Canadian Politics Today

=> so confident you are! Wait now waldo, isn't a fundamental aspect of being a Senator one that presumes upon a Senator being an independent decision maker... cause, like, uhhh... elections challenge that fundamental premise as an election would link an elected/nominated Senator to a "constituency"; one making said Senator an accountable representative.

=> c'mon member wilber, given your so confident claim, given those reform proposals of the 80s/90s & given the more recent Harper Conservative failed/stalled forays into Senate reform, why have no other provinces taken up this Alberta lead? Things that make one go... hmmmmm, hey!

=> waddbout the relatively recent introduced 'independent Senate appointments process'? Assuming you're even aware of it, what's your concern(s) with it... what's your beef with it man? Why is your boy O'Foole and the CPC so against it?

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.

The point though is whether this is something that our public schools should be instilling in our children?

I don't think students should be warped into the same political ideology of their teacher or the political leanings of the party in power in a given province, whether right or left.  Nobody on the left wants their kids turned into Trump supporters and no parent on the right wants their kids to become a Marxists because their teacher told them it was the best ideology and Trump sucks.

There is an argument to be made of making our young students into good citizens, which simply means knowing some history (good and bad and everything in between), the basics of how our government works (civics) etc.  Playing the national anthem in the morning.  The same things an immigrant needs to know in order to pass a citizenship test.  You can let students debate, just don't have the teacher lead kids to have one opinion or another.  Teach kids about residential schools, then let them debate.

I think people in Canada know extremely little about their country, both good and bad.  It's pathetic.  Canadians know more about the US than Canada.  If you don't know anything about your country it's harder to feel connected to it and the other people that live in it.  If you feel you don't share anything with other Canadians across the country you will have less national unity.  On the other hand you don't want to be spreading false narratives and slanted propaganda to people just to build a sense of nationalism.  Just teach kids the facts of history and I think they will come to connect with their country more.  If they don't that's their choice too.

I think it's important to feel like you're a part of the national family that is Canada, and in order to do that we need to listen to the stories of everyone in this country so we understand each other more.  I like learning about the refugee stories of different immigrant groups too, it makes me understand why they came to Canada, and gets rid of the "othering" thoughts we tend to do when we don't understand somebody.  What are the stories of the Quebecois?  Different indigenous groups?  People on the east coast?  If you still don't like each other well that's fine but at least you understand them.

timed in association with Alberta municipal elections to be held this fall, Alberta's UCP/Kenney brought in legislation to also allow Albertans to, once again, vote to nominate candidates for Senate appointment - currently there are 2 vacant Alberta Senate positions. To date, Alberta is the only province to hold elections to nominate candidates for Senate appointment (previous related legislation expired in 2016)... in total over time, Alberta has had 5 of it's elected/nominated Senators appointed - 1 by PM Mulroney & 4 by PM Harper.

of course, CPC/O'Toole has jumped on the opportunity to once again push for 'elected/nominated' Senators... vowing to appoint elected/nominated Alberta senators while encouraging other provinces to take up Alberta's lead and do the same. It appears the CPC/O'Toole are a tad hesitant to resurrect the failed Harper attempt/want to introduce an elected Senate to Canada; something that would require the agreement of seven provinces representing 50% of the population to implement an elected Senate: