He said the Senate is outdated and undemocratic, but the NDP still wants Canadians to have a say on its future.
So...you just throw it away? Sorry Jack, but you've just demonstrated how little you really understand. Like Harper's piddling Bill C-43 which he couldn't seem to ram through parliament, simply abolishing the Senate isn't doing us any favors either.
I suggest that Mr. Layton review the legal constructs that surround the Senate, as well as its practical role in parliament (which is actually quite limited). Simply abolishing the Senate leaves us with a parliament that has no natural "counter check" on bills passed. While the Senate may irritate me in a dozen different ways, having a second set of eyes that is not beholden to the often turbulent currents of public opinion is a good thing for Canada. In the past it has forced the House of Commons to go back and place limits on the more dangerous clauses of legislation that could be used to unjustly abrogate the principles of civil rights, and equality before the law.
Senate Reform, whether it is making the senate elected or removing it altogether is not trivial, nor should we treat it as such. Among other things, any meaningful reform involves a constitutional amendment - anything else is little more than legislative window dressing. If we are going to go down the path of creating an elected Senate, that's fine, but let's examine what we expect the role of that Senate to be.
Similarly, if we are going to outright abolish the Senate then we must ask what kind of structure do we put in place to act as a counterweight to the House of Commons.
If we fail to do so, we will create a situation where even greater powers will devolve to the courts and the Governor General. (and, I would argue that both bodies would find themselves swamped with demands to overturn Parliament's excesses)
Layton needs a wake-up pill ... or a serious boot to the head. If he doesn't focus his efforts on countering Harper's legislative agenda in a meaningful way - instead of playing to it - the leader of "Canada's Effective Opposition"(™) will have allowed the CPC to damage Canada very badly indeed.
He may think he's scoring political points right now, but what Layton's really doing is pissing off everybody who might consider voting for him - largely because he is acting more and more like a Conservative Party shill every day.
1 comment:
As you know, the Senate is entrenched in the Constitution. If Jack Layton wants to abolish the Senate, then he should be up front about the fact that this would require a constitutional amendment. Implying otherwise is either disingenuous or ignorant.
Stephen Harper takes a more devious approach, not surprisingly. His implication is that if senators were elected, suddenly the Senate would be a more democratic institution. He is ignoring the fact that the distribution of Senate seats by province is wildly undemocratic. And again, the only way to change that is by a constitutional amendment. Having elected senators would simply entrench the current unfairness.
I can't imagine that Stephen Harper and Jack Layton are ignorant of the Constitution, so that means they're just playing politics and assuming that the electorate is ignorant of the Constitution. Unfortunately, they're probably right about that. But since the Supreme Court is not ignorant of the Constitution, playing politics with constitutional issues just ends up misleading people.
Misleadership. Now there's a concept. Don't we deserve leadership? Isn't that what we voted for?
Post a Comment