The Senate - Abolish - Reform - Leave it alone?

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

If you abolish the Senate, then every province not named Ontario and Quebec might as well just stop wasting the time and money voting on MPs as well.

The Senate needs reform. Elected, fixed terms, and with a sufficient number of Senators to balance Canada's disparate regions against the population-focused House of Commons. I used to be fully in support of the EEE senate idea, but the challenge to the equap part would always be the risk of gridlock if the Senate was led by a party different than the leaders in the House.

But how does abolishing the senate affect the seat dominance of Ontario and Quebec now? The senate is ineffective; we don't really want them with power, as they are unelected and may not have any real connection with the region they supposedly represent (as is clear in the Senate spending scandal).
Fact is, Ontario and Quebec have the most seats. They could control everything based on numbers, but they are not always aligned (Alberta and Quebec are more aligned on many issues than most people think). Quebec is likely overrepresented based on population, but so too are the Maritime provinces.

[Resolute 14]

That's the point of reform, FBS. To mitigate or eliminate current problems.

Originally Posted by Jacks

Any change will require a constitutional amendment. If you try to bump up the number of senators in the west there will surely be court challenges. The way that judges have become so activist these days I can't see it being allowed.

That hasn't been the case historically. The size of the Senate has been adjusted several times throughout Canada's history - most recently in 1999 - without the need for anything beyond an act of parliament.

[Jacks]

You're right but if you did anything to water down Quebec and Ontario's numbers they would surely take it to the courts. The way the higher courts have been pushing their boundries lately I wouldn't be surprised if they shot down that proposal too.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Understood on why to reform, but I still question whether a EEE Senate would actually help. My guess is that it would be more expensive, at least as partisan and potentially lead to more compromise, in the negative sense. I don't personally want a US style senate. What would be your vision?

[HOWITZER]

Honest question: if you abolish the Senate what takes its place to review bills passed by the house? Somebody has to look it down and say "yeah this makes sense", right? What would prevent a government from passing super partisan bills? Does everything at that point have to go through the supreme court?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by HOWITZER

Honest question: if you abolish the Senate what takes its place to review bills passed by the house? Somebody has to look it down and say "yeah this makes sense", right? What would prevent a government from passing super partisan bills? Does everything at that point have to go through the supreme court?

What stop this now. Outside of bills related to the senate what has the senate sent back.

The answer of who reviews the bills is that the Supreme Court will ensure rights of citizens are maintained and the threat of elections keeps the government in line. Harper routinely gets bills that the Supreme Court objects to. Perhaps a better answer to your question is that if we abolished the senate today absolutely nothing would change as the senate currently does absolutely nothing in terms of providing good governance.

[PostandIn]

I'm in favour of flipping the Senate from a revenue sink hole to a revenue generator where well-monied Canadians can buy peerages similar to the UK. The Duke of Bowness, the Earl of Roxboro. Let them sit in the Senate a few times a year to compare portfolios and Rolex's n' stuff. Maybe host a meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations. They would have no role to play in even rubber stamping legislation from the Commons but they could have fancy G of C stationery and business cards, all for a price.

[CroFlames]

Abolish it after I retire from being a Senator.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by GGG

What stop this now. Outside of bills related to the senate what has the senate sent back.

The answer of who reviews the bills is that the Supreme Court will ensure rights of citizens are maintained and the threat of elections keeps the government in line. Harper routinely gets bills that the Supreme Court objects to. Perhaps a better answer to your question is that if we abolished the senate today absolutely nothing would change as the senate currently does absolutely nothing in terms of providing good governance.

That is certainly my view of the Senate.

I suppose it all depends on your perspective. I see no great loss if the Senate is abolished. If the dream is to create another body to improve governance, I suppose abolishing it doesn't do anything to improve governance. Still not sure an elected Senate really helps much.

[Slava]

It's interesting to me that one of the things Harper was adamant about ten years ago was senate reform, and while he has done nothing on the topic, the other parties are bringing up the topic. The others seem to have stances and arguments while Harper has just dithered and offered little or nothing on the topic.