d g i V i s t a. o r g . . . "Makingthe FifthEstate the Fourth." | Sparky!the Political Blog | |||
dali global intelligentsia | expressiveeducationalenlightening transformative potent and giving ubuntu ![]() | Education Fiction Personal Poetry Politics | ||
Seeking A Reformed Senate for a Legitimate Legislative System Keeping, but reforming, the Senate is essential for Canadian democracy to improve. Meaningful democracy in Canada is hampered by the first-past-the-post electoral system and excessive party discipline. The former hampers the potential of elected representatives to meaningfully reflect ridings’ popular vote and harming voter turnout itself. [1] The latter inhibits elected representatives’ abilities to actually represent voters, for example with MP’s currently having what Paul Martin last year called the democracy undermining “choke collar” of the whip controlling all voting. [2] Though creating more legislative complexity than with the current sycophantic Senate role, a reformed, elected Senate also has the potential to address the undemocratic concentration of powers of the Prime Minister with a fused executive and legislature. The Senate should have elected members: eight from each province, four from each territory, with half being elected whenever there is a general election for MP’s and terms lasting through two Commons elections. This would provide a body of 92 members, with equal provincial representation, and lower yet still significant territorial representation. We should alter our electoral system so that in each Senatorial election, the four senatorial candidates who earn the highest number of votes should be considered elected, assuming each earns over 50% of votes cast. If less than four receive 50% of the vote, there should be other voting rounds with the remaining candidates until four elected. Representatives ought to be able to justify an electoral mandate in such a way. Like there ought to be in the House of Commons, there should be no whip in the Senate: party discipline should be diminished to increase the potential of individual Senators bringing more than a voting pulse to political issues either in a Burkean trustee role or delegate role, the role itself to be chosen by individual Senators themselves in the course of campaigning. The veto provisions in the 1992 Charlottetown Accord [3] of a joint sitting combined with less enforced party discipline/oppression (ideally in both houses) could resolved deadlocked issues and lead to more attempts at legislative consensus building. Abolishing the Senate is a tempting option [4] because its rubber-stamping function, while doing little to impede democracy in Canada, adds nothing but a great expense, not only in terms of money but the political legitimacy of our entire constitutionally-mandated bicameral legislative system in the eyes of citizens. If we are bicameral, not being functionally bicameral is far worse than removing the requirement of the second House from the constitution. But perhaps we could reform the House of Commons by eliminating the whip and electoral voting reform, which would improve the representative nature of our democracy considerably and justify removing the Senate. However, there is value in retaining the Senate because of one of its key original goals: protecting provincial interests with equal regional representation. It wouldn’t even be cynical to suggest that the central Canadian power block of Ontario and Quebec have maintained a weak Senate through partisan appointments from the prime minister so they could maintain control of the country from their power block in the Commons. The only hope of improved regional equity [5] lies in a legislatively empowered Senate where regions would weigh almost as much of the population-defined Commons. Maybe then someday a federal election might not be over before Manitoba’s polls close. Footnotes [1] Ontario’s Redeemer University College political science professor
David Kayzis commented on proportional representation’s ability to improve
voter turnout. See Elizabeth Payne, “Dropping voter turnout alarms political
observers,” Ottawa Citizen, September 18, 2003, p. A.6.
Stephen Buckley
|
![]()
![]() Rumsfeld
and The Grinch? ![]() |
dali
global intelligentsia Vista dot org
|
|
dali
|
Because sometimes the surreal is the only viable approach |
global
|
The big picture is the only picture |
intelligentsia
|
Since we're all in this together, let's put our minds together |
Vista
|
We're dead without a vision. What's yours? |
dot
org
|
We're no dot com |
Email me: NotUninspired at Yahoo dot com
Stephen Buckley, CEO of dgiVista.org [un]Limited
You must be of legal drinking age [in your jurisdiction] to enter this site. If you are too young, please exit here.
CEO = [Chief Entropic Officer]
ISSN 1198-7634
This gravitational colour scheme is brought to you by the letter L, the
number 12,
the red wheelbarrow and the palm at the end of the mind.