Harper poised to appoint 18 Senators


Ron in Regina
Free Thinker
Avatar
#1
Source: --

Harper poised to appoint 18 Senators

OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper is poised to name as many new senators as he can before Christmas, Canwest News Service has learned.

There are 18 vacancies in the 105-seat Senate and Harper will try to fill as many of those slots as quickly as possible in order to put them out of reach of a Liberal-NDP coalition.

The Liberals will continue to hold the majority in the Senate even if Harper fills all 18 vacancies.

Each new senator will be a Conservative and is likely to share the prime minister's views on Senate reform, a senior government official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

In the last Parliament, the Harper government attempted some reforms, such as introducing eight-year term limits on senators. Currently, a senator remains in office until reaching the age of 75.

Legislation to change the Senate died with the last Parliament.

Harper and the Conservatives believe that the opportunity to reform the Senate will be lost for a generation if a Liberal-NDP coalition fills up the vacancies.
Both the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois have called for the Senate's abolition. The Liberals, on the other hand, have often been accused over the years of using Senate appointments as patronage plums.

But appointing senators could also help Harper address some of the regional inequities in his caucus. There is no one in the federal Conservative caucus or cabinet from the city of Montreal, Canada's second-largest urban region. And there are no Conservative MPs or cabinet members from the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. There are currently four senate vacancies in Quebec and one from Newfoundland and Labrador.

Senators receive an annual salary of $130,400.

The Liberals hold 58 seats in the Senate and the Conservatives hold 20. There are three senators who call themselves Progressive Conservatives, four who are independent and one senator who represents the Independent New Democratic Party. One other senator, Ontario's Anne Cools, was kicked out of the Conservative caucus after she spoke against the government's 2007 budget. She is listed as a "non-aligned" senator.

Since he took office in early 2006, Harper has filled two vacancies. Shortly after taking office, he made the controversial move of putting Michael Fortier, who had just been the co-chair of successful election campaign, into the Senate. Fortier resigned his Senate seat in September in order to run in the last general election, but did not get elected as an MP. He is not expected to be among those named to the Senate again.

The other appointment was Bert Brown from Alberta. Brown won a "senator-in-waiting" election in Alberta in 2004. The Alberta government of Ralph Klein ran that election partly in an effort to goad then-prime minister Paul Martin to take Senate reform seriously.

Earlier this year, the province of Saskatchewan passed legislation that would allow for elections in that province for senator. Saskatchewan has one vacant Senate seat right now.

But Harper cannot wait for elections in Saskatchewan or any other kind of broad consultative process. Parliament resumes on Jan. 26 with a throne speech, a budget will be tabled on Jan. 27, and both those items will precipitate confidence votes within days. If the government loses a confidence vote and if the Liberal-NDP coalition is still intact, it is likely that Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean will ask newly minted interim Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff to form a government.

The new senators would be appointed from across the country. There are four senate vacancies in Quebec; three each from British Columbia and Nova Scotia; two from New Brunswick and Ontario, and there is one senate spot open for each of Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Yukon, and Saskatchewan.
 
mabudon
Avatar
#2
I would imagine Harper should be working on what he's gonna be doing when parliament resumes, a guy in his position should NOT be doing this kind of thing at this time, we have to find out if he can even speak for Canada before he should be allowed to shape it IMO
 
Socrates the Greek
Avatar
#3


Harper's Senate plan blasted

Good day to all,


Harper will go down in the Canadian political history as the most spiteful, divisive and polarizing loser in the House of Commons ever.

What a joke, Brian Mulroney stuffed the senate like a thanks giving turkey in order to pass the GST because the opposition to the GST across the country was huge, and being Mulroney had no balls at the time to legislate the GST he borrowed the unqualified senators balls to show strength of agreement in the house.
Today chicken cowered Harper he feels inferior in the House of Commons and ran behind the GG skirt to avoid defeat.

Today Harper wants to reform the senate when in fact constitutionally being in the crisis Parliament is in he doesn’t have the constitutional right to appoint SENATORS @ $130.000 A YEAR TIMES 18 = $2.340.000 MILLION OF TAX PAYER MONEY when the country is hurting financially and people do not know if they will have a home to go to next year…..
While midget brain Doug Finley Conservative national campaign chairmansent out a fundraising letter slamming the Liberal party for short-circuiting its leadership selection process and quickly installing Ignatieff before party members could cast ballots. Finley called it a "stunning and unprecedented demonstration of Liberal contempt for our democratic rights."

Get these mega hypocrite losers out of office they will do irreversible damage to Canada.
 
