[Newsbot]

Title: Senate failed to become independent, Ottawa tells Supreme Court, arguing for reform
Category: Law & Order
Posted By: DrCaleb
Date: 2013-11-12 12:45:29
Canadian

[DrCaleb]

So, saying the PMO interfered in the Senate, and that makes the Senate partisan - that's your argument? Good one Harper, the SCoC will buy what you are selling!

[Jabberwalker]

The Senate became the ancient burial ground of the party-in-power, right at the beginning.

[DrCaleb]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

The Senate became the ancient burial ground of the party-in-power, right at the beginning.

Seeing as how Senators are chosen, I don't think it's a big surprise there. That the interference continues after the appointment is what needs changing.

[Unsound]

It we're going to continue appointing senators I'd like to see the process look more like what the SCoC appointments process is supposed to look like. Ideally, you'd have an all-party committee nominate 3 to 5 people and have 12 randomly chosen citizens of the province being represented decide which of that short list gets the honour.

[Freakinoldguy]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

The Senate became the ancient burial ground of the party-in-power, right at the beginning.

Seeing as how Senators are chosen, I don't think it's a big surprise there. That the interference continues after the appointment is what needs changing.

Non partisan Senators are what's needed or better yet an elected, effective Senate with actual power who aren't not beholding to anyone for their jobs, perks, pensions or future employment. Then if they screw up like 3 conservatives and 3 liberals have done, the riding they got elected in gets to hold a binding referendum to see if they stay or go. It may cost us more money but it'd be a lot cheaper than having the fucks robbing us blind.

All expense accounts public record, and all expenditures by the Senate as a whole public record. Anyone appointed prior to the elections gets a severance package and a pension based on time in with a max of 50% of their best 6 years wage, Then they'll be shown the door and of course to collect those pensions they'll have to survive an audit by the RCMP and an independent investigator.

I can hear the howling now.

Although my first choice would be to disband them and just go with a Parliament who should be following all those rules I laid out to but we know that'll never happen.

I'm sick and tired of seeing fat cat politicians and their political appointees getting perks that only an Saudi Prince could dream of along with the golden parachute pensions they get just for fucking up our country and then having the gall to say that they've earned it.

[Gunnair]

Provincial appointments through elections. Unless of course they appoint me.

Then anyone wanting elections can go fuck themselves.

[DrCaleb]

Unsound Unsound:

It we're going to continue appointing senators I'd like to see the process look more like what the SCoC appointments process is supposed to look like. Ideally, you'd have an all-party committee nominate 3 to 5 people and have 12 randomly chosen citizens of the province being represented decide which of that short list gets the honour.

Not a bad idea, but I think it should be a non-party committee.

I think that's the big problem in the Senate that we don't see in civic politics - party interference. If Senators were left to represent their regions as was meant, then they could be more effective instead of being under the thumb of the Party Leader, be they Prime Minister or Leader of the Loyal Opposition.

[DrCaleb]

$1:

GORDON GIBSON

Reform made simple: Pick Senators the way we select judges

So the Stephen Harper government complains to the Supreme Court that the Senate is too partisan. This is the most outrageous legal argument since the fellow who killed both his parents asked for mercy on the grounds he was an orphan. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.

The bizarre Harper fixation on trying to reform the Senate through the blockbuster machinery of constitutional change is most peculiar, given that he has another route wholly within his own powers.

It is equally odd that the trivial expense account scams of three Senators should lead to calls for the abolition of what has been, and could be again, a very useful part of our Parliament.

One should recall an essential link between each of the controversial trio. They were each and every one appointed by the Prime Minister. How is it that this is not sticking to the teflon man? The connection is so simple – if Mr. Harper had not appointed these folks there would be no scandal.

This leads to the central issue of the Senate, namely how the members are selected. Good appointments equal a good Senate. Bad appointments seem to equal a Harper Senate. You would think he would want to find a way to atone for that and make sure it doesn't happen again. Just a minimal bit of embarrassment leading to change would be nice to see. Alas, it seems he doesn't embarrass very easily, and maybe we will have to find another Prime Minister to do the right thing.

And what is the right thing? Just name good Senators.

How to do that? Elections? No – reasons to follow. Severely guided Prime Ministerial discretion? Yes – details below.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-de ... e15439418/

[Public_Domain]