More Insenaty! Trudeau and LeBreton

Senator Marjorie LeBreton thinks if we can't reform it, we should abolish it.  Well, we've been trying to reform it since confederation and I highly doubt the supreme court will overturn the constitution to abolish it, so why make statements like that?  Unless there's another sneaky legal way around it, I don't think I'm off in saying abolition is near impossible.  Abolition is not Conservative Party policy, so it's a bit shocking to hear her say this. It's clear "insenaty".

As well, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau makes remarks to La Presse that he wouldn't want to abolish the senate because Quebec has 24 seats in the senate and provinces like Alberta only six, that it's to Quebec's advantage, that abolishing it is "demagoguery", "we'll have to improve it."  Well, how, Justin?  Again, he's suffering from "insenaty".

But then just now, Alberta Premier Alison Redford had posted this on Facebook/Twitter in response to Justin.

"I am disappointed by Justin Trudeau's comments. There is no need to pit Alberta and British Columbia against other regions. We need an elected, equal Senate that is accountable to Canadians."

Well, THANK YOU Premier Redford for saying the correct thing here! Despite all you and your party's faults, this is a clear message and you don't suffer from "insenaty".

And, I'll continue to say this again and again... while I don't think he masterminded a senate expense scandal, I think this all fits within Harper's long-game plan to draw continued attention to the senate, to reform it, and the need to make it accountable. How?

The Hatrock's Cave Canadian Senate Reform Plan Proposal (a.k.a. The HCCSRPP):

• Sixty-six senators:  six senators per province, two per territory, each representing a provincial/territorial region based on geography/environment, infrastructure/economy, and not necessarily population, and serve 8-9 year terms
• Three senators per province elected every 4-5 years in conjunction with provincial elections OR with 4 year fixed federal election.

How hard is it for these politicians who continually display "insenaty" to propose something simple like this?

Reverse Insenaty

Some people say that insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and getting the same result. But I'd say in the case of reforming the Canadian senate, it's worth it to pursue and is not insane, nor is it "insenaty", unless those opposed to any reform (Quebec) have anything to say about it. And they always do...

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2009/05/28/9600246-cp.html

OTTAWA - When it comes to Senate reform, the Harper government is applying the old adage: If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.

The government reintroduced for the third time Thursday legislation that would force senators to retire after serving a single, non-renewable term of eight years.

And it intends to reintroduce legislation soon that would create a process to elect senators.

"Well, here we go again," said Marjory LeBreton, the government's leader in the Senate.

Two previous attempts to impose term limits went nowhere amid objections from Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Newfoundland and Labrador, which argued that Senate reforms require a constitutional amendment approved by at least seven provinces.

Quebec, which views the Senate as a chamber designed to protect minority rights, has been the most adamantly opposed. It has threatened to take the federal government to court if it persists in trying to unilaterally reform the upper chamber.

Some have asked my view on senate reform. I believe having a triple-e senate a key ingredient to national unity, otherwise many provinces are just colonies within the dominion. Canada has changed dramatically over the past 100 years and our current senate makeup is a relic of an old system that needs major reform. And I'll take any kind of reform, any progress to get to a triple-e, even if it's one step at a time.

This is the key issue of why I support Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

First off, we have too many senators. I propose the following, similar to the U.S. system:

- Each province gets 6 senators and each territory gets 2 for a total of 66. (Keep in mind that they have 100 senators in the U.S. (2 per state).

- Each province is divided into 6 regions (not necessarily based on population). These regions are determined by the provincial legislatures. For example, Alberta would be divided as such: Edmonton Captial Region, Calgary Region, Central, Northwest, Northeast, South.

- Three senators are up for election every six years in conjunction with a province's civic elections usually held every three years.

- Because of elections, there is no need for term limits. I believe if someone is doing a good job and continually gets elected, then there's nothing wrong with that.

- Current campaign financing laws would apply with an adjustment to the amount a campaign can spend depending upon the population of the region.

Now is that so insane?

E E E

The "momentum" trickles along for Senate reform... with a boost from the Motherland!

Senator LeBreton said Harper's bill, which proposes renewable eight-year terms for senators, is being held up by the Grits for more study even though a special Senate committee has already filed a report on the proposed legislation. She said a second Senate committee which is examining the bill even appears poised to recall witnesses who have already testified to answer more questions.

"I just don't know why the Liberals are doing this. You know, they just don't get it. I've always thought they are insulated from the public in a type of closed society which totally ignores the Canadian public," said LeBreton, who acknowledged the Senate reforms would likely become an election issue if they are held up before a vote is called.

Liberal MP Stephen Owen agreed with LeBreton that the pro-reform vote in England should serve as a further catalyst for change in Canada's Senate. However, he said the numerical disadvantage that western provinces suffer in the Senate must be addressed before elections and shorter terms are brought in for the senators.

He said a proposed bill by Liberal Senator Jack Austin which would increase the number of Senate seats for the West needs to become a priority for the government.

Owen, who is not running for re-election, said despite objections from Liberal senators, he personally does not have a problem with the prime minister appointing senators who have first been elected through a consultative vote in each province, as proposed by Harper. Many Liberals have said bringing in an elected Senate can only be done through a constitutional amendment and Harper's plan would create a two-tier Senate.

"I'm not so worried about that since it will be solved in a fairly quick time-frame. But to bring in elected senators without adjusting the numbers will further disadvantage the West and give more power to the central Canada. And that's not acceptable," said Owen.

Nice try, Stephen Owen. This is a typical Liberal Senator tactic. Agree with the idea of reform, but don't do anything. Actually, it's a typical Liberal tactic in general. They like to use the word "tiers" don't they?

And does anyone give a rats ass how many "tiers" there are in the Senate?

With a population of over 300 million, the U.S. has 100 elected Senators, two for each state, with staggered six year terms . Canada is one-tenth the size in population, but has, what, 106 unelected Senators who serve life-terms to the age of 75? Seems a bit off, doesn't it?

So now Senator Austin wants MORE senators for the Western provinces. Currently, Alberta has 6 and Ontario has what 24? So is he saying we should add 18 senators to Alberta? Isn't that a little much? We already have 28 MPs. Then there's BC. Is there enough room in the red chamber for all these bodies?

And there's my point. The Liberal senators don't have the courage to want to change how THEY sit, so they simply ADD more, reducing the transparency and scrutiny of their own lazy jobs.

Well, last week, the British House of Commons voted 337 to 224 in favour of an elected upper chamber.

Mike Jenkinson has a good article here.

Prime Minister Harper has put forth an 8 year term for senators in Bill S-4, which is currently before the Liberal dominated senate, and has been sitting there for 10 months now, waiting, waiting.

"I encourage the senators to hurry up their detailed analysis," Harper said. Yeah, no kidding.

Now I'm going to throw an idea out there. I'd like to suggest that each province should have 4 senators with 12 year re-electable terms. An election would occur for one of the senate seats every 3 years in conjunction with a province's civic election (which are fixed). With fewer senators, they would be under greater scruitiny, but have the longevity to overlap governments in the house of commons.

There's my analysis.

I think the Conservatives can use this has an election issue to solidify the western base, especially in B.C. where the party lost a few key seats. Every little bit will help in getting a majority.

But the next time a Liberal talks about senate reform, you can't help but laugh.