Dear Jack Layton

Doesn't this amount to letting him set the agenda?

Not at all. This has been NDP policy since God was a baby.

This has been NDP policy since God was a baby.

Oh, I knew that. And Harper's preference is an elected Senate (which Ian Welsh addressed here). But I have to wonder if the timing on this is all Harper's.

Let the record show that you support an unelected and perpetually Liberal senate. Wave goodbye to any claim of being a supporter of responsible government and the most basic of democratic fundamentals.

I'm not going to argue whether an unelected perpetually Liberal senate is a good or bad thing, it suffices to merely point out that you support it, and, by extension, oppose democracy.

Jack, Jack, Jack...

sigh.

*headdesk*

Let the record show that you support an unelected and perpetually Liberal senate.

Words. Mouth. Put. Don't.

And by the way, now I know I've returned to political blogging. A couple of days ago I was accused of worshipping Jack Layton. Today I'm being accused of supporting the Liberals. Just like old times. ;-)

If there is something unfactual contained in my comment please clearly state it. The plain meaning of your words is that you want an unelected Liberal senate to thwart Stephen Harper and his mandate:

"When I consider the possibility of a Stephen Harper with a majority in the House of Commons, I'm not so sure I want to eliminate a second chamber"

No wiggle room there. You'll just have to accept the responsibility of your words.

Oh, I knew that. And Harper's preference is an elected Senate (which Ian Welsh addressed here). But I have to wonder if the timing on this is all Harper's.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Senate reform is being pushed by Harper, so Layton may as well get out the NDP position. I do agree though that there are many more important issues out there.

The only way I can make sense of Kaleta's comments is to conclude that Kaleta believes voting = democracy. Perhaps I'm being unfair, but if Kaleta thinks that no other principles and structures and institutions are as basic to democracy as is voting, then Kaleta is hardly in a position to judge anyone else's credentials as a democrat, having failed the test him/herself.

Whooee! The Senate, as it stands, is an embarrassment. It may have some role to play wrt "sober second thought" but when the members rae unelected and there are no effective term limits, it amounts to patronage on a grand scale.

If the opposition does its job, a minority Harper government cannot subvert the will of Parliament -- with or without the Senate. They can stall things but they can't really do much?

I fully agree with the PogMan. There's things that are hugely more pressing. I had a laff when Layton was on his horse wrt bank fees. Sheesh! What a compelling issue! Now, he's on Senate reform -- something else few people see as a top issue facing Canajuns.

Ol' Mother Earth's in deep doo-doo an' accordin' to some pundidiots, Harpoon's managed to pull the wool over an' make a lotta Canajuns think he's as good as anyone when it comes to dealin' with the most important threat ever.

Afghanistan is a runaway train that's gonna come off the rails soon as the Merkans quit EyeRack an' start blowin' up Afstan, again. Karzai's headed fer the selfsame troublems that are plaguin' Perv the Mushy Sherrif.

Our First Nations folks is still fightin' 100 year old land claims.

Our water supply is threatened by wasteful Merkans who wanna tap into our clean lakes an' rivers now that they poisoned their own.

We got a bigass tradin' partner who is the worst human rights violator in the world an' who sells us tainted products fer our pets and our kids.

I reckon I could go on and on tellin' about things that are way more important than reformin' that retirement home fer friends of pryministers, the Senate.

It ain't just Happy Jack Laydown who's takin' his eye off the ball. They're all doin' it. Well... except maybe the gal I adore, Earth Mother Lizzie May.

JB

The Senate is a rock hanging around the country's neck. The purpose it was created to serve has long gone by the wayside.
If we do not have a Triple E Senate we need something different altogether. How about Referenua like they have in Switzerland? That would bring the government to heel without having to pay deadwood political appointees to do their master's bidding.

"And by the way, now I know I've returned to political blogging. A couple of days ago I was accused of worshipping Jack Layton. Today I'm being accused of supporting the Liberals. Just like old times. ;-)" Posted by: pogge at November 5, 2007 11:37 AM

That didn't take long at all did it? Got to love the way words are put in your mouth. Now, if Kaleta had said you want an unelected Senate to stop/block Harper (as in an institution he does not control and cannot simply dictate to which the Senate traditionally provides the function of) instead of a Liberal one then she would have honestly represented your first statement, but that is not what happened.

Thank you for this post, I happen to agree with you on this having the appearance/possibility of being a political tactical move by Layton that will distract from more pressing/important/urgent issues, especially when he has to know that only under the provisions of the Constitution can the Senate be abolished and no referendum can change that reality. Therefore to be demanding such seems far more like grandstanding than serious, and when combined with Harper's current focus on the Senate it does have the appearance of coordinating yet again an issue with the CPC to try and maximize any damage that can be done to the Libs. Like I said in the prior thread too often it looks like Layton is more afraid/opposed to the Libs because of the threat they represent to his seat count than of Harper's CPC despite its governing philosophy being a far Far FAR greater threat to core NDP principles/policies and achievements federally to date. Whether it is coordinated or not it is a de facto alliance from my perspective and one that risks far too much for any possible NDP gains and risks the nation by risking a Harper majority government in which he can and will radically change the laws of our land to suit his ideological beliefs. Which since Straussians are what they are is so inherently anti-democratic the idea that any party claiming to stand for democracy and principles first being willing to work in any manner with them to attack other opposition first (let alone the most probable alternative next time out to the CPC for government) strikes me as betraying core NDP principles.