Risus
Avatar
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Socrates the GreekView Post


Harper's Senate plan blasted
Good day to all,
Harper will go down in the Canadian political history as the most spiteful, divisive and polarizing loser in the House of Commons ever.
What a joke, Brian Mulroney stuffed the senate like a thanks giving turkey in order to pass the GST because the opposition to the GST across the country was huge, and being Mulroney had no balls at the time to legislate the GST he borrowed the...

Quote has been trimmed, See full post: View Post

Listen to the hypocrite. If you look and think, you will figure out that the majority of the senators are liberals appointed by liberal pinions in the past. Wake up, dude.
 
Risus
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by mabudonView Post

I would imagine Harper should be working on what he's gonna be doing when parliament resumes, a guy in his position should NOT be doing this kind of thing at this time, we have to find out if he can even speak for Canada before he should be allowed to shape it IMO

Unlike the liberals, some people can do 2 things at once....
 
Tonington
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by RisusView Post

Unlike the liberals, some people can do 2 things at once....

You don't know how to multi-quote?
 
Risus
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

You don't know how to multi-quote?

Yep, but in this case preferred not to....
 
Socrates the Greek
Avatar
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by RisusView Post

Listen to the hypocrite. If you look and think, you will figure out that the majority of the senators are liberals appointed by liberal pinions in the past. Wake up, dude.

Good day Harper, we are not talking about the legitimacy of the senators but rather the unqualified opportunity Harper chose to take in an effort to gather some indirect support in the house... So, when you take a look at the timing you will see that #1 the fact that parliament is stopped and Harper is going through the back door to implement a situation that will only benefit the Con party says nothing about Harper coming into a second chicken little term looking to help Canadians.
Instead the loser is pulling all the stops to create more criticism about his opponents.
And #2 when in fact the countries business has been put on the back burner...
Who is the hypocrite here.....................Do you support sneaky mentality?
 
Risus
Avatar
#9
soc, unlike the liberal leaders in the past, Harper and his cabinet, are capable of doing more than one thing at a time...

Quit whining....
 
Socrates the Greek
Avatar
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by RisusView Post

soc, unlike the liberal leaders in the past, Harper and his cabinet, are capable of doing more than one thing at a time...

Quit whining....

Hey I am not whining at all if anything I have front seat view of the political decapitation the Conservative one man show will face come end of January, pop corn is ready for the occasion. Who said Canadian politics are boring?... You have not seen anything yet..........forum friend or foe.
 
Risus
Avatar
#11
LOL, reread your posts! You are sounding like a kid who has lost his marbles.

Iggy will side with the budget. Wait and see.
 
Socrates the Greek
Avatar
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by RisusView Post

LOL, reread your posts! You are sounding like a kid who has lost his marbles.

Iggy will side with the budget. Wait and see.

Eggy will give Harper political rope to hang him self, if you think anything else you are dreaming in Technicolor......

 
Kreskin
Avatar
#13
No chance the ndp and liberals will want an elected senate. Heck, they don't want an elected pm.
 
Socrates the Greek
Avatar
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by KreskinView Post

No chance the ndp and liberals will want an elected senate. Heck, they don't want an elected pm.

Kreskin, talking about being desperate look at the Conservative caucus, Harper is pulling all the stops to hold on to Chicken Little power. Run and hide behind the GG's skirt, Stuff the senate like a thanks giving turky at a time not appropriate for the Canadian Tax payer, as well being in the midst of a parliamentary crisis paying out $2,3 Million per year unnecessarily and unjustifiably is plain wrong. Glad they got a minority in the 08 election.
 
Tonington
Avatar
#15
There's nothing wrong with an elected Senate...it would be better than the current method. Get our money's worth that way too. If they're elected, they might show up for work!
 
Socrates the Greek
Avatar
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

There's nothing wrong with an elected Senate...it would be better than the current method. Get our money's worth that way too. If they're elected, they might show up for work!


I agree with that measure, good for the people with no 99 year lease on the job paying for life of the worker when in fact some of these workers do not show up for work. But the time in which this is done, is self serving to Harper rather then the best interest of the people. $130.000 per year x 18 people at a time in which cuts are made it doesn’t work. Not good for the people. Plus Harper campaigned on smaller Government and from 30 ministers he had to show some hypocrisy by increasing his cabinet to an additional 8 men or women or mixed. Again bad for the people.




 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
Avatar
#17
Perhaps with a Conservative senate we will get to elect our senators. None of the Liberal senators ever showed much interest in having to justify their pork barreling.
With a con majority in the senate and a house that is willing to look at doing what is best for taxpayers instead of themselves it will happen.
If by some sad missfortune the opposition parties do manage to pull off their coup I will bet that instead of abolishing the senate they fight over who gets how many seats and giving unelected senate seats to the Bloc will cause an uprising.
 
