Now that we have a majority government and can pass Senate reform, that should be addressed as soon as possible when Parliament resumes. It did not look good to appoint 3 defeated candidates to the upper chamber so soon after the election, and many on the right and left were not happy about it. All 3 are very qualified people who did collect a combined 51,664 votes on May 2nd. Personally I believe that Senators should be elected and have term limits; but I'm not screaming from the roof top over these appointments because I believe that the Prime Minister will deliver on this promise in due course. I'd just like to see the reforms sooner rather than later.
And I will thank Liberals not to get high and mighty about Senate appointments; as most Liberals sitting in the Senate owe their jobs to patronage. The NDP are justified to complain about this.
The PM needed an absolute majority in the Senate before June 2nd, to get the chairmanship of committees. Without these 3, the liberals could still have had chairmanships and been able to stall legislation or change it. Chairmanships are only changed after an election or prorogation. The PM could not allow liberals to stall and defeat everything for 4 yrs.
ReplyDeleteEven if 2 of the 3 new ones resign within a few months, those chairmanships can't be changed.
There are around 15 vacancies to occur within 5 yrs.
Senate Reform always sounds like a much better idea when you're in Opposition than when you're in power.
ReplyDeleteI'd say you're being a little over-optimistic about Harper here. There was no need to name these three to the Senate -- he already has a majority there and one of them publicly declared he wouldn't accept reappointment (not that that's stopping him now that the handout's been offered). I do believe Harper once agreed that an elected Senate would be a good idea, but it's hard to believe this is still something that interests him. He's let partisan interests run away from principle here.
Skip it, I see the math. maryT is right.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I am still skeptical that there will be Senate reform. If your view of the Senate is that you have to stack it with loyalists to make sure every bill gets through, you're NEVER going to let it go out to be elected by voters. Those two positions just aren't going to be reconciled.
I'm beginning to agree with the NDP. Scrap the Senate completely.
No one is taking senate reform seriously yet, so I do not have a problem with what he did. Until the provinces and adults in parliament want to talk, I have no problem with his filling vacancies. In time, he will have enough people who actually believe in reform/renewal. This is definitely NOT a priority within the 4-year mandate. He needs the draft legislation passed and to watch out for the coming bond disaster in the US.
ReplyDeleteLike the reallocation of seats, senate elections can only really be implemented after the next election. Just about all of the provinces are having elections in the next 2 years, and senatorial elections likely won't take place on their own. He can move on 8 year terms, however those will have to wait for new senators to be appointed. I think everyone has to get used to the idea that Mr. Harper will appoint 15 more senators (unless he can maintain a majority in the Senate without them) and Senate elections will take place in conjunction with the next federal election in 2015.
ReplyDeleteI 'spose people will forget about this in a few months whether PMSH does anything or not. Catnip for the media tho - something to howel over, wax indignant and stuff. But like u i also 'spects he will make some improvements to the senate.
ReplyDeleteAgent Smith
I doubt Harper will do anything to reform the Senate now that he's in a majority position.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like the Conservatives will govern much like the Liberals,with some minor differences on gun control and a few other items that appeal to his base.
Hopefully, this will include getting rid of the Wheat Board and making membership in all Marketing Boards voluntary, but we'll see.
On the controversial items, abortion, immigration reform, the HRC's, CBC funding, revisiting the Charter to deny Charter rights to anyone who sets foot on Canadian soil,constant pandering to Quebec, I seriously doubt he'll do anything much different than the Liberals.
Again, we'll see,I hope we won't be disappointed.
Anon comments: "I 'spose people will forget about this in a few months "
ReplyDeleteGosh, given the nature of this issue -- all optics, no substance -- I am optimistic that they will forget about it by Friday (like tomorrow). I have decided that some people are addicted to hating Harper -- if it is not one thing, it's another. Media is good at feeding anger.
Didn't a motion to elect Senators come forward in the past. Wasn't it Jack (John) Layton who helped vote it down. If so, then Layton can stop squawking, he only has himself to blame.
ReplyDeleteI think a lot of things layton voted against (without reading) will come back to haunt him.
ReplyDeleteThere are 4 MORE Quebec Senate seats coming due in the next 2 years..... Layton would be nuts to not support PMSH and go lobby Charest for Senate elections with next prov election,
ReplyDelete4 NDP Senators Jack!!!
When Stephen Harper first became PM he was slightly idealistic, e.g. in his attempt to appoint Gwyn Morgan to chair the public appointment commission. However, the Liberals and NDP have taught him many a rough lesson,which he has learned well.
ReplyDeleteIf the Senate actually had some useful function to perform, I think they should all be elected.
ReplyDeleteIt's heartening to see many Conservative supporters criticising the appointments but this latest round is more galling than any previous ones I can recall. Two senators were appointed less than a year ago in order to facilitate government action in the Senate then they resign to run for a seat in the House of Commons then they're reappointed because they lost.
ReplyDeleteCynical.