[Newsbot]

Title: Harper names 5 to Senate
Category: Political
Posted By: Canadaka
Date: 2010-01-29 09:00:01
Canadian

[bootlegga]

Apparently this is what Harper meant when he siad he suggested Senate Reform, filling the seats with party loyalists, not actually reformation of the Senate.

[westmanguy]

Oh please take your santamonious views somewhere else.

Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. The only way to reform the Senate is to end the Liberal majority, so Conservatives have the numbers to pass things like term limits and senate election.

[DerbyX]

westmanguy westmanguy:

Oh please take your santamonious views somewhere else.

Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. The only way to reform the Senate is to end the Liberal majority, so Conservatives have the numbers to pass things like term limits and senate election.

The fire department uses water.

[martin14]

westmanguy westmanguy:

Oh please take your santamonious views somewhere else.

Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. The only way to reform the Senate is to end the Liberal majority, so Conservatives have the numbers to pass things like term limits and senate election.

[westmanguy]

Oh, never heard of the term fighting fire with fire?

Conservatives are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If we didn't make any senate appointments the Senate would be in shambles and a constitutional crisis would ensue because there would be pressure on the Governor Generor to fill the vancancies Harper would be refusing to do.

The Liberals in the Senate are defiant imbociles who have shown no indication of wanting to support any reform bills the Conservatives have put forward. The only way forward is to diminish there numbers and have a Conservative majority in the Senate that will vote for and proceed ahead with term limits and senate elections.

[Zipperfish]

Meh. No big surprise. Liberal, Conservative or any other stripe...when they want to get into power, they're all about power to the people. Once they're in it's all about holding on at all costs.

[bootlegga]

westmanguy westmanguy:

Oh please take your santamonious views somewhere else.

Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. The only way to reform the Senate is to end the Liberal majority, so Conservatives have the numbers to pass things like term limits and senate election.

Save your ill-informed beliefs for someone else. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised that you re-surfaced to defend your beloved Harper.

Having a majority in the Senate does NOT allow for it to be reformed, it just allows smoother passage of your party's bills, period. Harper isn't reforming shit.

To actually reform it requires that the Constitution be amended.

[DerbyX]

westmanguy westmanguy:

Oh, never heard of the term fighting fire with fire?

Conservatives are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If we didn't make any senate appointments the Senate would be in shambles and a constitutional crisis would ensue because there would be pressure on the Governor Generor to fill the vancancies Harper would be refusing to do.

The Liberals in the Senate are defiant imbociles who have shown no indication of wanting to support any reform bills the Conservatives have put forward. The only way forward is to diminish there numbers and have a Conservative majority in the Senate that will vote for and proceed ahead with term limits and senate elections.

First off your post reeks of the arrogant elitism you claim the Liberals are full off. Nobody but nobody can govern the senate or parliament unless they are a conservative.

Second, just how obstructionist has the senate been especially considering you cons have crowed enormously over just how much Harper has accomplished and how many bills he has passed. This is all because the senate (very wisely) amended a rather shitty piece of legislation put forth by Harper and the same people crying about it would be the same people cheering if and when a conservative majority senate obstructed any piece of Liberal legislation. The Liberal senators aren't "imbociles" (and its imbeciles you moron. If you are going to insult peoples intelligence then spell it correctly) who show no indication of supporting Harpers agenda they are Liberal senators who don't happen to agree with Harpers legislation or reform ideas.

Third, just why you guys think that elected senators will automatically be better then appointed ones is beyond me since most of you consider the bulk of elected government MPs (or their provincial counterparts) with contempt. We might end up entirely with the exact same partisan politics we have now in the HOC.

You might also do well to realize that far from benefiting from a 3E senate your brand of conservatism would see its voice diminished (by far the best argument for a 3E senate actually) since fully 3/4s of the country is either centralist or left of centre.

Forth, if you want to monkey with senate reform then you had better be prepared to reexamine the parliamentary system too since complaints about its fairness and representation are just as legitimate. You might like to examine what would happen if the left votes were suddenly allowed to get their second choice counted. Hint: It wouldn't be too beneficial for the CPC.

Fifth, considering the "west wants in" mantra you might also look at the population distribution to see that Ontario I believe will get a much larger voice.

[ASLplease]

Derby, you make alot of sense, are you sure you aren't a closet conservative?

[DerbyX]

ASLplease ASLplease:

Derby, you make alot of sense, are you sure you aren't a closet conservative?

Oh I'm in the closet sweetheart.

Another factor I think seems to be escaping those calling for senate reform is the fact that we will suddenly have large numbers of bloc/PQ aligned senators and that ain't good. Unless of course they plan measures to stop separatists from voting in senators which will give them exactly what they want.

[OnTheIce]

The senate as a whole is a giant turd of an expense for Canadians.

Harper cannot make any changes to the Senate unless he has the majority of the Senate in his favour. It's about time.

[stokes]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Another factor I think seems to be escaping those calling for senate reform is the fact that we will suddenly have large numbers of bloc/PQ aligned senators and that ain't good. Unless of course they plan measures to stop separatists from voting in senators which will give them exactly what they want.

Derby you do raise a good point, but who are we to say that the citizens of this country do not have the right to elect whom they want, regardless of party affiliation. If that means we get Bloc or NDP in the senate so be it, the senate should not be a dumping ground for party flakes.

[DerbyX]

stokes stokes:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Another factor I think seems to be escaping those calling for senate reform is the fact that we will suddenly have large numbers of bloc/PQ aligned senators and that ain't good. Unless of course they plan measures to stop separatists from voting in senators which will give them exactly what they want.

Derby you do raise a good point, but who are we to say that the citizens of this country do not have the right to elect whom they want, regardless of party affiliation. If that means we get Bloc or NDP in the senate so be it, the senate should not be a dumping ground for party flakes.

I don't disagree with that one bit and despite my post I am not opposed to a 3E senate. I just detest the way it seems to be assumed better and almost universally supported by those who won't oppose a conservative majority senate.

Another factor is what about those that vote NDP/Green. They have long said their seats do not reflect the % support and vote they get. They have a very good point also don't you think?

Why can't we have Green and NDP affiliated senators considering they get ~8% and 18% respectively. Of course when we decide on how to vote for senators who's to say the FPTP system will be used. Why not STV or another proportional representation system?

That being said who is to say elected senators will listen to the electorate since they cannot campaign under any campaign promises can they? In fact just what can they campaign on for that matter?

[EyeBrock]

I agree with much of what you say about the Senate Derby, but having an elected Senate has to be the way to go.

Either it's elected or we get rid of it.

It should have been changed during the 19th century reforms. Having appointed politicians just 'ain't responsible government.

Even if the elected senators are just as shit as the appointed ones, the elected types will have to respond to the voters or they will get voted out.