Senate Not So Stacked or The Missing Harumph!

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
YouTube - ‪Blazing Saddles - We Must Do Something! Harrumph!‬‏

A Conservative senator is blasting his caucus colleagues for opposing Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s plans to reform the Red Chamber.

“Every senator in this caucus needs to decide where their loyalty should be and must be,” Bert Brown wrote his Senate colleagues Wednesday.

“The answer is simple; our loyalty is to the man who brought us here, the man who has wanted Senate reform since he entered politics, the Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper.”

The CBC reported that the Harper government has changed plans to introduce legislation in the Senate that would permit the election of senators, provided provincial premiers agreed, and that would impose term limits on new and existing senators.

The government still plans to proceed with the legislation, but Mr. Harper has apparently decided to introduce the bills in the House of Commons first.

Some senators appointed by Mr. Harper appear to object to the initial plan to limit senators to a single eight-year term, saying a longer tenure would ensure greater independence. Negotiations over what the actual term limit should be have grown heated, despite an apparent compromise that would set the limit at nine years.

According to Mr. Brown’s letter, “[Democratic Reform] Minister [Tim] Uppal was showered with complaints about Senate elections and a nine year term,” during a meeting Tuesday of the Senate caucus.

Mr. Brown reminded his colleagues the Prime Minister had appointed a raft of Conservative senators in order to ensure that his plans for Senate reform overcame Liberal opposition.

If Conservative senators oppose the legislation, it could fail to clear the Red Chamber and become law.

The Harper appointments “were there to get a majority vote for reform,” Mr. Brown reminded the Conservative caucus.

Mr. Brown was appointed to the Senate in 2007, after earlier senatorial elections in Alberta. He is a staunch advocate of Senate reform.

Most premiers oppose the Conservative plans to permit senatorial elections with provincial consent. Quebec is threatening to take the government to court if the legislation passes.

Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae said the controversy simply reflects the “confusion” within Conservative ranks over the legislation, which he said should be referred to the Supreme Court first in any case to determine if it is constitutional.

“There is a real problem with the way the government is proceeding,” he told reporters outside the House of Commons.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
YouTube - ‪Blazing Saddles - We Must Do Something! Harrumph!‬‏

A Conservative senator is blasting his caucus colleagues for opposing Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s plans to reform the Red Chamber.

“Every senator in this caucus needs to decide where their loyalty should be and must be,” Bert Brown wrote his Senate colleagues Wednesday.

“The answer is simple; our loyalty is to the man who brought us here, the man who has wanted Senate reform since he entered politics, the Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper.”

The CBC reported that the Harper government has changed plans to introduce legislation in the Senate that would permit the election of senators, provided provincial premiers agreed, and that would impose term limits on new and existing senators.

The government still plans to proceed with the legislation, but Mr. Harper has apparently decided to introduce the bills in the House of Commons first.

Some senators appointed by Mr. Harper appear to object to the initial plan to limit senators to a single eight-year term, saying a longer tenure would ensure greater independence. Negotiations over what the actual term limit should be have grown heated, despite an apparent compromise that would set the limit at nine years.

According to Mr. Brown’s letter, “[Democratic Reform] Minister [Tim] Uppal was showered with complaints about Senate elections and a nine year term,” during a meeting Tuesday of the Senate caucus.

Mr. Brown reminded his colleagues the Prime Minister had appointed a raft of Conservative senators in order to ensure that his plans for Senate reform overcame Liberal opposition.

If Conservative senators oppose the legislation, it could fail to clear the Red Chamber and become law.

The Harper appointments “were there to get a majority vote for reform,” Mr. Brown reminded the Conservative caucus.

Mr. Brown was appointed to the Senate in 2007, after earlier senatorial elections in Alberta. He is a staunch advocate of Senate reform.

Most premiers oppose the Conservative plans to permit senatorial elections with provincial consent. Quebec is threatening to take the government to court if the legislation passes.

Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae said the controversy simply reflects the “confusion” within Conservative ranks over the legislation, which he said should be referred to the Supreme Court first in any case to determine if it is constitutional.

“There is a real problem with the way the government is proceeding,” he told reporters outside the House of Commons.

Completely outrageous!

Especially as Harper refrained from appointing senators until it became obvious that the Liberals were going to use their majority in the Upper House to defy the will of the Commons......then he made every newly appointed senator promise to support Senate reform when the time came.....

Now they want to renege.....I guess they like the big money, no work for life deal.

It is mightily hard to find an honest man, Diogenes.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
Senators should work for a dollar a day plus expenses. That way we would get ones that truly want to serve their country instead of high paid prostitutes.
 

Durry

House Member
May 18, 2010
4,709
286
83
Canada
If there is going to be selected senators, they should be selected from the "Have" provinces. The "have not" provinces have shown they cannot manage their provinces responsibly, so they should not be in a position to mis-manage Canada as a whole as well.

Those provinces that contribute most, should have the largest representation in the Senate. It's only fair, if you contribute the most, you get to oversee if what you contributed is getting spent wisely!!
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
If there is going to be selected senators, they should be selected from the "Have" provinces. The "have not" provinces have shown they cannot manage their provinces responsibly, so they should not be in a position to mis-manage Canada as a whole as well.

Those provinces that contribute most, should have the largest representation in the Senate. It's only fair, if you contribute the most, you get to oversee if what you contributed is getting spent wisely!!

Well, that's a liberal load of BS.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
So ontario gets none and Nfld gets,what,five ?

Actually those sneaky Newfoundlanders have sneaked into the have category, much to their chagrin.

If there is going to be selected senators, they should be selected from the "Have" provinces. The "have not" provinces have shown they cannot manage their provinces responsibly, so they should not be in a position to mis-manage Canada as a whole as well.

Those provinces that contribute most, should have the largest representation in the Senate. It's only fair, if you contribute the most, you get to oversee if what you contributed is getting spent wisely!!


Right - that would give Alberta 70 Senators and the rest 34. Seems fair to me.