In related developments, sources at CTV reveal the Senate is “unelected”;
Prime Minister Stephen Harper plans to fill 18 vacancies in the unelected Senate with Conservative loyalists before Christmas, CTV News has learned.
Sources said Harper is concerned the Senate committee system isn’t working properly because there are only 20 Conservative senators sitting in the Liberal-dominated Red Chamber.
But according to insiders, what really drove Harper to move quickly and fill the vacant Senate seats is the possibility of losing political power in January at the hands of the Liberal-NDP coalition
I know. It came as a shock to me, too.
17 Tories and Borat Dion. a non partisan appointment.
Game Set Match.
Harper you magnificent bastard.
Harper being Harper,principles? what are those?
But I am sure his loyal backers will rationalize yet another flip-flop.
Oh Sean S. go flip your Iggy over easy
Sean S. care to share your tips? I’m not too well rehearsed on this flip flop thing. As a liberal I’m sure you have LOTS of tips to share. Especially with your vast adscam experience.
Ezra is being sued..again. It seems someone does not like Ezra providing the link between Iggy and Adscam.
http://ezralevant.com/
I also wrote the PM last week and said “Fill those vacancies NOW!”
I’m furious–but not at all surprised–by the ABUSE our fine PM is taking from the disloyal opposition mob: political and MSM. These people are despicable and would tear the PM and his caucus to shreds if they could.
Priggy is an utter jerk and has openly stated that he will NOT negotiate the budget with the government. Fine, Your Highness . . .
PMSH is damned by these jackals no matter what he does. So, Mr. Harper, it’s time to go for the jugular: use the power at your disposal–you didn’t set up the system: the Liberals did!–to kick as hard and as far as you can.
The thought of toadies like Oliver, Robertson, Mansbridge, Fife, Boag, and May seeing their Senate sinecure snatched away is “music to my ears”. It couldn’t happen to a more deserving coven!
Man, when I heard that Dion had “promised” screaming mimi May a senate seat, that is when I wanted PM Harper to fill the vacant seats. If, this keeps her out of government in both houses I am 100% in favor. Opposition parties have been threatening taking over the government, they asked for a fight and that is what PM Harper will give them. Gloves are off!
You have to play by the rules as they are now written. You can work to have them changed for the future, but you play by the rules as they are, now how you wish them to be.
Yet another broken promise. As Coyne can add this to his list of “ever-lengthening list of jaw-dropping about-faces” by Harper and Gerry Nichols can ask again “Are the Tories (and Stephen Harper, with his “I’m not really a conservative” routine) worth defending?“.
If there was ever any doubt that the Reform Party and its ideals are dead – and, really, by now there should not be – this is the last shovel full of dirt on the casket of the Reform Party.
Like Social Credit, like the Progressive Party, now just a sentence in the encyclopedia of Canadian history. Harper soon to follow.
Hmmmm… and yet on Conservative blogs I hear only relief over this move. And don’t think for a second that this means Harper has changed his plans for the Senate.
Ted’s concern for us Reformers is touching though.
with no senate appointments available, the currency of the coalition will not be “1 senate seat” as payment for your support:-))))
The Party that appointed Frank Mahovlich to the Senate cannot claim the moral high ground.
So let me get this straight: The libs appoint Iggy their leader when their constitution says they are supposed to elect the leader, but this is okay because of the circumstances. But Harper follows the country’s constitution and appoint senators, because the libs are planning to use senate seats as rewards for their greentard and separatist pro-coalition operatives once the revolution is complete.
And all Ted can find to criticize is Harper’s flip-flop?
mmmmkay….
Ted at December 11, 2008 9:36 AM
Hi Ted…Care to expand on your stmt concerning PMSH filling the vacant senate seats? Perhaps you could enlighten me by explaining what you think He should do. Leave them for the coalition to fill perhaps?
RSVP
Actually, ted, Harper isn’t breaking his promise. He wants an elected Senate and one with limited terms of office.
He’s tried for the limited terms – and the Liberal Senate, heh, turned it down. He’s tried for an elected Senate, but the heh, Liberal=NDP=Bloc Opposition won’t hear of it. So, he has a choice.