Risus
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by Socrates the GreekView Post

Eggy will give Harper political rope to hang him self, if you think anything else you are dreaming in Technicolor......

Man you can't even spell the lib's leaders nickname.... its Iggy....
 
Risus
Avatar
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Socrates the GreekView Post

Kreskin, talking about being desperate look at the Conservative caucus, Harper is pulling all the stops to hold on to Chicken Little power. Run and hide behind the GG's skirt, Stuff the senate like a thanks giving turky at a time not appropriate for the Canadian Tax payer, as well being in the midst of a parliamentary crisis paying out $2,3 Million per year unnecessarily and unjustifiably is plain wrong. Glad they got a minority in the 08 election.

But the polls today are saying if there was an election next month, the conservatives would have a majority, so eat your heart out.... (Source: Global News)
 
Socrates the Greek
Avatar
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by RisusView Post

But the polls today are saying if there was an election next month, the conservatives would have a majority, so eat your heart out.... (Source: Global News)

Majority for Harper will happen only if he was to saturate Quebec with Conservative seats, after the coalition name calling to wards the Block the Conservative popularity in Quebec is dwindling by the day; I bet your poll has not factored that in. By the way thank you for my spelling correction on Iggy, I am sure I am not the only bad speller on the net....

 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
Avatar
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by RisusView Post

Listen to the hypocrite. If you look and think, you will figure out that the majority of the senators are liberals appointed by liberal pinions in the past. Wake up, dude.

Well THEY do it....

Supports the spoiled brat syndrome....

Eighteen seats huh.... Harpo should ask what's-his-name from Illinois how much a senate seat goes for these days....
 
Risus
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Socrates the GreekView Post

Majority for Harper will happen only if he was to saturate Quebec with Conservative seats, after the coalition name calling to wards the Block the Conservative popularity in Quebec is dwindling by the day; I bet your poll has not factored that in. By the way thank you for my spelling correction on Iggy, I am sure I am not the only bad speller on the net....

Its not my poll....

You have a mental block for the truth...
 
Ron in Regina
Free Thinker
Avatar
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

Well THEY do it....

Supports the spoiled brat syndrome....

Eighteen seats huh.... Harpo should ask what's-his-name from Illinois how much a senate seat goes for these days....


I don't think Harper needs to. He (and the Conservative Party) seem VERY capable of
raising funds from their supporters in donations of $1000 or less...The Conservative
Party is more than financially flush.
 
Ron in Regina
Free Thinker
Avatar
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by Socrates the GreekView Post

Majority for Harper will happen only if he was to saturate Quebec with Conservative seats, after the coalition name calling to wards the Block the Conservative popularity in Quebec is dwindling by the day; I bet your poll has not factored that in. By the way thank you for my spelling correction on Iggy, I am sure I am not the only bad speller on the net....


Good Day to you Socrates. If the Conservatives where to win a majority, I think it
would go down something very much like this:

-January 26th (or so) Harper introduces his budget, and it's fantastic...it spills cash
in all of the right directions in such a quantity that nobody can argue about it at all...
-Tacked onto the end of that budget it the "dump the $1.95/Party/Vote" Pork Barrel.
-The Liberals & Bloc & NDP overthrow the Conservative Government over that
budget.
-Harper goes to the GG, explains that the budget had everything in it that everyone
wanted, and he was still voted down, making the budget irrelevant to the Coalition.
-The GG calls another Election.
-Canada can see that the only reason the budget was turned down was to suck $$$
out'a their pockets in Pork Barrel $1.95/Party/Vote funds in tough financial times...
-Harper wins a Majority...the NDP becomes almost non-existent...the Liberals and
the Bloc wonder just what the Heck happened for the next four years...

That's just one senario, but that would assume that Stephen Harper was a fantastic
chess player, able to plan his moves several moves in advance. Oh well....
 
B00Mer
No Party Affiliation
Avatar
#25
Haper won't be happy until Canada is the 51st state.

He would rather tank the country, rather than work with the opposition. The guy is off balance, and i'm glad his days as PM are numbered.

Viva La Canada
 
mt_pockets1000
Avatar
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

There's nothing wrong with an elected Senate...it would be better than the current method. Get our money's worth that way too. If they're elected, they might show up for work!

Last night on the tube I saw these statistics flash across the screen. I'm posting the numbers from memory. They are accurate within 5%, 9 times out of ten.

