Roundup: Reverberations from the Senate bombshell

So, that whole Justin Trudeau expelling senators from caucus thing. It was a very interesting day to say the least. Trudeau’s speech, with all of its populist bilge about the Senate being “broken” can be found here. Senate Liberal leader (as he is now styled) James Cowan posted some thoughts on what the change means and how it’s more about solving the problem of the perception that Trudeau was issuing orders to his senate caucus when he really wasn’t, and you can see him discuss this on Power & Politics here. And yes, there seems to be some differing ideas on what “independent” means – who would have thought? My own column about the move looks at why it’s a problem with respect to responsible government and the loss of experience in caucus. Emmett Macfarlane, whom the Liberals consulted on the move, writes that there is nothing fundamentally unworkable about a “non-partisan” Senate, and that Trudeau’s move is an attempt at a culture change in the Chamber. Here’s more reaction from Paul Wells, John Geddes, and Michael Den Tandt. Senator Joyal is torn about the move and worries about the loss of collegiality, which is a very good point – it’s easier to use the Senate as a punching bag if you don’t have to see senators at caucus meetings. The NDP are making noise that Trudeau opposed their opposition day motion “on the very same thing” back in the fall, but as you can see, it’s not the same thing, especially as the House can’t legislate the Senate’s activities.

Glen McGregor got the inside scoop of how Trudeau’s plan came about, but for all of the meticulous planning, the fact that they left the Senators flat-footed about how they were going to manage their Senate affairs – and for Trudeau not to have a credible answer on how he, as future PM, would usher legislation through a “non-partisan” Senate – strikes me as a gaping hole in the plan.

It took until well into the next day before Julian Fantino offered a weak sauce apology to the veterans he clashed with on Tuesday evening, before his recited apology in the House during QP, delivered with the warmth and sincerity of the Enterprise’s computer in the original Star Trek. And no, the veterans didn’t accept it, and have now vowed to campaign against the Conservatives in the next election. CBC has a timeline of how the whole meeting went sour.

It sounds like the provinces have agreed to a counter-offer to Jason Kenny over the Canada Job Grant programme. I guess we’ll wait to see what it is and what Kenney has to say.

Chris Alexander talks about the forthcoming changes to the immigration system that are designed to make it “fast and flexible” and more employer-driven.

There are concerns that the provinces don’t have the resources to continue protecting certain grasslands after the federal government stopped funding them.

StatsCan finds that household cell phone costs are at an all-time high, while landline rates are falling dramatically. But what about all that competition in the system that the Conservatives are boasting that they put in, and how cell phone bills dropped 20 percent in the past few years?

Kennedy Stewart’s e-petitions bill barely passed the House. Get ready for debates on things like chemtrails, UFOs, and abortion.

As part of the Liberals’ commitment to keeping their nomination process as open as possible, they’ve instituted a waiver system that stipulates that if you run in a nomination in one riding and lose, you can’t try your luck in another one. It’s designed to keep incumbents whose ridings are being split from trying their luck on both sides, which may not be such a bad thing. But cue the usual voices about how this is an affront to democracy, and all of that.

And Patricia Treble debunks the hype about those “The Queen is last to her last million!” stories that were going around the Internet earlier this week. Note that the difference between her personal estates and the official ones related to her government duties is important, and that her budget has been frozen for twenty years, meaning that it has been effectively cut in half by inflation.

2 thoughts on “Roundup: Reverberations from the Senate bombshell

  1. “Kennedy Stewart’s e-petitions bill barely passed the House. Get ready for debates on things like chemtrails, UFOs, and abortion.”

    Why would you assume that? Nothing of the sort has occurred in the UK after the introduction of its e-petition scheme. They have very specific criteria in place that has to be respected, and so frivolous petitions will not get debated, regardless of how many signatures they might get. Why assume that we can’t set up similar criteria here?

    • I would assume that based on American experience, plus it’s the reason why MPs like Maurice Vellacott supported it – to be able to debate things like abortion based on e-petitions.

Comments are closed.