Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Unquote

We don’t believe an unelected body should in anyway be blocking an elected body. We are looking for the opportunity to elect senators, but if at some point it becomes clear some senators are not going to be elected, the government will name senators to ensure that the elected will of the House of Commons and the people of Canada is reflected in the Senate.

- Stephen Harper

Related: Bill defeated by unelected Tories.

[via, Aaron Wherry - Maclean's]

8 comments:

Michael Harkov said...

LOL So? All that says is that he has always looked to have an elected Senate. Barring that because of barriers to reform, the Tories have to work with they system we've got in the meantime, as does everyone else. So should the Tories have never appointed Senators to fill all those vacancies to keep Liberals happy? You expect that they shouldn't? Well, of course you don't. That would keep the Senate conveniently controlled by the Liberals, wouldn't it? Of course, we can't have that any other way.

I'm loving all of these outraged Liberals railing now about the unelected Senate. The sudden conversions are refreshing. If the Liberals ever want to prevent that from happening again, maybe they should get on board with Senate reform that the Tories have always advocated. In the meantime, maybe the Liberals will work within the system that we have by actually showing up to work occasionally.

Jim (Progressive Right) said...

Stephen Harper says he wants an unelected Senate to reflect the will of the House.

How has the unelected Senate reflected the will of the House?

This doesn't disturb you even in the slightest?

Dylan said...

"Don't hate the player, hate the game." - 2011 Conservative Party of Canada election slogan.

Michael Harkov said...

This doesn't disturb you even in the slightest?

Nope, not even one iota. Until we have an elected Senate, we play with the board that we have.

You know, I remember from days long gone by when the Liberals used to use their big majority to hold late votes on a Friday night when most MPs were on their way home, way back in the days when Preston Manning was the Opposition Leader. You guys and your media stooges thought that you guys were so subtle and so strategic, that the Reform caucus should have been paying attention.

Well now it is 2010. What went around has no come around, and now you guys are whining that the shoe is on the other foot. Don't like it? Tough.

ridenrain said...

Yes! Yesss! Oh, let me taste your tears, Scott Tenorman. Mm, your tears are so yummy and sweet!

So how many Liberal senators were absent? Don't they get paid enough to DO THEIR JOBS?

Jim (Progressive Right) said...

Nope, not even one iota. Until we have an elected Senate, we play with the board that we have.

So, then, what's the hold up on Senate reform? It seems to me then it's an easy win.

Why waste all this Parliamentary cloak and dagger on a climate change bill, when the Governor General could be signing legislation on Senate reform even as we speak?

Anonymous said...

Shocking but let's not complain. Instead let's document everything Harper is doing as precedent for when Liberals are back in power. They are neutering themselves for any future election campaigns. They can no longer speak of an elected senate, gay marriage, or long gun registry. I'm sure I've missed many. Also we can now campaign year round and launch character assassinations in prime time. The next stint of liberal government will be much longer with these new tools and the Lachlan of a conservative issue that they didn't squander themselves.

Trevor said...

Here's a shocking idea, how about the Liberals show up for work (in both houses). The Tories are a minority in BOTH houses, if Libs showed up for votes they could get anything they want.

Did anyone expect the Tories to vote for a bill they oppose just because the Libs didn't show up?