tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3136317901768500285.post7451980079287763007..comments2023-10-23T11:40:32.553-04:00Comments on The Skinny: Could a reformed House of Commons and Senate work together? RevisedUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3136317901768500285.post-24629467777139193822008-10-18T02:06:00.000-04:002008-10-18T02:06:00.000-04:00Not a fan of this. Don't feel like posting my reas...Not a fan of this. <BR/><BR/>Don't feel like posting my reasons ATMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3136317901768500285.post-57064114818716192682008-10-17T16:21:00.000-04:002008-10-17T16:21:00.000-04:00Thank for the comment, Crystal.I am not keen on an...Thank for the comment, Crystal.<BR/><BR/>I am not keen on any legislative body being appointed because I don't like who does the appointing and I am unfortunately not one who is being appointed.<BR/><BR/>The second reason why I do not like appointed Senators is because not one Senator represents me. They may be bright and intelligent. A few of them may share the same gender, race, ethnicity, religion, and other characteristics as me. However, they do not represent me. The people who represent me are those who I support in elections even if they may not share the same cultural characteristics as me.<BR/><BR/>We could have a Senate which the members are appointed by the provinces as is done in Germany's Länder for the Bundesrat (Senate).<BR/><BR/>We could abolish the Senate. The could be fine by me coming from Ontario. Even in BC and Alberta, there is less interest in a Triple-E Senate because those two provinces are increasing their populations at a rate higher than the national average. My only fear is that without a Senate, the four biggest provinces would want to become more autonomous with more powers. For example, there is no incentive for Alberta to share powers in a central institution in Ottawa. Essentially, Canada may beome a shell--a country in name only.<BR/><BR/>I do think that proportional representation could help reduce the regional divisions in Canada. I also do think that we still need some kind of second chamber to represent the regions--preferably one that is elected by the people or appointed proportionally by the provincial legislatures.<BR/><BR/>I want to make the point again that an elected Senate can work well with an elected House of Commons. There wouldn't be the paralysis that some Canadians might fear.<BR/><BR/>Finally, I know you didn't make this point, Chrystal. I don't like it when Canadians say, "God, another election! We have too many of them!" Well, we live in a democracy, I think. People vote in democracies. If people don't like voting, they don't have to. Canada is not Australia where its citizens are required to vote. As a citizen of Canada, it is my right to vote for my fellow Canadians who will represent me in the federal parliament, provincial legislature, and municipal council. It is an honour to be able to vote, not a sacrifice.Skinny Dipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12818163310102120130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3136317901768500285.post-85543922631612784652008-10-17T13:41:00.000-04:002008-10-17T13:41:00.000-04:00Am not keen on having an elected Senate, particula...Am not keen on having an elected Senate, particularly if the election periods are shorter than 10 years - to overlap 2-1/2 governments. <BR/><BR/>An unelected Senate adds stability to the instability - as we've seen - of an elected HoC. To have both upper and lower houses subject to elections raises a caution flag to me.<BR/><BR/>If electing the Senate is going to happen despite my misgivings, then it would be best that elections be done over substantially longer periods than HoC elections. This would provide overlap both in terms of stability but also in terms of avoiding the danger of having both houses stacked in favour of the ideological flavour of the day.Chrystal Oceanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00171002438761303983noreply@blogger.com