Harper to fill 18 Senate seats with Tory loyalists

[calculoso]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...tories&s_name=

OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper plans to fill 18 vacancies in the unelected Senate with Conservative loyalists before Christmas, CTV News has learned.

Sources said Harper is concerned the Senate committee system isn't working properly because there are only 20 Conservative senators sitting in the Liberal-dominated Red Chamber.

But according to insiders, what really drove Harper to move quickly and fill the vacant Senate seats is the possibility of losing political power in January at the hands of the Liberal-NDP coalition.

....

"It would be irresponsible to have this unelected coalition government stack the Senate with their supporters," said one Conservative insider.

Harper had campaigned on replacing the unelected body with elected Senators. Before the fall election, the Tories had proposed legislation to allow for their appointment in provinces that held Senate elections, and limit their terms to just eight years.

....

An insider said Harper would ask anyone he appoints to agree to step down and run in a Senate election if new legislation is ever implemented.

It's too bad that an elected senate hasn't become a reality yet. At least this should even out the political representation in the Senate, even though it will be lopsided - 38/105 instead of 20/105.

[Rerun]

Watch now how many NDP and Liberal supporters start going on about how this is another of Harper's campaign promises that he's broken. Even though an un-elected senate is EXACTLY what they want.

[Bobblehead]

I would have thought since he had the session prorogued to avoid losing confidence that this is the type of thing that would have been blocked by the Governor General before granting prorogation.

Edit: how did there get to be 18 vacancies - have the CPC been waiting for provinces to elect whom he should appoint?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I would have thought since he had the session prorogued to avoid losing confidence that this is the type of thing that would have been blocked by the Governor General before granting prorogation.

I don't believe that appointing senators is blocked since its not something that passes through the house.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't believe that appointing senators is blocked since its not something that passes through the house.

The Governor General has the authority to prevent this, or any other activity that falls outside the regular "running of the country" type of stuff. This is typically what happens when the session is prorogued before an election.

I'm just a bit surprised is all.

As Calculoso points out, it isn't going to swing the balance of power in the Senate, so it seems like a questionable strategy.

[Resolute 14]

It would take a long string of Tory governments - or Liberal respect of the voting habits of all regions (never happen) for the balance to swing. However, putting 18 tories in now is 18 fewer seats the Liberals could stack the Senate with should they persist in the coup.

Any way you slice it, the Senate needs a massive overhaul.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Edit: how did there get to be 18 vacancies - have the CPC been waiting for provinces to elect whom he should appoint?

The government has made a longstanding habit of ignoring Senate vacancies. At one point early in the Martin era, I believe we only had two sitting Senators representing Alberta. The Liberals simply ignored the open seats. Of course, when they did finally fill them, they filled them with Liberals.

If the Senate is to remain unelected, then the appointments should not be coming from Ottawa, but rather from the provinces themselves.

[Ronald Pagan]

Any way you slice it, the Senate needs a massive overhaul.

If by overhaul you mean abolishment then yes, I would agree.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It would take a long string of Tory governments - or Liberal respect of the voting habits of all regions (never happen) for the balance to swing. However, putting 18 tories in now is 18 fewer seats the Liberals could stack the Senate with should they persist in the coup.

Any way you slice it, the Senate needs a massive overhaul.

Agreed on the need for a massive overhaul, and honestly making the positions elected is only one small part. Just imagine how hard it would be to get anything passed if a ruling party had a minority in both the house and the senate, if the senate was actually more than just a rubber stamp.

That said, I think Harper is entirely within his right to appoint a bunch of Conservative supporters to senate seats. Balance is always good, and right now the senate has none of that.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Edit: how did there get to be 18 vacancies - have the CPC been waiting for provinces to elect whom he should appoint?

Before the fall election, the Tories had proposed legislation to allow for their appointment in provinces that held Senate elections, and limit their terms to just eight years.

Harper has been trying to get this legislation passed... thus he didn't want to appoint any senators. Unfortunately, the opposition in the House of Commons, has been dragging their heels on it, since they are not in favor of an elected senate.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

If by overhaul you mean abolishment then yes, I would agree.

Abolishment would eliminate any hope of Canadians outside of Ontario and Quebec ever having a legitimate voice in federal politics.

