babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
This is not crafty. It is major butt covering. Harper has shown time and time again that he is not much of a strategist. His only saving grace has been the inneptitude of 3 successive Liberal leaders. Period.
Only the foolish will be fooled by this.
No, it's not like America.
There the Senate is elected and equal to the House of Representatives.
In order for a Bill to become law, it must be passed in the Senate by a 2/3rds majority which means the Senate must read and deliberate the Bill thus also making the Senate effective.
When a Bill passes both the House and Senate (ie., Congress) the President does have the power to veto the Bill, however this means the Bill has to once again pass in the House (simple majority) and the Senate. If this happens, I believe the President is required by law to sign the Bill thus passing it into law. Most Presidents don't want to go through such a hassle when a Bill passes Congress.
U.S. Presidents are elected separately from Congress.
A President by law cannot "stack" or pressure the Senate (or House) to vote a particular way. This is the separation of Executive (President, White House) from the Legislative (Congress) branches of government.
Even if there is a majority of one of the parties in Congress with a President of the same party, this is no guarantee that Congress will cooperate with the President.
The comparison in this case with the U.S. is that Harper has been acting like a "regal" President/Prime Minister in that he has been following what Nixon and W Bush did: Extended/extending the power of the executive.
No. That means that if a Liberal or Liberal/NDP coalition government is elected while a Conservative majority Senate is still around, the dead hand of Herr Adolf Harper's Conservafascist government still influences Canadian politics.
The Senate should be reformed to be another check and balance for We the People and against the Executive. Not a check and balance for the Executive against the Legislative (Lower) House that represents We the People.
I say make it elected to provide another check and balance against the Executive (branch of government) and represent We the People.
End this check and balance for the Executive and the Prime Minister appointing Senators bullshit.
Do we really have no pundits in the room, ready to take a chance on a prediction?
How do you predict the three parties will respond to the request for unanimous consent?
Oh, forget it. The moment has passed, and you can read the answer in the media.
Some hate the idea of an elected Senate either becuase then it will compete for legitimacy with the House--
Then there is the issue that the Senate is stacked in favour of smaller provinces.
Then there is the issue of making it a proportional vote chamber.
At one time I thought this should be a chamber appointed by the provincial legislators-- requiring all party support in the provinces. Thing is, the Federal Provincial Power has been tilting away from the Federal government so I am not sure this would be as good an idea today as it might have been years ago.
Perhaps all party approval in the House could be a way to go -- thus eliminating people who are partisan as all parties could not agree to them.
But for sure no matter what -- it needs to be taken away from the PMO even if that means abolition.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-fail-in-attempt-to-fast-track-senate-reform/article1804626/
In addition it is yet another way to reward cronies. Here have an 8 year stint to pass my legislation and get a golden severance.
Bad enough that we have the pigs at the trough, can you imagine what it will be like with this much turn over. Do we then lower or eliminate their pensions? Who the hell is going to pay for about 3-4 times as many retired senators collecting a pension. Sounds like a budget issue as much as a democratic one.
The Conservatives' authoritarian anti-democratic record is their Achilles Heel. The opposition parties have a huge opening here. Harper and the Cons will be in big trouble if they can be framed as an out of touch, dictatorial government. The Conservatives will find themselves sitting on the opposition benches if democratic renewal becomes the next election's primary issue.
The NDP's platform on democratic renewal is strong. Abolishing the Senate is a winner. Not allowing the Prime Minister to unilaterally impose prorogation is a popular idea. Establishing fixed election dates that can not be circumvented by the PM is a great proposal. Open-list MMP could also win support. Supporting recall may also be worth looking at. Reducing political spending by parties and making voting easier via Internet voting and weekend polls are other ideas worth proposing.
I think you're really right about that being their achilles heel, JKR -- especially out west.
Latest Council of Canadians poll on climate change released this week.
Poll suggests Harper Government out of step with Canadians
Ugh, is the NDP really 'grudgingly prepared' to go along with shorter term limits for Senators?: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/893344--harper-government-los...
I strongly agree with Sean about how this just concentrates more power in the sitting PM's hands. It's the worst of both worlds: We lose the check and balance of history that the current system provides with none of the benefits that would come with an elected Senate.
My disgust with the defeat of the climate change bill really came from the way a snap vote was called with no debate and with many Senators absent, not because I wanted the constitutional role of the Senate to be changed, especially in such an idiotic manner.
read the article again. From the article it appears the NDP was prepared to see at least some of the cash for life aspect of the Senate removed. Now though the article clearly states that the NDP will have no truck or trade with such ideas and thinks it should be just abolished. Trying to reform a stinking cesspool is off the table from the article. So again I say re-read the article.
Yes, it seems that you're right. I was tired and reading quickly, ha.
