Senate Elections

[Hank C]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...7/klein_senate_060227/20060227?hub=TopStories

Feds to hold Senate elections this fall: Klein

EDMONTON — Alberta Premier Ralph Klein says Prime Minister Stephen Harper has promised to hold Canada's first official Senate elections this fall.
But Klein says the prime minister did not indicate how the elections would be carried out, which leaves open the question of whether the provinces will be responsible for electing senators.
Electing senators was a key promise for Harper during the recent federal election campaign, but he surprised many Canadians by naming Quebec's Michael Fortier to the Senate as part of the recent cabinet appointments.
Alberta has asked voters in three successive elections to choose would-be senators, however the federal government has never honoured those results.
Klein says the prime minister also promised at a meeting with the premiers last Friday in Ottawa to give the next available Senate seat to Bert Brown, one of four senators-in-waiting chosen by Alberta voters in the 2004 provincial election.
But the Alberta premier says Harper has decided not to pursue other Senate reform measures because it would be problematic to make the required changes to the Constitution.

 

[FiveParadox]

Senate Reform Problematic

Yes, reforming the Constitution Acts in relation to the selection of Senators would be a troublesome feat, indeed; not only would such a thing require a resolution from the House of Commons, but of the Senate in addition; in addition, at least seven Legislative Assemblies of the Provinces, representing at least one-half of the people of Canada according to the most recent census, must pass resolutions providing for the same.

:!: Edit : Resolved a formatting problem.

:?: Footnote
For the formulae for amending the Constitution Acts, please click here to view the Constitution Act, 1982 and refer to Sections 38(1) and 42(1)(b).

 

[Finder]

However Paradox, there is away around this. The Provinces, or whatnot no matter how we chose to elect a senator, once done this act does not make the Senator, but then by a new tradition in parliment is still appointed by the PM. This can be done until the time we feel we need it to be in the constitution.

 

[Finder]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...0301/harper_senate_060301/20060301?hub=Canada


I'll give Harper Credit if he pull's this off properly. Hopefully we have an elected senate by next election.

I'm also Hopeful, with Ed's comment on the abolished or reformed senate, as it means the NDP do have limited support at least for a reformed/elected senate and doesn't just wish to dismantel it.

There's a political reason why the New Democrats would like to see it removed... generally Social Democrats don't really care that much about checks and balances and often rule on Plebisite and by pure democratic ways (ie Mob rules). Though this is not always true.

I really do hope the NDP once they seethat the Senate may become a democratic body of government support the reform of the senate completely and leave the elimination of the senate behind to a threat against an undemocratic senate of the past.

 

[Finder]

Liberal Ontario Premier McGuinty says Senate should be abolished. He back treks a little but then kills the notion of an elected senate based on population which he appeared to semi support in his argument by saying two parts of government based on the same electorate is redunant.

I disagree with him of course and I do not think a elected senate would have to be purely based on population.

Will be interesting to see what happens. My best guess is Harper is still lieing and won't do anything about the senate and we will be seeing more senate appointments.

edit
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...02/senate_mcguinty_060302/20060302?hub=Canada

 

[FiveParadox]

Finder, from what I have read from the link you provided, I must conclude that the Right Honourable Stephen Harper must have taken some sort of comprehension-compromising drug — the Constitution Acts are quite clear in that reforms to the selection of Senators requires the consent of the House, the Senate, the seven legislatures, and fifty percent of the citizens of Canada.

The only way to reform the Senate (in terms of an election simultaneous with that of the House) would be to require Senators to resign at the end of each Parliament (each Senator would be required to send an address to the Governor General in order for the seat to become vacant, as per Section 30 of the Constitution Act, 1982).

Thereafter, an informal election would have to take place for Senators, after which the Governor General would appoint the Senators recommended by the election back to the Senate. However, this poses problems; in Québec, there are twenty-four Senatorial Divisions — but this isn't the case in the other Provinces. There are Senators that represent the other Provinces in their entirety, period.

I would be in favour of Senators keeping their seats for longer than Members of Parliament — I think that the "memory of the Senate" is something that we should strive to retain. Mr. Harper must keep in mind though, that if there are dissenting Senators who refuse to resign at the end of a Parliament, there is nothing that the Prime Minister, nor his Government, can do to have such a Senator removed.

 

[Finder]

Paradox, I'm not too sure what he is thinking too. I think amending the constitution is needed and I hope Harper see's the need.

I mean it is possible they may just make an amendment. When you consider that many Premiers may have problems with even an elected senate because of the make up and then some political parties prefer it being removed completely and the fact most Canadians don't care about the Senate.... I don't know. first if Harper really wants to make a changes he will have to educate the puplic on the immportance of having an elected senate and why abolishing the senate isn't the answer. Then I think we will have to amend the con, which might be a big problem depending on what happend with the puplics aditude towards the Senate.

Will be interesting to watch this unfold. I'm sure there's some sort of loophole here anyhow. I just havn't had the time to find it, In reguards that is to forcing Senators to retire.