The Rants of Issachar
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Senators
I was listening to the news on the way to work this morning and I heard the announcer saying "Senator so and so says...", and all I could think was "who cares?". What conceivable legitimacy does a senator have? It's an indefinite unelected appointment that is decided on by a single man who is himself not directly elected by the entire electorate. The appointment is not vetted by elected officials and is normally used these days as a way of rewarding political friends.
Politicians bleat on about democratic renewal, and yet this stupid situation continues. Senators should be elected. I defy anyone to justify anything else. We can argue about methods of election or about how the senate seats should be distributed, but appointments of posts that collectively have full veto power over any legislation is just anti-democratic. Martin's sad attempts at diversion by whining about piecemeal reform is just silly. That argument boils down to "We can't fix everything, so let's not bother improving anything".
If the Liberals leave office without changing how senators are appointed then they either don't know what democracy is or they don't really believe in it. If the Conservatives take the government and don't change the senate system than they've betrayed us. I for one will be watching this.
Politicians bleat on about democratic renewal, and yet this stupid situation continues. Senators should be elected. I defy anyone to justify anything else. We can argue about methods of election or about how the senate seats should be distributed, but appointments of posts that collectively have full veto power over any legislation is just anti-democratic. Martin's sad attempts at diversion by whining about piecemeal reform is just silly. That argument boils down to "We can't fix everything, so let's not bother improving anything".
If the Liberals leave office without changing how senators are appointed then they either don't know what democracy is or they don't really believe in it. If the Conservatives take the government and don't change the senate system than they've betrayed us. I for one will be watching this.
2 Comments:
Posted by: 
I agree. The old model of the aristocracy given a somber second thought to the lunatic ravings of the great unwashed mob in the commons is more than a little outdated.
But the senate should not just be elected, it should be equal too. Similar to the US federal senate, only without the Republicans :)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the Commons overide the Senate? Or you can just do what Brian Mulroney did, and create new Senate seats to give your party the majority.
CB.
I agree. The old model of the aristocracy given a somber second thought to the lunatic ravings of the great unwashed mob in the commons is more than a little outdated.But the senate should not just be elected, it should be equal too. Similar to the US federal senate, only without the Republicans :)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the Commons overide the Senate? Or you can just do what Brian Mulroney did, and create new Senate seats to give your party the majority.
CB.
Posted by: 
issacharThe Commons can't overide the Senate. If a bill doesn't pass both houses in identical form it doesn't become law. It also has to get royal assent, but that's a technicality.
Bills can originate in either house, (though they typically originate in the Commons), and either can make ammendments. If ammendments are made it keeps going back and forth between houses for repeated ratification until they both ratify the same bill or someone defeats it.
Stacking the senate is always an option, but I think that's a case of two wrongs.
issacharThe Commons can't overide the Senate. If a bill doesn't pass both houses in identical form it doesn't become law. It also has to get royal assent, but that's a technicality.Bills can originate in either house, (though they typically originate in the Commons), and either can make ammendments. If ammendments are made it keeps going back and forth between houses for repeated ratification until they both ratify the same bill or someone defeats it.
Stacking the senate is always an option, but I think that's a case of two wrongs.
