The Constitution established the people as sovereign and non-sovereign in virtually the same breath. Republicans are rejoicing over what is likely to be a fifty-four to forty-six majority.
Most importantly, it needs to be elected. The Senate has become a hyper-partisan body contributing little to addressing regional tensions or supporting good national governance.
Despite that, no one feels a chamber of "sober second thought" is needed to vet bills passed by their unicameral legislatures. The government must come up with a law the restricts the Senate from whatever privileges they seem to assume they have because of their title.
Why not fix those problems. Submit Let the Senate should be elected by the people for the people. Overall, the importance of the Senate is not to emphasis on what they do, but on what they stop others from doing.
Of course the Senate has long had a reputation for cronyism. But that was wrong then and even more wrong now. Plain and simple, we need it. Abolishing the senate without changing the voting would basically give anyone with a majority government too much power.
It is no secret that that is what the political NDP party wants. The Senate, in the upper house, reviews proposed legislation and ultimately decides whether a bill becomes a law.
Biased on the recent scandal and unmistakably there needs to be more accountability, which could be achieved through transparency. False housing and residence claims, abuse of travel privileges, and other unethical conduct reflect a deeper problem of unaccountable privilege.
Those who wish for the Canadian Senate to be abolished, are mostly looking at how our tax money is being used to pay men and women who barely work days of the year.
The time is overdue to cement constitutional change as principally an affair of citizens, not simply an ordinary set of federal-provincial negotiations. Is there a way out of this trap of hypocrisy?
Coincidentally, limiting Senators to one term undermines the accountability that comes with seeking re-election. Yet, on the other side, detailed information on travel expenses by government ministers and parliamentary secretaries is posted online, including the destination and the length of each trip.
A scenario where the Commons was dominated by one party and the elected Senate by another is actually a recipe for more deadlock — not less — than now. Unfortunately, and despite the appointment of two elected senators from Alberta, Harper appears to have been seduced, as were all his predecessors, by the prospect of using the Senate to reward friends and consolidate his own political power.
What can be the reason for such passivity? Regardless of any expressions of idealism when in opposition, what sitting prime minister would want to create a truly equal, elected and effective Senate that would have as its main purpose to counterbalance or limit his own powers?
Because of its inherent independence from election cycles, the Senate can provide an indispensable public service that enriches our democracy. Also, an Angus Reid survey last August found 33 per cent of us back such a move.
The sobriety is supposed to be a product of the calibre of Senators and their reliance on evidence as opposed to populism. Nation columnist Alexander Cockburn labored to put a positive spin on gridlock.
Other groups are also penalized. As a result, the American nation was above the Constitution in one instance and below it in another. It needs to elected, as an un elected body should have no right in a modern day democratic institution.Keep, reform or abolish: What to do about the Senate.
Keep, reform or abolish: What to do about the Senate. Chris Hannay. Ottawa.
Published July 24, Updated June 5, True, abolishing the Senate would be difficult because it would require a constitutional amendment, which needs provincial consent. That's hard to achieve, but it's no reason to give up. The first step to abolishing the Senate is to hold a national referendum, timed with a federal election to control costs.
Making the Senate more like the House by abolishing the filibuster will not do much to help that problem, because more legislation will not halt the slide of power down Pennsylvania Avenue.
I need an 8 page argumentative essay about whether or not Canada should abolish the Senate. (Canadian Politics) Your essay must include a meaningful and well-informed: review of the critical events and ideas necessary to understand the issue; exploration of both perspectives on the issue; and defense of a particular position on the issue.
Harper’s Senate Reform Act, introduced inproposed to appoint senators elected through provincial elections and limit terms to a non-renewable nine years. Both are sensible suggestions that would go a long way to repairing the Senate. The Senate has become a hyper-partisan body contributing little to addressing regional tensions or supporting good national governance.
For one thing, the western provinces are seriously underrepresented in it. Furthermore, as an appointed body, the.Download