[Bobblehead]

The only reason I don't like the idea of an elected Senate is I don't like the thought of another house as dysfunctional as the cluster**** we have just gone through.

I would agree to a lot of changes, but seeing partisan politics x2 and elections x2 would suck. Set term limits, age limits, one term per member, minimum attendance requirements, etc, but once appointed I want smart people weighing the bills based up their own knowledge, not based on what party whip has told them to do. A Senator should not be beholden to anyone beyond the the Canadian public. Not appeasing a political party, not positioning himself for re-election, but for doing the right thing as he sees it to be. A naïve wish, but how I see it.

[Ronald Pagan]

An empowered Senate is the last thing this country needs IMO.

Canadian federalism is already a more than ample check on the federal government's legislative power.

It's hard enough to pass laws in this country. Ask yourself whether a real Senate would be a bane or a benefit. I'd err on the side of caution.

Oh yeah, and the rest of Canada has no legitimate voice in the federal government? Weird thing to say.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

It's hard enough to pass laws in this country. Ask yourself whether a real Senate would be a bane or a benefit. I'd err on the side of caution.

Just look at the current mess we are in right now.

A real Senate, a real EEE Senate would ensure that the things Canadians have overwhelmingly rejected - i.e. the New Democrats having any say in financial matters - would not come to power.

A real Senate would be a benefit.

[snowdude]

-Forged birth certificate?
$50
-Purchase price of property?
>$4000
-Updated resume?
$0.25

-Serving as a Senator for most of the rest of my natural life?
Priceless

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

The only reason I don't like the idea of an elected Senate is I don't like the thought of another house as dysfunctional as the cluster**** we have just gone through.

I would agree to a lot of changes, but seeing partisan politics x2 and elections x2 would suck. Set term limits, age limits, one term per member, minimum attendance requirements, etc, but once appointed I want smart people weighing the bills based up their own knowledge, not based on what party whip has told them to do. A Senator should not be beholden to anyone beyond the the Canadian public. Not appeasing a political party, not positioning himself for re-election, but for doing the right thing as he sees it to be. A naïve wish, but how I see it.

Agreed.

The ideal situation would be to have elected senators from each province, with no party affiliation. They should vote according to what is in the best interests of their province.
I am also happy with the proposal of a fixed 8 year term. Also I believe Senate elections should be staggered. So that every 2 years, 1/4 of the Senate seats are up for renewal. That way you will always be getting new people in there, with new ideas.
I would also like to see more of a balanced number of seats allotted to each province as in the Triple E Senate

‘Triple-E’ Proposals: An Equal, Elected & Effective Senate

During the 1980s, a new approach to Senate reform, commonly referred to as the “Triple-E Senate,” began to receive public and scholarly attention. This approach to reform supports a Senate that is:

• Equal: A reformed Senate should have greater equality in provincial representation, with a more equal distribution of Senate seats among provinces.

• Elected: The Senate should be more democratic with members directly elected by citizens, rather than being appointed by the federal government.

• Effective: The Senate should have effective legislative powers, which it could use to play a greater role in the federal legislative process.

[Ronald Pagan]

Nobody's addressed my most salient point. The provinces themselves act as a senate under Canadian Federalism. A regional senate is redundant creating another needless and potentially very harmful new check on the federal government's legislative powers.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

An empowered Senate is the last thing this country needs IMO.

I disagree. It is an institution, that if properly reformed, can be quite effective.

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

Canadian federalism is already a more than ample check on the federal government's legislative power.

Not true.... particularly in government that has a majority.

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

It's hard enough to pass laws in this country. Ask yourself whether a real Senate would be a bane or a benefit. I'd err on the side of caution.

Definitely a benefit. A place where sober second thought should take place, unencumbered by party politics.

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

Oh yeah, and the rest of Canada has no legitimate voice in the federal government? Weird thing to say.

Number of Ontario and Quebec MP's = 181
Rest of Canada = 127

Need I say more?

[troutman]

Treason! Undemocratic! Coup D'etat!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by troutman

Treason! Undemocratic! Coup D'etat!

Yes, but remember that the first thing that happens in any revolution or coup is that they shoot the lawyers.