Sunday, March 14, 2010

Elected “Senate” for England

The reason, says a minister is to make the House of Lords “legitimate.” I am actually all for a Triple-E Senate. It’s time that the stuffing of the seats ends. Each House should be able to watch the other one. Therefore, Canadians would be able to vote for different political parties on the ballots. This would ensure the accountability of the two Houses.

"The time has now come to make it legitimate in the only way that a legislative assembly can be legitimate in the modern world, which is to be elected," Lord Adonis told BBC television.

"We can do it in this country as most democracies do it: we'd have two chambers, both of which are elected but with the government accountable to the first chamber," he added.

Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=2682156

4 comments:

  1. BigBlueDinosaur14 March 2010 at 20:24

    Quebec and all the smaller provinces have always opposed elected senate for Canada.

    The wheels on the senate go round and round.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And Ontario and Quebec have always opposed and will never support equal representation (one of the Es in Triple-E) for each province.

    ReplyDelete
  3. At the pace we are going in Canada, China will end up with a democratic senate before we do.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Really? More elected politicians in Ottawa? Seriously? Canada needs more POLITICIANS? The more of them I meet, the more turned off I am by anyone who thinks so much of themselves that they would run for office. It's a dirty job and all that.

    My version of senate reform would consist of a number of standards that a person would have reached, and then be asked to be a senator. They would have to have achieve peer and public recognition in their field, they would have to have spent some time in a professional or personal capacity in at least 2 of the major regions of Canada (so they are nationally minded as well). The checklist would be agreed upon by all political parties, and a person would need to achieve a certain score or they don't get to be a senator. It might mean that a success community minded farmer might get in, or a social worker, or a marine biologist, or a writer, or a city planner, but mostly someone who was all about doing well at the career/art/job they had chosen. And they wouldn't be political glory hounds who already owe somebody a bunch of favours on their first day in the senate.
    SM

    ReplyDelete

Any highly offensive matter will be deleted whether it be solid, water, gas or plasma. No comments from outsiders represent the opinions of Owner and Doggy or vanillaman. We reserve the right to delete any comments without explanation.