ht: National Newswatch
"There is a feeling among many Canadians that the nature of lifetime appointments does not provide any kind of accountability and there is a lot of dead wood in the Senate," said Steven Fletcher, minister of democratic reform.
Senators are currently appointed until age 75, but the government wants to limit new senators' appointments to one non-renewable eight-year term.
"It is certainly time that we don't have people that can be appointed for 35 years. It is a small step to giving more Canadians the chance to be in the Senate," said Alberta Sen. Bert Brown, the only current member of the upper chamber to stand for popular election.
(...)
Two years ago, when the Harper government first introduced Senate reform bills, the Liberal majority in the Senate told the government it would not pass its legislation until it sought the opinion of the Supreme Court. The government refused.Fletcher said there is no need; if Canadians or the provinces believe the changes are unconstitutional, they can appeal to the top court after the legislation has passed.
Precisely, Mr. Fletcher. They can go to the SCOC later if they don't like what they got. Just as we can go to the SCOC to reverse the unconstitutional, unwanted, potentially socially harmful SSM law. If we have the balls. We can do it as the People, without needing the government's aid.
Yes, progressive.
And, "Balbulican", it's also innovative. So much for your theory that "right-wing" means "not innovative", among other absurdities.
The Liberals will babble about the Constitution.
But since when do Liberals give a flying feck about the Constitution?
They, despite the Constitution not allowing such extreme social reengineering, imposed, without a proper, ordinary-People-determined democratic mandate to do so, same sex "marriage".
The Charter also doesn't say anything about either "sexual orientation" or about marriage.
Yet they claimed, and the Big Media echoed the claim with incessant blitzing to drill the Big Lie into the Public Consciousness, that the Charter actually did support SSM because it mentions "sexual orientation", which it doesn't, as one can plainly see by simply reading the Charter (a copy of which I have, framed, in my living room, so don't give me any B.S.!).
So I'd suggest the Liberals just give in and allow this reasonble, meaningful, Canadian-Public-wanted-and-supported-in-polls, progressive, innovative reform to make the undemocratic, unelected, unaccountable bunch of appointed-by-a-politician-til-age-75 pampered elites.
They got to cheat and unconstitutionally reengineer our most fundamental, most established and most tried-and-true social institution without any mandate to do so, and after, just a few short years prior, having voted to NOT do so.
So why don't they shut the feck up and support this necessary, progressive, innovative, wanted-by-Canadians move to make the Senate work as it's supposed to?
I don't care if a couple or three provinces don't want it. Screw them. Albertans didn't want SSM, either, but, hey, they gave in anyway. Why not the Liberals and Quebec? Just go along, like everyone went along with the unnecessary reform to impose SSM.
Oh, and I don't hear the Liberals talking about how Barack Obama hasn't qualified under the US Constitution to be President, so that's the proof in the pudding that Liberals don't care about constitutions unless they benefit Liberals.
Liberals want an unelected, long, long, long-term-appointed Senate of tired-and-bored partisan loyalists so that they can have a stranglehold on all the levers of power with their virtually-assure Liberal majority in the Senate. So that they can impose stuff like SSM and get it automatically immediately rubber-stamped without any sober second thought (Funny how they now claim that they need to have tired, bored old farts with "experience" giving everything sober second thought! What a pile of pure, unadulterated Liberal bullshit!) by their partisan/ideologically extreme cronies in the Chamber of Long Naps.
The Liberals want to screw up Canada the easy way, bypassing real democracy, bypassing the People completely, and will always do so as long as they've also got a majority in the Commons. They're disgusting. Backwards. Dinosaurs. Retrograde. Living in the Dark Ages. Undemocratic. Dictatorial. Totalitarian. Intolerant. Bigoted. Extreme. Bunch of total buttholes, they are!
If they're so desperate to maintain their totalitarian stranglehold on the Senate, then why not force an election on this very issue? I'd love to go up against these undemocratic, totalitarian extremists on this issue. It's a winner for the Conservatives! Now, we know that only the Conservatives are progressive and innovative and that the Liberals are backwards, retrograde, regressive and all that crap they unfairly, incorrectly, hypocritically projected upon us over the decades.
Let's end Liberal totalitarianism forever and put the levers of power back into the hands of Canadians.
LET'S JUST DO IT.
LET'S HAVE CHANGE.
YES WE CAN.
