Tag Archives: Canadian Senate

C-10 Omnibus Crime Bill Illustrated

A whiteboard re-cap of Bill C-10, the Harper Government® omnibus anti-crime legislation that is currently being reviewed by the Senate…

The video urges viewers to contact the Senate to voice objections to the bill in its current form. Should you be interested in doing so, a while back the Canadian Bar Association helpfully identified ten key reasons why the passage of Bill C-10 would be a mistake.

Update: “More than two dozen current and former law enforcement officials in the United States – including police officers, prosecutors and judges – are warning the Canadian government against mandatory minimum sentences for minor marijuana offences.” Read more here.



Filed under Crime & Punishment, HARPER Government of Canada, Legal Issues

Whither “The Other Place”?

When parliament eventually gets back to business after the prolonged winter recess, perhaps one of the most interesting issues up for debate will be that of Senate reform.

Over the past four years, many Liberals have vigorously defended this unelected body of appointed individuals and its function as originally constituted to provide a sobering influence and balancing check on the power of the governing party of the day. Of course, that was quite politically convenient for them to do so at the time. Now that control of the Senate has officially been ceded to the Conservatives however, and it’s stuffed with a preponderance of unworthy “hacks” and “cronies” of the PMO (according to some critical partisans), will Liberals maintain the same degree of enthusiasm they previously held for preserving the Red Chamber’s present form and function?

Update: Unfortunately, I missed CTV’s Question Time (as usual, because it runs here at unpredictable times on channel 103 or something), but apparently Ignatieff talked on that program about the issue of Senate reform:

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff laid out some broad Senate reform ideas Sunday, including term limits and a curb on the prime minister’s ability to stack the Upper House with his own picks.

“That kind of reform, I think, is actually doable,” Ignatieff told CTV’s Question Period.

More specifically, Ignatieff proposed a 12-year term limit on Senate positions and an arms-length committee tasked with vetting candidates.

“I’d even go as far as to limit the prime minister’s prerogative to appoint senators. That is, I’d pass (appointments) through a public service appointment commission, so we scrub it and get the best possible appointees.”

The suggestions proposed aren’t entirely unreasonable, but they’re problematic in their own ways for various reasons. Term limits, for example, are dubious for the same reasons as mandatory retirement rules that are now widely considered discriminatory. If Senators are required to step down after a dozen years of service, then why should not judges and other appointees also be forced to do so? As for the appointment commission idea, its own composition and qualification could prove to be debatable…

Furthermore, these proposals miss one of the most fundamentally dysfunctional aspects of the Upper House, which is the ludicrous regional imbalance that’s been entrenched in its structure from the outset.


Filed under Liberal Party of Canada

Controlling the Senate

Grumpy Old Men

Does anyone on planet Earth (aside from these two guys) really give a toss whether the Conservatives may eventually regain control of the Senate?

Oh the audacity of these Liberals. They think the Senate should do everything humanly possible to thwart the will of the people & block Tory gov’t legislation, but it’s supposed to bow down in feal [sic] submission & rummber [sic] stamp everything a Liberal gov’t would do. The nerve of these people.

Yawn. One presumes that Mikey would be just pleased as punch if a Conservative majority in the Senate routinely thwarted the “will of the people” (whatever that means in this country) and blocked legislation sponsored by the Liberals in parliament. Whatever. Personally, I welcome the prospect of a Conservative controlled Senate. It would be great sport.


Filed under Wingnuts

Saying One Thing – Doing Another

It’s the hypocrisy, stupid.

To be honest, I don’t really have any problem with Harper’s appointments, but they are quite amusing in light of his past statements about the issue. Safe to say than any statements the Dear Leader said in the past about his so-called “principles” are now completely irrelevant as he extemporizes his way forward…

Update: Too funny. And for more hilarity, check out this unctuous stream of addlepated drivel. WARNING: Use of motion sickness bag is recommended.

Douche Crux of the Matter Update:

To all those who have left nasty comments (that I didn’t approve) about how Mr. Harper has said, many times, that he didn’t want to have to appoint Senators — that is completely irrelevant to this discussion.

It never fails to amuse witnessing the elaborate rhetorical hoops that Sandy “I’m not a Conservative partisan” Crux will jump through to painfully rationalize and justify her insanely slavish hero-worship of the Dear Leader and unqualified approval of every single one of his contradictory, hypocritical policies and so-called “accomplishments” as she likes to describe the routine business of government.


Filed under Conservative Hypocrisy, STEPHEN HARPER Govrnment of Canada