On the Star’s front page of Sept. 13, 1979, Attorney-General Roy McMurtry was promising a citizen review of police complaints, Ted Kennedy was rumoured to be challenging Jimmy Carter for the Democratic nomination and half a million people were fleeing Hurricane Fred.
On Page 2, the paper reported that Prime Minister Joe Clark was likely to appoint Lowell Murray to the Senate.
He did.
And he’s still here.
Murray’s future is secure — retirement with his wife, even a new dog — but he’s not so certain about the future of the place he has represented for 32 years.
Murray, representing a party that no longer exists, appointed by a prime minister who last brushed his teeth at 24 Sussex more than three decades ago, has had a distinguished career in the Senate.
But had he been appointed today, in Stephen Harper’s proposed brave new Senate world, he would have been forced to find other unemployment by 1988, at the age of 51, instead of leaving on his 75th birthday this September.
That would have been just fine for the dean of the Senate.
He says he probably would have left when Clark was defeated the next year rather than look for work at age 51.
Murray has sat in cabinet, led the Senate for his Progressive Conservatives when he was outnumbered three-to-one and has earned the right to provide some sober second thought on Harper’s Senate reform bill, introduced Tuesday.
Murray thinks it’s a mess.
It might surprise Harper that Murray sides with New Democrats.
He would call a referendum on the future of the body he has represented for 32 years.
“That would lead to a proper debate on the matter,’’ Murray says.
“We ask Canadians, do we need one? And, if so, what kind of a Senate?
“And if a majority in 10 provinces said they don’t need it, then it’s done.’’
Under Harper’s legislation, the provinces and territories would be “strongly encouraged’’ to have voters choose a list of proposed senators to be appointed by the prime minister.
Senators appointed after October 2008 would be limited to one nine-year term.
As New Democrat David Christopherson points out, that is nine years, with a total salary of $1 million, an annual pension of about $35,000, with the senator being prohibited by law from ever being accountable to voters.
“It may technically be Senate reform, but it’s not democracy,’’ says Christopherson, his party’s democratic reform critic.
Full Article
Source: Toronto Star
On Page 2, the paper reported that Prime Minister Joe Clark was likely to appoint Lowell Murray to the Senate.
He did.
And he’s still here.
Murray’s future is secure — retirement with his wife, even a new dog — but he’s not so certain about the future of the place he has represented for 32 years.
Murray, representing a party that no longer exists, appointed by a prime minister who last brushed his teeth at 24 Sussex more than three decades ago, has had a distinguished career in the Senate.
But had he been appointed today, in Stephen Harper’s proposed brave new Senate world, he would have been forced to find other unemployment by 1988, at the age of 51, instead of leaving on his 75th birthday this September.
That would have been just fine for the dean of the Senate.
He says he probably would have left when Clark was defeated the next year rather than look for work at age 51.
Murray has sat in cabinet, led the Senate for his Progressive Conservatives when he was outnumbered three-to-one and has earned the right to provide some sober second thought on Harper’s Senate reform bill, introduced Tuesday.
Murray thinks it’s a mess.
It might surprise Harper that Murray sides with New Democrats.
He would call a referendum on the future of the body he has represented for 32 years.
“That would lead to a proper debate on the matter,’’ Murray says.
“We ask Canadians, do we need one? And, if so, what kind of a Senate?
“And if a majority in 10 provinces said they don’t need it, then it’s done.’’
Under Harper’s legislation, the provinces and territories would be “strongly encouraged’’ to have voters choose a list of proposed senators to be appointed by the prime minister.
Senators appointed after October 2008 would be limited to one nine-year term.
As New Democrat David Christopherson points out, that is nine years, with a total salary of $1 million, an annual pension of about $35,000, with the senator being prohibited by law from ever being accountable to voters.
“It may technically be Senate reform, but it’s not democracy,’’ says Christopherson, his party’s democratic reform critic.
Full Article
Source: Toronto Star
No comments:
Post a Comment