He’s also aware that the public agenda of the Coalition, IF they got to power without a democratic election and with their signed agreement with the Bloc to reject any democratic accountability for almost two years – that this public agenda of the Coalition is to fill the Senate with their buddies. Do you support this violation of our democracy and this lack of integrity? Well?
Therefore, Harper has no choice; he has to follow the CURRENT RULES for the Senate. The opposition won’t allow elections or limited terms. Therefore, he either leaves the Senate empty until the Liberals et al take over and fill it with their best pals. Or, he follows the RULES and appoints new Senators.
Oh, I’d bet you didn’t notice his stricture that IF he got the system changed to elections, that they would stand down for an election. I bet you missed that.
So, what’s your solution, ted, to this reality? Your people won’t allow any Senate reform. None. Not even accountability. Nothing. They like their perks and patronage. What would you do if you were Harper? Leave the Senate seats unfilled until the Liberals, someday, take over, and fill it with their buddies?
Unfortunately Prime Minister Harper cannot change the Canadian Senate system today. Even though the majority of Western Canadians are sickened by the existence of this institution it cannot be unilaterally fixed. One must play within the rules, and the rules are that Senate appointments are made by the Prime Minister of Canada. The liebral shills will,of course, bemoan the fact that this is not Senate reform. Alberta has one elected Senator but also is saddled with Cretin appointed liebral flunkies with no mandate to speak for Albertans. These so called Senators do not voice concerns of Albertans but rather parrot whatever their morally bankrupt Liebral masters tell them. Yes please, fill the Senate vacancies and change from this system from within. That doing this denies Dion and Lizzy May a permanent spot at the Public TROUGH is a side effect that can be endured. Watch for MSM to attack the Prime Minister over this as they now perceive that the GG and Senate appointments are theirs for the many years of propaganda services provided to the Central Government at the deterement and expense of ordinary Canadians.
CTV headline ‘Quebec willing to go to court over Senate reform.’
The Boat Anchor province strikes again.
How long did it take them to allow women to vote?
At least they are consistent – consistently behind the times.
tephen Harper, Vancouver, December 14, 2006: “A senate chair should be occupied by someone with a democratic mandate, and Canadians should be able to mark their ballot for their Senator, as well as for their MP. We need a ballot with senators’ names, and seats with senators that have been elected. Under a Conservative government, Canadians will choose who sits in this chair. In the 21st century, those who want to sit in the parliament of a democratic state should have a mandate from the people. The Prime Minister currently holds a virtually free hand in the selection of Senators. As Prime Minister I will use that power to establish a federal process for electing senators. Alberta has already held provincial elections for individuals aspiring to the Senate. A national Conservative government will establish a national process for senatorial elections in each province and territory on an interim basis.”
On the Conservative website, now wiped clean of the 2006 platform and even the 2008 “platform”, Harper said “A Conservative government will not appoint to the Senate a person who does not have a mandate from the people of Canada.”
He broke that one on his first day in office with the appointment of Fortier.
What mandate will these stack-a-deck senators have?
What process has Harper tried to establish?
With all the rationalizing here you would think this was a Mulroney era Progressive Conservative website lashing out at Preston Manning and Stephen Harper and their newly established Reform Party.
Harper has broken more promises in 2 and a half years than Mulroney, Chretien and Martin combined.
ted – you still haven’t answered my questions. You are behaving like a Liberal, a member of a Ruling rather than Political Party, someone who acts as a Sovereign rather than an elected representative.
HOW can Harper fulfil his agenda of an elected Senate IF the other elected representatives of the House of Commons refuse to agree to such a change? Please tell me how.
You can’t be that naive or partisan that you blame Harper for the unwillingness of the Liberal, NDP, Bloc Members of the House refusing to allow any Senate reform. Or, are you doing just that?
Martin appointed 17 senators:
– 13 Liberals (including some independents who then sat as Liberals) – 75%
– 4 Conservatives (including Hugh Segal) – 24%
– 1 NDP – 1%
Harper, despite promising not to appoint any unelected senator, has made 2 appointments already (one on his very first day as PM!) and looks to be making 18 more appointments of unelected senators:
– 20 Conservatives – 100%
– 0 Liberals – 0%
– 0 NDP – 0%
“HOW can Harper fulfil his agenda of an elected Senate IF the other elected representatives of the House of Commons refuse to agree to such a change?”
