Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Tim Harper: Senate dean gives reform failing grade

On the Star’s front page of Sept. 13, 1979, Attorney-General Roy McMurtry was promising a citizen review of police complaints, Ted Kennedy was rumoured to be challenging Jimmy Carter for the Democratic nomination and half a million people were fleeing Hurricane Fred.

On Page 2, the paper reported that Prime Minister Joe Clark was likely to appoint Lowell Murray to the Senate.

He did.

And he’s still here.

Murray’s future is secure — retirement with his wife, even a new dog — but he’s not so certain about the future of the place he has represented for 32 years.

Murray, representing a party that no longer exists, appointed by a prime minister who last brushed his teeth at 24 Sussex more than three decades ago, has had a distinguished career in the Senate.

But had he been appointed today, in Stephen Harper’s proposed brave new Senate world, he would have been forced to find other unemployment by 1988, at the age of 51, instead of leaving on his 75th birthday this September.

That would have been just fine for the dean of the Senate.

He says he probably would have left when Clark was defeated the next year rather than look for work at age 51.

Murray has sat in cabinet, led the Senate for his Progressive Conservatives when he was outnumbered three-to-one and has earned the right to provide some sober second thought on Harper’s Senate reform bill, introduced Tuesday.

Murray thinks it’s a mess.

It might surprise Harper that Murray sides with New Democrats.

He would call a referendum on the future of the body he has represented for 32 years.

“That would lead to a proper debate on the matter,’’ Murray says.

“We ask Canadians, do we need one? And, if so, what kind of a Senate?

“And if a majority in 10 provinces said they don’t need it, then it’s done.’’

Under Harper’s legislation, the provinces and territories would be “strongly encouraged’’ to have voters choose a list of proposed senators to be appointed by the prime minister.

Senators appointed after October 2008 would be limited to one nine-year term.

As New Democrat David Christopherson points out, that is nine years, with a total salary of $1 million, an annual pension of about $35,000, with the senator being prohibited by law from ever being accountable to voters.

“It may technically be Senate reform, but it’s not democracy,’’ says Christopherson, his party’s democratic reform critic.

Full Article
Source: Toronto Star 

No comments:

Post a Comment