I have the problems I have with Layton not only because I think he is selling out the nation, it is also because I believe he is selling out the NDP as a party of principles first. That he has changed the focus of the NDP from principles and core policies above all else as the driving focus to winning seats first and foremost even if that means sacrificing principles in the short term. I see that as a betrayal of the NDP I once supported and valued and voted for a few times. I liked having a place I could park my vote on principled grounds if I was particularly offended by the PCPC/Libs either nationally or in my riding. I don't like not having that anymore.

Kaleta:

You need to learn that democracy is not simply voting, it is things like rule of law governing and checks and balances which the Senate in its current form provides and since it cannot initiate money bills nor simply stop them and bring down governments its own power is limited/balanced. It represents a place where the popular pressures of the day do not dictate policy, which is a good thing because just because there is public demand for something does not automatically make it the right/best/healthy thing for a nation to actually do. By having unelected Senators that do not have to worry about regaining their seats periodically they cannot be so easily bought by lobbyists and interest groups and therefore are more likely to take a longer term broader perspective on how legislation will actually impact the nation instead of being caught up in partisan political gamesmanship as we routinely see in the HoC.

I believe it is that function of the Senate that POGGE values as to many Canadian voters/citizens. It is funny, but when hearings were held and those that came were massively in favour of the Senate as it is now and not wanting significant changes let alone abolishment. Too often it is those that do not understand how our democracy and governmental structures work seem to be interested in such change, mostly because they hear unelected and equated that automatically as anti-democratic when in truth that is not always correct. When there are other and overriding institutions like the HoC that are democratically elected they check and more than offset the power of the unelected body while the unelected body helps check the powers of the elected body. This is not such a bad thing and is not automatically anathema to democracy despite what some might think.

Whether it is coordinated or not it is a de facto alliance from my perspective and one that risks far too much for any possible NDP gains and risks the nation by risking a Harper majority government in which he can and will radically change the laws of our land to suit his ideological beliefs.

All Liberals have to do to stop this from happening is vote NDP.

Scotian,

I respect you but this:

"It represents a place where the popular pressures of the day do not dictate policy, which is a good thing because just because there is public demand for something does not automatically make it the right/best/healthy thing for a nation to actually do. By having unelected Senators that do not have to worry about regaining their seats periodically they cannot be so easily bought by lobbyists and interest groups and therefore are more likely to take a longer term broader perspective on how legislation will actually impact the nation instead of being caught up in partisan political gamesmanship as we routinely see in the HoC."

Is a fundamentally undemocratic notion. Certainly, what's popular isn't always right. But to say that we need some unelected body to save us from our stupidity is elitist. They've already been bought and paid for by the Liberal Party. They're party hacks.

To protect individuals from the oppression of something like a Harper majority we have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

To protect us from electoral accidents producing asshole conservative or Liberal governments we need electoral reform.

We need a lot of revolutionary change in Canada in fact. But we don't need a legislative body of Liberal appointees to protect us from ourselves.

Overall, I support the NDP's proposal to abolish the Senate, although I entertain idle daydreams of a body of non-partisan citizens (Suzuki, Arar, Naomi Klein, etc.,) Canadians who have done a lot of work for Canada and the world, being elected for life to a reformed Senate. But it's simpler just to abolish it.

Well this post has certainly smoked out the crypto-fascists among us :-)

Well this post has certainly smoked out the crypto-fascists among us :-)

Based on this I'd say it smoked out at least one idiot.

I'd be bitter too if I were caught red-handed supporting an unelected senate as a check against the will of the people :-)

That doesn't make him a crypto-fascist. I can think of better ways to block someone like Harpo than the Senate, but preferring a Liberal-dominated Senate to Harpo's agenda isn't fascism.

Kaleta really doesn't know what democracy is, does s/he? Sad, really.

There's nothing wrong with Layton's proposal. But there's something very, very wrong with the following statement he made:

"We're not a party that's going to go increasing taxes,"

http://tinyurl.com/2xnom2

Has he been watching too many of the Republicans' debates?

Ya, I was wondering about that one.

I've always considered myself some kind of Progressive Conservative. No - not in the Diefenbaker/Mulroney sense, but in a more fundamental sense of while I support (what are called 'progressive') policies I think a drag on exuberance and a reminder of continuity is rather a good thing.

Yes, I think the Senate should be changed from a Liberal retirement home yet the way to do that is at the ballot box for the Commons.

It is easy to claim that it is full of "Party hackes" ... but that charge was also leveled at the proportional rep. scheme suggested in Ontario in the last provincial election, and I supported that.

My reaction there is that ... "yes - so what?" That is the purpose of the Upper House - the members are freeded from Party discipline and can follow their conscious. The perpetual election campaign south of us, where every word, every sentence and nuisance is inspected for political (not principled or even utilitarian) implications is not a good atmosphere in which to operate a country.

I sort of like the Senate the way it is.

croghan27: I sort of like the Senate the way it is.

Hear! Hear! Other than the Progressive Conservative bit at the beginning, I agree completely. Of course, this totally sinks you, credibility-wise. :)