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.]

Thursday, May 02, 2013

Retired senator Bert Brown says Senate reform may need constitutional amendment: report

OTTAWA — Retired senator Bert Brown, the government’s former point man on Senate reform in the upper chamber, had argued for years that the Conservative plans for Senate reform didn’t require a constitutional amendment.

In an interview with French-language newspaper Le Devoir, Brown appears to backtrack on that position.

According to Le Devoir, Brown said that a constitutional amendment, requiring the consent of seven provinces with at least half the country’s population, is needed to create a voluntary framework for provinces to hold elections for senators, and set nine-year term limits for senators.

“It takes a constitutional amendment approved by at least seven provinces representing 50 per cent of the population, which means that at least Ontario or Quebec agrees,” Brown told the newspaper.

When asked why he supported multiple government attempts to reform the Senate through federal legislation rather than a constitutional amendment, Brown reportedly said this: ”It allowed us to go to each province and convince them to establish their own elections….It was an offer, not a command. It was a first step. We wanted to show that it was legitimate.”

Brown has said something similar to this before. In an interview with Postmedia News shortly before his retirement, he said this about the Quebec court challenge to the Senate Reform Act:

“When we get to the point where we have seven provinces that have followed the way of Alberta, which is not constitutionally challengable because they have the election in the province and when they begin to understand that there’s no challenge on that — Quebec keeps on trying, but there is no challenge on that alone — it’s when you get into the place where you’re trying to do powers (of the Senate) and when you’re trying to do numbers (of senators) where there could be a challenge. The prime minister has put all of those challenges before the Supreme Court and I think he will win.”

He added this about the best hope for Senate reform: “That’s what our best hope is: that they realize that they (the provinces) have the power, if they want to use is to get seven provinces out 10 representing 50 per cent of the population, then they say we want a standalone constitutional amendment.”

Original Article
Source: canada.com
Author  Jordan Press

No comments:

Post a Comment