[poquas]

ridenrain ridenrain:

In 8 years when ours leave, who are the Liberals going to replace them with and will the new appointments have a time limit? I hardly doubt it.

It's making the best of a bad situation and if the Conservatives have to flood every seat to make effective and positive change, then I support it. Something has to be done because what's there now isn't working.

Get your facts straight.

There is no eight year term.

Those that have been recently appointed have “promised” to support set term legislation when and IF it’s brought to a vote.

I'm beginning to think you share your brain with Harper. Neither one of you can seem to get it straight.

[OnTheIce]

poquas poquas:

You just don't get it do you? Reform of the Senate has NOTHING to do with the members of the House of Commons.

Oh really? Do some homework

[ridenrain]

That's still more towards a functioning senate than the 13 years of Liberal party rule has achieved.

[poquas]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

poquas poquas:

You just don't get it do you? Reform of the Senate has NOTHING to do with the members of the House of Commons.

Oh really? Do some homework

Here’s the Classics comics version so you might understand just how out to lunch you are.

To open up the Constitution and to reform the Senate a majority of Canadians in a majority of provinces would all have to agree to modify the constitution. Since that would affect Ontario and Quebec in a big way by reducing their potential clout, they will NEVER agree.

Now instead of making a fool of yourself AGAIN, do a little research.

[OnTheIce]

poquas poquas:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

poquas poquas:

You just don't get it do you? Reform of the Senate has NOTHING to do with the members of the House of Commons.

Oh really? Do some homework

Here’s the Classics comics version so you might understand just how out to lunch you are.

To open up the Constitution and to reform the Senate a majority of Canadians in a majority of provinces would all have to agree to modify the constitution. Since that would affect Ontario and Quebec in a big way by reducing their potential clout, they will NEVER agree.

Now instead of making a fool of yourself AGAIN, do a little research.

Rewind back to 2006 genius.

You can have Senate reform without opening the Constitution, but surely you knew that, right?

[poquas]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Rewind back to 2006 genius.

You can have Senate reform without opening the Constitution, but surely you knew that, right?

That's really sad.

Please explain what senate reform is....... to you.

[PluggyRug]

Here's a thought....stack the senate with Liberal appointee's, weld the doors shut, situation normal.

[Unsound]

Or the PM could just start "appointing" the winners of senatorial elections in the provinces. If enough of the provinces started holding the elections the PM, of whichever party, would have a hard time defending a decision not to appoint the elected senator. That gives us 1 of the three "E"s we're looking for.

[Lemmy]

...and when Quebec "elects" a separatist to Senate, you think Stevie (or Iggy) is gonna go along with that? No chance in hell.

[poquas]

Lemmy Lemmy:

...and when Quebec "elects" a separatist to Senate, you think Stevie (or Iggy) is gonna go along with that? No chance in hell.

Not a hope in hell. I'm still waiting for OnTheIce to respond. It seems he has the answer.

[OnTheIce]

poquas poquas:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Rewind back to 2006 genius.

You can have Senate reform without opening the Constitution, but surely you knew that, right?

That's really sad.

Please explain what senate reform is....... to you.

Sad is that you're waiting here for an answer while I'm out with friends popping back a few....and you're questioning others on whether or not they have a job?

Start with the definition of reform, can you handle that? Good.

Now, go back to 2006 and look at the bill Harper brought forth for the Senate.

I know what you're going to say, that it doesn't meet your standard of "reform" as it didn't go far enough.

But then again, had Harper abolished the Senate, you'd still find fault as that's what you do.

[OnTheIce]

For all you people, left and right, I want to know how YOU would handle this situation if you were Stephen Harper.

Would you leave the seats empty?

Would you fill them with some new-ish process?

[Lemmy]

Ideally, I would fill the seats by election. Absent that, Harper did the right thing as Conservative leader. It's his duty to his party to put his party in the best position he can. Liberals do the same thing, just as it is their duty to do so.

Until the rules change, you can't bitch about PM's using those rules properly and intelligently.

[DerbyX]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

For all you people, left and right, I want to know how YOU would handle this situation if you were Stephen Harper.

Would you leave the seats empty?

Would you fill them with some new-ish process?

Harper could have filled it with non-partisan people, politicians with a reputation for integrity but he didn't.

He instead choose to fill the seats with his cronies.

[ASLplease]

DerbyX DerbyX:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

For all you people, left and right, I want to know how YOU would handle this situation if you were Stephen Harper.

Would you leave the seats empty?

Would you fill them with some new-ish process?

Harper could have filled it with non-partisan people, politicians with a reputation for integrity but he didn't.

He instead choose to fill the seats with his cronies.

and who would that be?