[EyeBrock]

Personally, in a democracy I think 'populist swings' are the idea.

We shouldn't have unelected people deciding the fate of Bills from a parliament that was elected.

It's silly. Both houses should be elected.

[hurley_108]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Maybe the Libs should have gone along with looking at an elected Senate when Harper suggested it in 2006. Crocodile tears.

2006? An elected Senate has been a Reformacon platform plank forever.

If Harper actually wants an elected Senate, he's got the PMO now, he's got the power to call for a Constitutional amendment, why doesn't he go for it? Because he's all too happy to play the system as it currently stands. He's very good at it, he just outsmarts himself from time to time and keeps himself out of majority territory. Too bad, so sad for him.

[CommanderSock]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Personally, in a democracy I think 'populist swings' are the idea.

We shouldn't have unelected people deciding the fate of Bills from a parliament that was elected.

It's silly. Both houses should be elected.

But they are not. They are biggest drawback of a democracy.

It is why we have elected and appointed representatives as opposed to endless referendums and ballot initiatives where everyone is constantly involved.

A democracy without checks and balances is simply mob rule.

[BartSimpson]

$1:

The absence of more than 15 Liberals from the Senate allowed the bill to be defeated by a margin of 43 to 32.

Woody Allen Woody Allen:

Ninety-nine percent of success is showing up.

Good advice from a liberal.

[EyeBrock]

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Personally, in a democracy I think 'populist swings' are the idea.

We shouldn't have unelected people deciding the fate of Bills from a parliament that was elected.

It's silly. Both houses should be elected.

But they are not. They are biggest drawback of a democracy.

It is why we have elected and appointed representatives as opposed to endless referendums and ballot initiatives where everyone is constantly involved.

A democracy without checks and balances is simply mob rule.

I disagree that political appointees are an improvement on those elected by the people. It's a hangover from Legislative Councils in the first Colonies which in turn mirrored the House of Lords.

The sooner we have an elected upper house the better. There are plenty of ways to ensure it's just not a mirror image of the lower one.

I can't believe any left-leaning voter in Canada thinks an unelected upper house is a good thing. Sober second thought my arse.

[CommanderSock]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I can't believe any left-leaning voter in Canada thinks an unelected upper house is a good thing. Sober second thought my arse.

In my opinion it is a sobering 2nd thought.
And a very important one too. All we have to do is look at our neighbors down south, and their overcrowded jails, and their bloated rule books. There are laws that are legislated that make little or no sense. Many are promises by politicians to be "tough on crime". The highest incarceration rate on the globe, and the highest costs associated with it too. DMCA locking up people for downloading music. Underage kids put on the sex offender lists for having sex with each other. All types of hasty laws passed due to lobbyist, knee jerk reactions, religious pressure, and who knows what else.

Oh, I quite agree on the 2nd sobering thought. And Senators can't keep a sober mind when they're relying to get re-elected.

My 2c.

[BartSimpson]

CS - that ain't my quote. Just saying.

[CommanderSock]

Sorry Bart, stupid browser, (or me). I'll edit when I get home. Unfortunately I can't edit from here.

[EyeBrock]

This is Canada. What happens in the US doesn't translate into the same scenario here.

How ever you try and justify it, having unelected 'senators' passing, amending, stopping bills drafted and passed by the only elected national assembly in the country makes no sense in a democracy.

[BartSimpson]

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

Sorry Bart, stupid browser, (or me). I'll edit when I get home. Unfortunately I can't edit from here.

No worries.

[BartSimpson]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

This is Canada. What happens in the US doesn't translate into the same scenario here.

How ever you try and justify it, having unelected 'senators' passing, amending, stopping bills drafted and passed by the only elected national assembly in the country makes no sense in a democracy.

I agree.

In the US the Senators used to be appointed by the governor or legislatures of their respective states and we changed that to direct election. It isn't perfect, but it works.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Woody Allen Woody Allen:

Ninety-nine percent of success is showing up.

Good advice from a liberal.

Thanks--just yesterday I was trying to remember who said that. Good advice actually.

[andyt]

Are you sure they did not not show up on purpose? (Gotta love the English language).

[Curtman]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

2006? An elected Senate has been a Reformacon platform plank forever.

It pains me to say it.. But Sharon Carstairs used to be one of the biggest proponents of a Triple E senate. Until she became a senator.

[sandorski]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Personally, in a democracy I think 'populist swings' are the idea.

We shouldn't have unelected people deciding the fate of Bills from a parliament that was elected.

It's silly. Both houses should be elected.

I mostly agree, main sticking point is on what that means. For the most part the current Senate works just fine with only the occasional controversy. I certainly don't want the US style of Senate with constant/regular Elections. I like the permanence of the current Senate system as it does add a buffer to the Commons potentially preventing radical moves. However, the Partisan appointments by the PM(whomever that is at the time) is the Senates biggest flaw.

Since the Senate is structured on the per Province model, what I'd like to see is for the Provinces to choose whom their Permanent Senators are. I would even be willing to let the individual Provinces choose How those Senators are chosen. The Premier can choose, there can be an Election, draw the name out of a hat, fisticuffs, whatever. Just remove it from the PM.