Don't forget when you file to claim a few MPs and Senators as your dependants!
MPs at work earning $12000 a month. Give them credit for at least showing up, some don't!
''Since when did senate reform become important to the NDP?''
Since it will hopefully get them votes the next election.
March 2011:
OTTAWA—Abolishing the Senate would plunge Canada into a constitutional drama it doesn’t want, Prime Minister Stephen Harper says.
NDP Leader Jack Layton is arguing it’s time for Harper to admit defeat on Senate reform and for Canadians to be asked in a national referendum whether to abolish the unelected chamber of Parliament.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2011/03/01/killing_senate_too_difficult_pm_says.html
"the NDP have asked for senate reform since 2011."
Sorry if I gave you that impression from that press clipping.
The NDP has never asked for reform, they asked and have suggested to abolish the Senate for decades. Not a new policy. It has been around forever. Unfortunately, the NDP as a third, fourth or fifth place party had little voice. Now in official opposition, they can be heard.
Do I agree to abolish the Senate? No. I really think the Senate is an important part of our Canadian heritage and has a place in Parliament to balance the powers of the house of Commons.
Should it be reformed? Yes of course but who is to say what "reform" should be like? Does the Prime Minister offer the right answer? Impossible to say as he has been appointed his conservative friends and partisan supporters to the Senate for seven years, doing exactly what previous government had been doing and totally disregarding his "reform" policies.
Reforming the Senate can only be done if the Supreme Court agrees, seven provinces agree, and will only work if the overall support of the Canadian population is behind it. It should not and cannot be a partisan solution.
Reform will not stop "errors" such as the election or appointments of a few senators (Duffy, Wallin, Brazeau, etc...) who will abuse the system and line their pockets. However, a few bad apples is not a good enough reason to abolish this Canadian institution.
"...an elected senate..."
That is part of the problem. An election is expensive. It is expensive for the country (taxpayers) and expensive for those running for a seat, more so if there is no party support.
One of the advantages of the way members of the Senate are currently appointed (not elected) is that they stay in office after the current government has lost power. In other words, the composition of Parliament (House and Senate) does not necessarily change following the result of an election. Partisan composition has a much longer term effect.
Reform of the Senate as seen by Western Canada means more seats for them. Not something folks in the Maritimes (with a much smaller population) necessarily want to see.
Maybe an eventual reformed Senate will have a few more seats for the West, some seats "reserved" for selection by provincial governments who may appoint and/or select "elected' senators, with other seats appointed by the government of the day. A ten or twelve year term would appear appropriate as it would overlap more than two elections of the House.
To assure continuity, the number of senators forced to retire (by age or duration of mandate) should be spread ovet the years so that changes every year are not disruptive.
Whatever "reform" is contemplated, results will not please everyone and will be difficult to implement unless the government pushing for "reforms" agrees to take a non-partisan approach. Easier said than done.
All I see from you is defence of the prime minister and his party, post after post.
How about you offer your own suggestions for senate reforms? Or do you have to wait until the "party" tells its members what to think?
The electorate will be overjoyed to see three Senators suspended without pay.
Especially after all Harper's lies.
But I think they would have been much happier to see them booted out, removed, unemployed and then charged with fraud..........without the benefits they still have.
A majority of people aren't stupid. Harper and his friend Ford in TO have one thing in common. They're both on their way out.
"you just wonder what kind of dumb twit put him up there to begin with."
Perfect!
Harper should have initiated Senate reform seven years ago following his first election, six years ago, five years ago, four years ago, three years ago... He has done nothing other than ask for a reference from the Supreme Court this year.
He could have continued on his promise to appoint elected senators or leave the seats vacant. There was not need to fill these seats other than for purely partisan purposes (Duffy, Wallin, etc...).
Or he could have done what other Prime Ministers have done before him... appoints a few Senators who are not associated to his Party.
However, that his not what he did, is it?
Now, what do you suggest to reform the Senate?