ET, ever the kool-aid drinking apologist.
I am not the one who promised to appoint only elected senators. You need to ask Harper why he is breaking his promise and one of his fundamental democratic policy planks, not me.
Can someone please tell me why ‘selling’ a Senate seat in the US gets you arrested but to a Canadian Liberal it’s business as usual?
Ted, if you are so insistent on picking nits, your hair needs some attention.
Kate- sign me up as your premier supporter for a role as senator! What a delicious development it would be to see you smokin’ up to parliament on your racing bike whipping off your helmet shaking out your hair and blowing lefty blowhards into their deserved oblivion!
Kate- sign me up as your premier supporter for a role as senator! What a delicious development it would be to see you smokin’ up to parliament on your racing bike whipping off your helmet shaking out your hair and blowing lefty blowhards into their deserved oblivion!
Kate and Deb Grey could ride up together… vroom!
Ted, do you have a point or are you just whining for the heck of it? Until the Senate actually becomes more balanced, any meaningful senate reform or legislation in general will be stopped, hacked or delayed for simply partisan reasons. Even with 18 more senators of conservative persuasion (and not necessarily party members) the Lieberals still have more seats so there should be a more balanced approach to it’s function. It would be a win for Canada and Canadians in general to have a functioning senate.
Canoe poll on the Senate:
http://tinyurl.com/6fako4
7 questions but currently a Deathmatch between:
-Senators are elected like MPs are
&
-Abolish it completely
As an Albertan, I voted for “Elected like MPs” are because we need a bicameral system despite Gerry from Toronto’s wish that Alberta should separate in order to have a say in their own future.
Just imagine !!
Some long time Liberal Hack Senator going – make that TRYING to go toe-to-toe with Don Cherry !!??
You thought a HNIC interview was lively ??
Cherry and Oliver !? Or Newman ? Or Galloway ?
They fact that there are currently 17 vacancies and the Senate is still “functioning” just shows how useless it is. How will they ever get all that terribly urgent and important work done with 17 Senators missing? It should be scrapped or failing that, reform it so that it serves some useful purpose.
Quick, anyone know how many CBC/CTV people are in line for a Senate seat?
>> Quick, anyone know how many CBC/CTV people are in line for a Senate seat?
Off the top of my head, I’d say… TOO MANY!
CBC senate seats?
no these golddiggers only want the GG office.
SomeGuyinOttawa,
Ottawankers like you should know that Albertans have been pushing to Reform the Senate for 20 years now.
We need a functioning bicameral system in Canada to reduce the corruption that is hardwired into the Canadian governmental system.
Lib/NDP/Bloc: **…we want our public political party funding…**
Lib/NDP/Bloc: **…appoint Lizzy May to senate…**
CTV: **Quebec willing to go to court over Senate reform**
Lib/NDP/Bloc: **…Bloc members to be appointed to senate seats…**
ulianov: **The optics are great…keep it up Steve.**
You’re correct ulianov, the optics couldn’t be better. Election please!
OZ: Maybe you should learn how to read? I said if it can’t be scrapped all together (my preference), then REFORM it so that it serves a useful purpose.
And don’t confuse my place of residence with the idiocy of the Federal politics.
Ottawanker,
You mean if Ontario’s Green Chamber numerical supremacy can’t be entrenched for all time by scrapping the bicameral system, then reform is OK with you?
What a swell guy.
Pushing for scrapping the Red Chamber really shows you care about reform./sarc
“Ted, do you have a point”
Yes, Texas Canuck. The point is this: Harper was elected in 2006 on the promise that he would “never” appoint an unelected senator. With this massively partisan patronage appointment, Harper has not just broken another important promise but shattered one of his fundamental cornerstone principles.
In other words, you just cannot trust this guy. As Ignatieff said last night, Harper has a difficult time with “truthfulness”.
