Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Democracy in its current form may not be perfect, but an elected Senate is far superior to the patronage filled one that exists today. Also, with an elected Senate, voters could, for example, give the Conservatives a majority in the House of Commons, but the Liberals one in the Senate to check power.
|
I'm just saying, why even bother having a senate at all if it can't do what it is supposed to? We have a GG that isn't elected. We have a queen that isn't elected. Having a senate that is unelected isn't any worse than that. Abolishing it outright would be cheaper, more democratic and less of a poison pill than giving us redundant (and neutered) elected body.
The real problem is that our parliamentary system is not a 100% pure democracy to begin with. For example, if it was, you'd see minority groups like First Nations in urban areas getting represented - but that never happens. The people who created the system knew that it had flaws and the senate is designed to address those and fit within the system we have. Until we have more representative system, we might as well keep the senate the way it is as the appointments in senate are meant to give representation to people the political system leaves behind.
I think it would be perfect to have all our officials elected (including judges for that matter), but unless you change the whole structure of the government, an elected senate would have the same problems that an elected parliament has (with no check or balance to mitigate it).