Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon
Well... obviously they wouldn't be impartial, they'd be elected. Elected politicians aren't impartial. Actually what the Senate does right now is leave most stuff alone. What it will do if we empower it with elected Senators given the right to block and introduce legislation is be an active player in the process, not a 'sober second thought'. The Senate in the US is not just a 'sober second thought' house, it is extremely active in changing/approving/denying legislation. We'd be adding another huge (imo) layer of government where I'm not sure one is required. Better to improve the way the current (effective) unicameral system works as far as I'm concernd.
|
You cannot compare Canadian politics with US politics. Well you can, but it's full of holes. US politics is based around lobby groups unlike Canadian politics which based around the party system. Sure there are parties in the US, but no vote is along party lines, etc. There are different rules governing the different houses in Canada and the US and they are not designed to be the same. In the US they are supposed to work just like they do. In Canada, they would have a different role.
There are a few questions we'd have to have answered to see whether or not the Upper House would be effective. First, is it also based on the party system? If it is, you'd likely end up with a split Upper House in Canada a lot. If it isn't, (and it's not supposed to be,) you do have independant Senators who can think freely. Also, how long are their terms? If you give a Senator a seat for 10 years, they're going to be there through a number of governments. Who is going to watch the interactions between the Houses to ensure that there is no 'buying' of the Senate? Is every province going to have an equal voice in the Senate?
IMO, anything is better than the lack of checks and balances we have now. Even if the role of the Senate is just to report to Canadians on what is actually included in the bills, they're doing their jobs. How much do we really know about all the ins and outs of each bill that goes through? Not a heck of a lot. It would be nice to hear an outside source interpret the bills. (Keeping in mind that right now while we have a rare minority government communication is much more open.)
I just don't see that there are any negatives to electing a Senate. I know I'd rather pay the Senators to do something rather than the nothing they're doing right now. It's much easier to elect them than it would be to abolish them. Abolishing them would require a constitutional change and we don't really want to open that can of worms again...