– promises no elected senators will be appointed => 20 unelected senators appointed
– tells us there will be no recession => a month later we are in recession
– tells us that a Conservative government will never allow a deficit => a month later he goes from no deficit, to possibly a deficit, to a deficit is a good thing (while his own Budget Officer says the deficit was avoidable and is a result of Harper’s record-breaking spending)
– promises not to tax income trusts => taxes income trusts
– promises to make only budgets a matter of confidence => makes pretty much every matter before the House a matter of confidence
– promises to only have elections on fixed dates or if the government loses the confidence of the House => calls an election without losing the confidence of the House and then when he does lose the confidence of the House he cancels an opposition day, doesn’t hold a promised vote on his Fiscal Update and then cancels Parliament altogether to avoid a confidence vote
– promises to deliver on wait times, the most important of The Five Priorities (TM) (remember them?) => nothing, wait times are worse
We all know that within 5 minutes of a Lib-NDP coalition gov’t taking over, the first thing they would have done was appoint senators. Libs have no moral high ground on this one, baby. They were frothing at the mouth in anticipation of filling those vacancies. (and so were Don Newman and Lizzie May.)
Harper has tried to get reform done; provinces are slow to change, everyone else is dragging their feet. Why on earth would he leave those seats open much longer. Good on you Mr. Harper. Well done. Stack it fast and stack it good.
I might also add: Harper would have looked like a fool if the gov’t had been defeated and the seats were still vacant. Liberals would have been laughing their heads off while naming names.
He’s doing absolutely the right thing.
OZ: If you think a reformed Senate will make a difference, then go for it.
“OZ: If you think a reformed Senate will make a difference, then go for it.”
~SomeGuyinOttawa
Thank you, Ottawanker.
I was just waiting for your permission./
PM Harper is not “stacking” the Senate.
Read here:
“26. If at any Time on the Recommendation of the Governor General the Queen thinks fit to direct that Four or Eight Members be added to the Senate, the Governor General may by Summons to Four or Eight qualified Persons (as the Case may be), representing equally the Four Divisions of Canada, add to the Senate accordingly.””
“A Stacked Senate
October 15, 2008 by The Trusty Tory
See, sometimes there are unelected Liberal Senators, who like to stall legislation passed by democratically elected Conservative governments.
That’s where this comes in handy:
26. If at any Time on the Recommendation of the Governor General the Queen thinks fit to direct that Four or Eight Members be added to the Senate, the Governor General may by Summons to Four or Eight qualified Persons (as the Case may be), representing equally the Four Divisions of Canada, add to the Senate accordingly.”
This is what happened the last time these unelected Senators tried to overrule democracy.”
http://returnofthetory.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/a-stacked-senate/
No, ted, Harper was elected on the AGENDA of an elected Senate. Please try to understand the difference between a ‘promise’ and an ‘agenda’.
A ‘promise’ is made by someone with the expectation that it can be fulfilled. You can’t make a promise about something over which you, alone, have no control. Harper, alone, has no control over the vote of the Liberals, NDP and Bloc. Or the Liberal Senate.
An ‘agenda’ is a commitment to doing something, in this case, reforming the Senate. Harper tried to make the Senate accountable; it refused. He tried to limit their terms; they refused. He’s tried to get an elected Senate; the Liberals, NDP and Bloc refuse.
So, stop with the semantics, ted. Harper didn’t promise anything. You can’t promise what is not in your control.
Now, again, ted, how about answering my question. What should Harper do about the Senate, when your Liberals, NDP and BLoc all refuse to allow it to be reformed? Well?
We’ve been through all your other assertions of ‘broken promises’ (income trusts, etc) and have found your assertions to be lacking both content, facticity and realism.
You know, a politician who provides an agenda and then, when the situation (economic, safety etc) changes, reacts to that situation and must change his agenda is what is called a LEADER. Someone who can’t adjust and follows through only with the original program is called a ROBOT.
Now, since you obviously support the Coalition, with your anger that Harper didn’t allow that Coalition to grab power from us, the electorate, this week, could you also tell us why you support such a vicious attack on our democracy?
By the way, Ignatieff’s signature on the coalition means that he is now aligned, operationally, with the NDP and BLOC. So, despite the polls against the coalition, despite its being an outrageous attack on our democracy, I am sure that you will insist that Ignatieff fulfill his PROMISE to ‘coalesce’ with these two parties.
About the myth that Ignatieff was “the last one” to sign the coersion-allition pact here is the truth – Ignatieff’s name is THIRD of the Liberals.
THIRD!!!! Amongst 77.
Got that media. He was not a reluctant aw chucks gotta think about this with my big brain and finally gave tepid approval by signing.
He signed THIRD!!! That’s being pretty eager don’t you think???
Especially considering he probably had his own coup to take over the Liberal party without a vote already in place.
Ted my dear friend, quit trying to look at the world through rose coloured glasses. There are things in this world that mere PMs cannot control like the global economy.
If mommy can’t get you your new Playstation for Christmas because she can’t afford it, it isn’t lying even if she promised. It’s life and there is no Santa for the Canadian economy.
Adapting to changing circumstances is not lying. Promising to abolish the GST and then denying he ever said that is lying, unless you are Jean Crouton.
As far as wait times, I have some personal experience in that field: I know of at least one province that received millions a while back to reduce wait times but have yet to spend a cent, except for “consultants” and committees. Can’t fault the feds for that.
There has also been more than a few changes and reforms that have died or been religated to limbo in the senate by partisan politics.
I think the minimum age to be appointed to the senate is something like 35. I suggest appointing young conservatives as the leftards wouldn’t be able to replace them with other leftards for 4 decades. Stack the senate so it will be conservative forever or until they’re elected – whichever comes first.
Seen it on ‘CTV’ news last night. The spin on PMSH is breaking another promise. No matter what PMSH does it’s wrong, so he may as well fill the Senate seats with Conservatives. I personally don’t agree with the way Senate is set up, but until he has a majority for 4 years he can not make whole sale changes. They are already spinning the Conservatives as right wing, next it will be ‘extremely right wing’.
ET:
Stop playing semantics.
Here is what Harper said: “A conservative government will not appoint to the senate anyone who does not have a mandate directly from Canadians.” He has also stated flat out that appointments would have to wait until his election process was in place.
That is a promise. Repeated over and over by Harper. There are no “as long as my legislation gets passed”
They already have appointed to the senate two people who do not have a mandate directly from Canadians and Harper is proposing to appoint to the senate 18 MORE Canadians who do not have a mandate directly from Canadians.
A ‘promise’ is made by someone with the expectation that it can be fulfilled. You can’t make a promise about something over which you, alone, have no control.
That is not correct. Look it up in any dictionary. A promise is a declaration assuring that one will or will not do something.
By contrast, a “reckless promise” is a promise about something over which you, alone, have no control.
A “lie”, however, is making a promise about something that you know you cannot or will not deliver on.
“If mommy can’t get you your new Playstation for Christmas because she can’t afford it, it isn’t lying even if she promised.”
But it is a broken promise. That is all I’ve said. It was also a reckless promise just to curry favour with your kid. It is bad parenting to make promises you can’t fulfill, that you know you can’t fulfill.
Ted,
Squawk, squawk, squawk.
Harper is required by the dictates of reality to play the game the way it was set up for the liberals by the liberals and the media with the rules they wanted which were designed to benefit themselves exclusively. Then you lot, who set the rules, whine that Harper has made use of them for reasons you don’t agree with. Boo fricken hoo.
The simple, ugly truth is that Preston (and to a lesser extent Kim Campbell) were destroyed by the liberal system for the unforgivable sin of telling the truth and not lying with the sociopath’s believability.
Harper has one choice: appoint senators or risk the liberals doing it. Harper doesn’t have the power to keep his promise. If he did, are you suggesting he wouldn’t do it? If you concede that Harper didn’t keep his promise solely because he couldn’t, then your point is moot.
As for lying in elections, truth kills. We, as an electorate, beg and demand that our politicians lie to us. The politicians who lie with the sweetest forked tongues win. We punish those who tell us the truth – especially unpleasant truth. We all know this.
Yet your faux-outrage doesn’t seem to carry over to your guys who don’t even pepper their lies with remote – if rare – grains of truth. They lie deliberately yet only Harper should be held accountable.
The liberals have made division, skulduggery, manipulations, and thug-politics the central (only?) plank of their existence for decades but only Harper is considered “mean” and “partisan.”
This, Ted, is why we hate you (and all the other lawyers, journalists and liberals)