daown ‘Harper’s hiding hole’ perhaps?
You are RIGHT ,no one can predict the economy & that is why the Liberals produced 9 or 10 SURPLUS budgets with a ‘rainy day fund’ of $3-4 Billion in moderate times while Mr. Harper governed over a hot economy and still spent us into a $15 billion dollar debt without any ;’stimulus’.Now he can’t even fund EI as he has spent those funds elsewhere.
Gillhoolee
April 30, 2009 at 6:23 am
Cretien paid for as you say’gutting ‘EI, Harper saw to it. He railed about how it was wrong for the G’vt to transfer funds to General Revenue- that was until he took office and all we heard was ‘peep’!
As for Senate reform, I trust the Liberal position rather than Mr. Harper who again railed about one thing and went ahead and did the opposite.
Harper is a goof who’s Senate policy if implemented would castrate the Chamber and place it in the hands of the PMO, something no Canadian needs.
Gillhoolee
April 29, 2009 at 10:19 pm
But it still doesn’t excuse the Liberals with their actions. The Social Safety net is in such a mess thanks to CHRETIEN and NOT Harper. What was Chretien’s reason for gutting EI then?
And while we’re on the topic of “no reference” as you said, what did what you said have to do with Senate Reform? What’s the NEW Liberal stance? I’ve heard nothing from Iggy, even thought he’s the new government-in-waiting, so where’s his policy?
I guess it’s just packaging. New leader, old results.
lkcwu
April 29, 2009 at 5:32 pm
“Perhaps, had he not been stuffing safety deposit boxes with cash he may have done better.” That’s slander right there. Got any proof from that?
No one can truly predict or dictate the economy. As the old saying goes: “Anyone who think they can is either a prophet or a fool.” The B of C revised outlook, the other banks have different outlooks, who knows who’s right?
And speaking of Mulroney, don’t forget that inherited a mess from Trudeau. So if anything, you have to give him credit.
lkcwu
April 29, 2009 at 5:29 pm
At first I thought this was a response to my comment made 5 months ago (which would qualify you as a Tory Candidate), but then I read my comment and it makes no reference to anything you mention.
I can only surmise your reference to the 90′s & Brian Mulroney is simply because our latest employment numbers are in the same ball park as when he stood behind the bench.
Perhaps, had he not been stuffing safety deposit boxes with cash he may have done better.
What’s Harper’s excuse?
Gillhoolee
April 29, 2009 at 5:03 pm
And the Liberals, who cut EI back in the 90′s to the point where nobody can qualify for them, are any better?
The Canadian Centre of Policy Alternatives, a left-leaning, NDP-supporting think-tank published that less than half of those who applied for EI actually get it. Back in 1990/91, over 80 % of those who applied got it. And guess who’s the PM in 91? Brian Mulroney!
If even a left-leaning, NDP-supporting think tank can point to Liberal mistakes, I don’t see what argument you have left.
lkcwu
April 29, 2009 at 11:27 am
Our “ECONOMIST” PM on Oct 10th.. Stephen Harper answers reporters in London, Ont.(Tom Hanson/CP)
A Conservative government would not need to cut spending to keep the government from running a deficit, leader Stephen Harper said Saturday.
The economy is not going into recession, and-
Harper is so much of a clown liar his own western support has fallen from over 50% to 38% since the election.
Boom de ya da, Boom de ya da, lofl
Gillhoolee
November 19, 2008 at 5:09 pm
“our plans are more than affordable,” he said.
When asked about possible cuts because a weakened economy could cut tax revenues, and the Tories have promised to keep the government in the black without raising taxes.
But Harper said the economy is not going into a recession, and the prospect of program cuts is a “ridiculous scenario.”….
…A ridiculous scenario? like the Throne speech you put forward then Mr. harper?
LMAO
Gillhoolee
November 19, 2008 at 4:59 pm
That the best you can do? You’re pathetic! Why don’t you try addressing my points for a change?
And in case you’re wondering, I no longer care how you view me. I’m going to continue punching your lights out with facts and policies, and if you’re man enough, you’d accept the challenge rather than resort to mudslinging.
Good luck trying to counter that.
lkcwu
November 19, 2008 at 4:14 pm
sockpuppet
Gillhoolee
November 18, 2008 at 9:50 pm
I think you’re against the elected senate because it doesn’t appeal to your party the Liberals, which stacked it with patronage appointments, rubberstamping any Liberal legislation and stalling other parties. No sober second thought there.
And what did Liberals say about either PR or senate reform? Nothing, because all I heard is “Green Shift this, Green Shift that” and nothing else. No wonder they got trounced so badly this year.
And yeah, apologize for calling me Philip J Fry.
lkcwu
November 18, 2008 at 6:48 pm
I agree, it doesn’t make sense for them to be there especially if they usually just pass the bill regardless. ALl they can really do is delay it. Also, people complain about having a governor general and paying her salary…yet we have a whole senate that is basically useless
masterplan65
November 11, 2008 at 9:46 pm
the liberals because they have like 70% of the senate seats.
thunderflash82
September 24, 2008 at 10:40 am
I think the senate should be abolished, no point in voting twice tbh.
And Proportional representation is very important too.
Amebixfan
September 17, 2008 at 8:46 pm
First of all I’m not against some reform.
I am however against an elected Senate.
It already does very good work.
The problem is that it’s work behind the scenes doesn’t readily lend itself to a 15 second sound bite and therefore is less appealing to Conservatives.
Gillhoolee
August 23, 2008 at 11:44 am
First off it’s not called representation by population, it’s proportional representation, and i don’t think that it more important than an elected senate. Right now, one House is elected and one isn’t, so we should focus on getting all politicians elected, AND THEN focus on the electoral system itself.
Cnd1867
August 23, 2008 at 11:03 am
chufuss in Canada we adopted both the British and American style of government.We have the House of Commons, this is where MP’s are,and these Mp’s are elected by the people.However the senate is chosen by the Party not the poeple.
colbertLOTR91
June 25, 2008 at 4:03 am
I’m sorry I am an American…Canadians don’t vote for their MPs? What government officials do you vote for?
chufuss
April 20, 2008 at 12:10 pm
who told you tht we dont vote for our MP’s we do vote for our MP’s we just dont vote for our senators.
Navi
October 8, 2010 at 6:49 pm
wow I totally agree, seriously who in their right mind would oppose electing our senate!
silverbullet902
March 31, 2008 at 4:57 am
when we going get a elected senate like the USA
BlueberryhillCB
January 1, 2008 at 6:51 am
its time sentors should be elected
bluefishmandarin
December 9, 2007 at 11:53 am
all mp and senators should be elected
MarssundanceMandarin
December 4, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Proportion representation will kill my dreams of ever becoming elected; it will benefit the NDP at the expense of independents. It’s yet another example of how the system protects itself from change, under the guise of change.
SlickExecutiveType
July 10, 2007 at 8:39 am
Representation by population is definitely important, I agree, but I also think it would be more in keeping with our democratic practices to elect the Senate as well. How does having the Senate elected make them accountable to the PM? (I’m just going to skip right over the fashion comments entirely as they are totally absurd.)
As far the clip itself, I think it is great – Harper sure has a good sense of humour – I like that!
MichClarke
May 29, 2007 at 10:40 am
Representation by Population is far more important that having an Elected Senate. Haveing them elected impunes their aotonomy and makes them accountable not to the Country but the PM. The Senate insures Sharp minds with no FASHION SENSE can participate too. The PM of all people should know this! Is he willing to pay for the Buttlers required to get them elected as well?
Gillhoolee
April 23, 2007 at 4:59 pm