The accusations were arose out of NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair’s response to questions Monday about if he would not appoint senators should the NDP form government in 2015. Mulcair pointed to the party’s 50-year-old policy position that the Senate should be abolished.
The Tories seized on that in early debate on the motion, claiming a conspiracy that the NDP didn’t want to abolish the Senate — they wanted to paint the red chamber orange.
“The NDP talk about abolishing the Senate, but it’s just that: Talk,” said Democratic Reform Minister Tim Uppal. “The NDP has no intention of actually abolishing the Senate and has the full intention of appointing its own NDP members.”
His evidence? A 2008 document outlining a coalition agreement between the Liberals and NDP that includes a provision for appointments to the Senate.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper once vowed never to appoint unelected senators (elected senators were okay), but reneged on that pledge two years into his mandate. Since becoming prime minister, Harper has appointed 58 senators (he appointed Sen. Larry Smith and Sen. Fabian Manning twice each).
Uppal then asked the Commons to agree to push through the Senate Reform Act, and send it off to the Senate without any committee study. (Questions about Senate reform are before the Supreme Court of Canada.) Uppal’s move didn’t work, and NDP parliamentary reform critic Craig Scott called the move a stunt.
The debate on the motion started Tuesday morning. Without support from enough Conservatives, the motion will fail. Even if it passes, it would not be binding on the government.
“We need to deal with this system. They refuse to reform, year after year,” NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus said. “Ask the Canadian people what they would do? They’d get rid of it.”
The Supreme Court of Canada will determine how the Senate can be abolished and reformed, settling questions about what constitutional amending formula, if any, apply to Senate reform. Reforming the Senate would require the so-called “7/50″ rule in the Constitution, meaning at least seven provinces that hold at least half the country’s population must agree to the change for a constitutional amendment to go through. Abolishing the Senate may require taking the same path, or require the unanimous consent of all provinces.
If the Supreme Court rules abolishment requires unanimous consent, it would make the task very difficult, said NDP parliamentary reform critic Craig Scott.
“The key is to note that on either of those formulas…ultimately, the Senate does not have to consent to its own abolition,” he said.
As for what the NDP would do if it formed government, Scott said, “There are good senators. We do hope to work with those senators if abolition doesn’t happen before this party forms government in 2015.”
Original Article
Source: nationalpost.com
Author: Jordan Press
No comments:
Post a Comment