Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Monday, June 20, 2011

Post Primer: Reforming the Senate

The Harper government is poised to introduce Senate reform legislation in the House of Commons this week, launching a national debate over whether a plan to change the upper chamber will improve Canadian democracy or make it worse. The bill, to be tabled by Democratic Reform Minister Tim Uppal, is the culmination of many years of successive promises by Prime Minister Stephen Harper — dating back to his early career as an opposition MP — to democratize the Senate. A quick Senate reform primer:

Q How have others tried to reform the Senate?

A Brian Mulroney unsuccessfully tried constitutional change twice – through the Meech Lake accord and Charlottetown accord. Under Meech, the Prime Minister would appoint senators from a list submitted by a province. The Charlottetown accord proposed an elected Senate, either by a popular vote or election by members of provincial and territorial assemblies. There would be regional equity, with six senators from each province and one from each territory.

Q What did Harper’s Reform roots demand?

A Under Preston Manning, the Reform party advocated a Triple-E Senate: elected, equal and effective.

Q Why isn’t Harper opting for constitutional change?

A He says it’s too difficult now to get provincial consensus, so he won’t bother. He promises the right outcome for Canada, but critics say he’s trying to sidestep the Constitution by making changes through the back door.

Q What’s the plan for term limits?

A Currently, a senator is in the job until he or she turns 75 — a system which, according to some, can breed arrogance and laziness among senators. In the last Parliament, Mr. Harper proposed an eight-year term limit. Critics said that was too short. Mr. Harper has reportedly decided to make it a nine-year term.

Q What’s the plan for Senate elections?

A Each province is currently allocated a certain number of senators. The bill will set out a voluntary framework through which provinces can hold elections where voters elect nominees for the Senate. Provinces will be encouraged to adopt this process, and Mr. Harper will commit to pick from the list of winners when he makes Senate appointments.

Q What do the provinces think of this idea?

A Some like it, while others are firmly opposed. Alberta has already held Senate elections that produced two senators. Saskatchewan has passed legislation enabling provincial Senate elections, but none have been held. British Columbia has indicated it is also onside with the idea. Elsewhere, Mr. Harper has major problems. Quebec says it will challenge the law in court. Others — including Ontario, Manitoba and Nova Scotia — simply want the Senate abolished.

Q Will Mr. Harper create a Triple-E Senate?

A No. It will not be equal. Smaller provinces such as those from Atlantic Canada that were original members of Confederation will still have a disproportionate share of Senate seats, compared to larger provinces such as British Columbia. To make the change requires a constitutional amendment.

Q Will the Senate become more powerful?

A That’s the crucial question with no clear answer. But many expect that if Mr. Harper’s reforms become reality, the balance of power on Parliament Hill could shift dramatically. Over time, elected senators could decide they have more authority and credibility than in the past, and start flexing their muscle.

Origin
Source: National Post 

No comments:

Post a Comment