Average number of days Canadian senators worked last year: 78
Average number of days Canadian MPs worked last year: 158
Average number of days Canadian citizens worked last year: 252

Suddenly I feel very tired. At least my appointed senators are well rested. And my elected MP is not doing too shabby either.
 
Vanni Fucci
Free Thinker
Avatar
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by RisusView Post

Listen to the hypocrite. If you look and think, you will figure out that the majority of the senators are liberals appointed by liberal pinions in the past. Wake up, dude.

Yep, appointed by a Liberal PM who had the confidence of the House, and in an active Parliament...

Harper knows he's not going to be in power much longer, and wants to ensure that the Con agenda is going strong long after he's gone...
 
pegger
No Party Affiliation
Avatar
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by RisusView Post

Listen to the hypocrite. If you look and think, you will figure out that the majority of the senators are liberals appointed by liberal pinions in the past. Wake up, dude.

Do you even know why hypocrisy means?

Please show me an instance where the Liberals even claimed that the Senate should be elected?

The only one showing hypocrisy in this instance is Mr. Harper. For the last, what 10 years (?), he has talked about how useless the senate is, and that is should be reformed. For him to now stack the senate is hypocritical, given his own statements.

Personally, I don't care if he appoints senators or not - but his actions speak again to his hypocrisy, that he has shown often. I do not hold him the Liberal statements or action - I hold him to his. Such as:

Promising open and accountable government - then shutting parliament to avoid a confidence vote (hypocrisy)
Speaking against an appointed senate - then appointing senators (hypocrisy)
Vowing to reduce the size of government - then increasing government spending by more than 2x inflation (hypocrisy)
Buying off the separatists in the past 2 budgets - then slamming the opposition for talking to them (hypocrisy)
Slamming Goodale for talking about taxing ITs, then taxing them 6 months later (hypocrisy).
Passing a fixed election date legislation - then calling an election (hypocrisy)
I could go on....

I have no respect for the man, and I expected better from him, and his party.

If you were an honest, open thinker - instead of a blind partisan - you would recognize that this man is a hypocrite and a power hungry sycophant, and realize that he is not the right man for the job.
 
Colpy
Conservative
Avatar
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by peggerView Post

Do you even know why hypocrisy means?

Please show me an instance where the Liberals even claimed that the Senate should be elected?

The only one showing hypocrisy in this instance is Mr. Harper. For the last, what 10 years (?), he has talked about how useless the senate is, and that is should be reformed. For him to now stack the senate is hypocritical, given his own statements.

Personally, I don't care if he appoints senators or not - but his actions speak again to his hypocrisy, that he has shown often. I do not hold him the Liberal statements or action - I hold him to his. Such as:

Promising open and accountable government - then shutting parliament to avoid a confidence vote (hypocrisy)
Speaking against an appointed senate - then appointing senators (hypocrisy)
Vowing to reduce the size of government - then increasing government spending by more than 2x inflation (hypocrisy)
Buying off the separatists in the past 2 budgets - then slamming the opposition for talking to them (hypocrisy)
Slamming Goodale for talking about taxing ITs, then taxing them 6 months later (hypocrisy).
Passing a fixed election date legislation - then calling an election (hypocrisy)
I could go on....

I have no respect for the man, and I expected better from him, and his party.

If you were an honest, open thinker - instead of a blind partisan - you would recognize that this man is a hypocrite and a power hungry sycophant, and realize that he is not the right man for the job.

Okay.....let me get this straight......

The Liberals have been "stacking" the Senate for about 100 years.

Harper wanted the Liberals to appoint elected Senators when they were in power. The Liberals refused, and continued "stacking" the Senate.

Harper, when elected, does not appoint Senators, because he wishes to see elected Senators elevated to the chamber.

This results in a chamber badly tilted towards Liberal partisans, in a political situation that is unstable, at best.

Harper, with no other option rather than be challenged by a Senate "stacked" with Liberals, regretfully takes his only option, to fill the 18 seats available with Conservatives.......and even that does not bring the chamber into balance, it simply gives Conservatives a reasonable representation there......

The Liberals scream "foul".....And that is hypocrisy.....on the Liberal side.
 
Risus
#30
What Colpy said... I agree
 

Similar Threads

53
Don't Appoint A New GG After Jean's Term, Andrew Coyne
by dumpthemonarchy | Nov 15th, 2009
109
Harper Appoints Nine Senators
by FiveParadox | Sep 1st, 2009
4
Open hearings to appoint judges in Canada
by dumpthemonarchy | Nov 4th, 2005
3
Ottawa Poised to become Big Brother
by Bob Carrick | Sep 4th, 2002
no new posts