***This comment was based on the previous headline -- Trudeau plans on stacking Senate before retiring: source
What a stupid headline. Insinuating that Trudeau is the only PM doing this is beyond the pale ... because every former PM has done the same.
This is setting aside the fact that the Senate, being appointed rather than elected, has almost always set aside partisan politics in order to act as a check on the current parliament.
The headline has since been changed:
Trudeau to fill Senate vacancies before retiring: source
Thanks for the heads up.
Sounds good to me. No point leaving a bunch of open senate seats for some future govt to fill.
I look forward to Trudeau's many non-partisan senators to blocking a future attempt by Poilievre to bypass the charter of rights using the notwithstanding clause federally. The senate would be right to reject that when conservatives try to advance attacks on whatever marginalized group they want blame for their own failings (probably transgendered people).
The senate would be right to reject that.
Please use the term transgender people.
Please use the term "Transsexual" for those transitioning medically from Male to Female or Female to Male who wish to be seen as Men or Woman, and "Non Binary" for those who don't like being referred to by certain pronouns.
Lumping in people against the social construct of gender with people who require surgery and hormone therapy to avoid negative outcomes like self harm is ignorant at best, and clearly destructive at worst.
Thanks!
In 2015, Stephen Harper swore he wouldn't make any senate appointments. He appointed 59.
Fucking good. Don't let them do what they did the US.
Opposition party: I am once again advocating for Senate reform
PM: You'll get your turn, don't worrry
Business as usual for a system that allows Senators without term limits. Until we get them this keeps happening on all sides.
Please explain the issues you see, and provide supporting evidence, concerning no term limits for senators.
From the government website. It says that they have a mandatory retirement at 75 but the only other way they leave office is if they decide to.
There are no defined terms. You get appointed then you either leave or retire at 75.
Okay. And what are the problems you see with that?
Seriously? Unelected officials having veto power over legislation?
Fuck is wrong with you?
Because electing someone in no way, shape or form means that they're any more competent or honorable than someone who's appointed.
The Senate is there to keep the gov't from doing whatever it wants. It weighs the value of legislation against how it would affect citizens and the Charter.
Just wondering if you have the same issues with judgeships that are appointed across the board in Canada.
You asked about the term limits which are not defined.
You asked what an issue with how we have our senators, (them being unelected).
How does a body who votes on legislation who are unaccountable to the general public a good thing?
What ifs about their competency are not a rebuttal, but showing an issue with the entire system (one that can't be removed).
I would prefer to chance people voting for morons than having appointed (by the then current PM) persons as the last line, regardless of record.
As far as I know judges have a level of competency to qualify, there isn't really much in the guidelines about who can be appointed senator.
You asked about the term limits ...
No I didn't. I asked for the OP to, "Please explain the issues you see, and provide supporting evidence, concerning no term limits for senators."
How does a body who votes on legislation who are unaccountable to the general public a good thing?
They rarely vote on legislation. They do debate complex proposed legislation (often before the HoC debates it, at the request of the HoC) because their schedule is more flexible than the HoC's.
As for accountability I will point to south of the border where most political officers are elected and ask if you think that system is better than ours? Because from my 65+ years perspective it is not. Elections can be bought (Elon just did it) and manipulated (re: gerrymandering).
You think that an unelected body in the government is better than being able to vote for different representatives?
Pointing to the states is NOT a good example.
What othe country has an unelected body such as our senate?
You think that an unelected body in the government is better than being able to vote for different representatives?
It doesn't have to be better, it just has to be not significantly worse (because switching systems incurs a cost, and the expected improvement has to be sufficient to justify that cost). As far as I can tell, the Senate here in Canada hasn't been significantly worse for the population than comparable elected bodies that exist elsewhere in the world. That doesn't mean it couldn't run off the rails in the future, but it could just as easily do that if it were an elected body (which is where the example of the States is relevant).
In general, it's better to leave things that work alone, unless you have a better reason for changing them than, "This doesn't match up with my ideology."
I mean if you want to pay my hourly rate, sure.
What's going on Canada?
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
🏙️ Cities / Local Communities
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
🏒 Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
💻 Schools / Universities
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales
🗣️ Politics
🍁 Social / Culture
Rules
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca