guys, guys... even before the waldo might choose to engage on the pro's vs. con's of an elected Senate, youse guys are 'out of touch'... you're jumping ahead of just one of the fundamental issues that must still be resolved. As it stands, this "Alberta only approach" is one still subject to constitutional reckoning. For both sides that question the legitimacy of provinces holding candidate elections/nominations for Senate appointment, each side holds to existing constitutional amending formulas that they respectfully interpret to either allow, or alternatively, disallow these provincial "aspirations". Ultimately, as has occurred in regard other Senate reform attempts, it is expected the Supreme Court of Canada will need to review/rule. But why would any of this get in the way of Conservative Prime Ministers (Mulroney & Harper) hell-bent on appointing candidates nominated by the province of Alberta?
obviously when Harper's attempts to first abolish the Senate... then reform the Senate... went nowhere, this Alberta "end-around" is simply another means to attempt to, without constitutional review on its legitimacy, introduce a path towards an elected Senate.
There is absolutely nothing that says the provinces can't request senators of their choice, selected by the method of their choice. Any federal government which rejects those requests wants nothing other than to use the Senate as its own tool.
Home
Contact
Login
Register