Except that, unfortunately it isn't. The keystone to any democratic renewal platform is voting system reform. Want to abolish the Senate or make it elected? How you gonna do that, exactly, with the provinces willing to challenge you in court (and win) on a Constitutional challege? It's all just posturing unless you can amend the Constitution. Electing the House by proportional representation does not require any Constitutional amendment. Limiting the PM's unilateral power to prorogue is worthwhile, but it's tinkering at the edges. The real elephant in the room is achieving some measure of proportional representation - it's fundamental to changing everything from the poisonous political climate we now have, to breaking up unassailable party strongholds, to rolling back our increasing regionalization, to engaging more Canadians in their democracy. A few years of the House under PR might even make the Senate look so bad in comparison that there might be enough impetus to change it.
Electoral reform is by far the largest single improvement that could be made to democracy in Canada, and it can be done without opening up the Constitution. Unfortunately it's been completely absent from the NDP platform for years. Not a peep in Parliament: no motion or bills tabled, not a single press conference or announcement calling for electoral reform. The Critic, David Christopherson, hasn't said anything about it in years, and the party declined to participate in the Charter challenge to overturn the Election Act currently winding its way though the court system, soon to reach the Supreme Court (the Greens and NGOs are participating).
So yes, this is a golden opportunity for the NDP. If it can develop a stellar democratic reform platform and that is one of the major ballot questions in the upcoming election, Harper may be relegated to the opposition benches, with the NDP profiting like never before. There is a huge undercurrent of anti-establishment voter discontent that democratic reform can easily tap into: assail the institutions that keep these clowns in power, etc. Sad that the NDP isnt quite ready to capitalize on that yet.
Too bad, the NDP would have had an easier time taking the high ground on the issue of democratic renewal if it supported the Charter challenge.
Here's some news regarding the charter challenge:
Charter challenge in Quebec against first-past-the-post - videos explain the case
FVC intervenes in challenge to Quebec Elections Act - hearing set for February 8
YouTube - What is being asked of the courts - part 1.
YouTube - Importance of the case and question of infringement.
I understand why Jack Layton and many here are upset this legislation didn't pass. But to feign outrage over the senate blocking this is laughable. You know goddamn well Jack Layton would pull the same tricks to drive his agenda forward were the shoe on the other foot.
Troll alert!
Such a very amazing link!
Thanks you for the post.
[spam link removed--although this site could use more burlesque, if you ask me-CF]
After effects of the coup of 2008. Senate stacked with Tories.
"racial realist" is gone.
Absolutely. Especially in light of the astounding abrogation of democracy that just occurred, you would think that the NDP would want to dust off it's democratic reform credentials and actually come out with some sort of platform on it.
But at this point, with the deafening silence coming from the party on this, one has to rank the NDP below both the Conservatives and the Greens on democratic reform. And with their new critic, even the Liberals look set to overtake them (all it would take is a single bit of credible movement from the Liberals). The NDP could soon be bottom-of-the-barrel on what used to be one of their strongest issues. It's already costing them votes.
Sad.
www.ndp.ca/xfer/campaign2008/Platform_2008_EN.pdf (Page 39).
Perhaps it could have been more prominent, but it was there, so your above statement is untrue.
I think the NDP hasn't led a highly visible campaign for electoral reform because it does not want to turn electoral reform into a partisan issue. The NDP is only supported by 1 in 5 voters, if that, so If electoral reform became "that NDP issue" it would likely be impossible for it to get enough support to be enacted.
That being said, Broadbent has been electoral reform's biggest advocate among high level Canadian politicians and Layton has not been that far behind.
During the next election I think the NDP will come out with a very strong package on democratic renewal including support for a fair voting system, namely open-list MMP.
To clarify, I don't believe the senate can pass anything not passed by the House. I believe they can only defeat.
This is hilarious....mainly because it is untrue, and the desperation shown by yourself in trying to portray as true, as you do below, is the icing.
Are the Liberals getting that desperate? Because this below, like this above, shows nothing but desperate Liberal propaganda...
Perhaps if the Liberals actually looked at reality they would not be so "sadly" desperate? The NDP are higher in the polls than they have been since last election, and given the fact they have not been silent on the issue, as you have falsely tried to proclaim, I doubt it is costing them any votes.
Seriously, the Liberals must be having a desperation propaganda push on, given the level of crap floating about these days here.
Rick Merecer's rant on the Senate's behaviour was excellent.
http://www.cbc.ca/mercerreport/video.html
I think what Rick's saying at the end of his excellent senate rant is this. There won't be any democratic reforms until those in power and phony opposition in Ottawa are run out 'o town on a rail by Canadian voters.
How do you figure? Have we missed a new NDP initiative, bill, or announcement on electoral reform? Please provide details.
I should have clarified: when I say "nothing in years" I mean the last couple of years. The last thing of significance anyone heard on electoral reform from the NDP was during the 2008 campaign. Since then they've done bupkis. And when Broadbent was an MP, they actually had credibility on electoral reform. But now the NDP ranks somewhere between the Liberals and Bloc on it.
You were referring explicitly to platform. The platform for the next election will in all likelihood include something on electoral reform, but it obviously hasn't been released yet. And please provide examples of what the Liberals have done to justify your opinion.