Sober second thought? In life and politics, it's pretty much considered a good idea. Asking the Senate to provide it? Maybe. Readers, print and digital, debate the Red Chamber's worth
.....................................................................................................................................
The Senate has a constitutionally approved function, and one that is necessary. Like the British House of Lords and the American Senate, its members are there to ensure politicians of the day do not legislate against the long-term well-being of the country; sober second thought is a good idea. So, when did it become part of the job to promote a political party? Shouldn't senators be spending their time poring over omnibus bills?
The problem lies with the selection of senators and the expectations behind that selection. Justin Trudeau is on the right track by divorcing senators from the party.
All that needs to happen now is to appoint the right people as senators, those without political ambition or delusions of grandeur, just people who want to serve their country.
A start would be for Prime Minister Stephen Harper to fill those vacant Senate seats with retired judges, teachers, scientists – or even respected ex-politicians.
Tony Burt, Vancouver
.........
Abolishing the Senate might be the only way out of this morass.
Art Levac, Chilliwack, B.C.
.........
Let's start by eliminating "party business" as an expense.
Senators are supposed to provide sober second thought to the actions of Parliament, not feed at the public trough to be fundraisers and shills for their political parties.
Jim Mantle, Nepean, Ont.
.........
Almost certainly it will be impossible to obtain agreement by all provinces and territories to abolish the Senate because some will want a quid pro quo: In other words, they'll want something in return for agreeing to this change in government.
Most likely it would take the form of a greater devolution of federal powers to the provinces, which would open up a whole can of worms. I think having a reformed Senate that will be a "house of sober second thought" is a good idea, and would be opposed to trying to abolish this chamber. The reforms I think would have a chance to get through with the least pain are changing how we appoint senators, and of course restricting their allowable expenses.
Isidore Martynyshyn, North Bay, Ont.
.........
Thomas Mulcair's claim that votes for the NDP will be understood as a mandate to eliminate the Senate is troubling.
These years with a Conservative majority government have demonstrated the need for a second stopping-point for legislation drawn up by a very partisan House of Commons whereby a clear rethink, without the burden of party loyalties, can occur.
This is particularly critical as long as Canada elects its House using the unrepresentative first-past-the-post system.
Take away the huge salaries and expense accounts, ask the provinces to propose Senate candidates, preferably from outside the political realm, and allow this second house to bring objective suggestions to the elected lawmakers before Senate approval is given.
If I were to vote NDP in October, that vote in no way could be seen as a mandate to abolish the Senate.
Cherie Hill, Mississauga
.........
Why is it that the membership of the Senate as a whole – and yes, even the members of the House of Commons – haven't been asked if they understand "right" and "wrong"?
Has it become necessary now for Canadians to require our representatives in government to take a course in integrity and morals? Have we come to the point where we must try and make them understand the word "primary," or have a book of firm regulations to guide them through their work day?
Are these the people who are to be examples for our children as to character? The same people who are to assist in our government's legislation? I do believe we are in deep trouble.
George Mealey, Edmonton
.........
When politicians are undecided about expense claims, do they ever ask themselves: Okay, if I were the one paying this, would I feel I was being taken for a ride? Squeezed for every last cent?
Would I say the request was reasonable if I had to pay it? Would I be satisfied with the documentation?
Alice Murphy, St. John's
.........
I disagree that we can't change the Senate.
First, we need to elect a new prime minister. Then, we should insist the new PM do two things:
1) Instead of appointing party loyalists with high media profiles, have the provinces develop processes to select senators;
2) Have the Canada Revenue Agency annually review senators' expense claims using the existing rules in the federal Income Tax Act, so that, for example, if a senator attends an event to support a particular political party, that expense is billed to that party.
Rick Munro, Kingston
.........
At age 52, I enrolled in a Master's program at the University of Saskatchewan. I withdrew $4,000 from my RRSP to partially pay for the program (I live in B.C. and had additional expenses as I spent three semesters on campus). Canada Revenue required proof that I was a full-time student. I paid back the loan within 10 years.
So, do you think I'm somewhat incensed regarding the Senate scandal? There should be no further appointments to the Senate – and would the last senator please turn out the lights prior to leaving the chamber?
M. H. Jerred, Lone Butte, B.C.
.........
How come many Senators had no trouble with being audited? Are they more able to understand instructions than their colleagues?
Iain Main, Ottawa
.........
The Senate is an integral part of the "responsible government" system in Canada, which demands accountability for actions and results – even from an unelected body that is nevertheless part of the governance structure of the country.
Using other people's money (i.e. taxpayers') requires holding oneself to a higher level of ethics and accountability.
Accountability is facilitated to the degree that the rules for using other people's money are clearly defined; the more vague and ambiguous the rules, the more problematic it is to hold individuals to account.
Martha Denning, Oakville, Ont.
.........................................................................................................................................
ON REFLECTION LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com
..........................................................................................................................................
Geared to fear
Re Health Minister 'Outraged' By SCOC Marijuana Ruling (June 12): Rona Ambrose's reaction to the Supreme Court's ruling on medical marijuana was predictable. Her fear-of-marijuana diatribe fits neatly into the Harper Conservatives' platform of fear – fear of terror, fear of street crime, fear of headscarves, fear of Vladimir Putin, fear of the judiciary.
Perhaps they should abandon the fear agenda and heed Leonard Cohen's words: "Let's sing another song boys, this one has grown old and bitter."
Audrius Stonkus, Stoney Creek, Ont.
.........
More than a market issue
Re Economics On Wheels (editorial, June 9): Regulations exist in the taxi industry to keep it stable and safe.
Under-regulated taxi services fit nicely in simple explanations of demand and supply, but ignore the economic principle that rational self-interest should lead to an overall benefit to the public. You need both.
Riders' safety is at risk when drivers aren't properly vetted through a regulated process.
If rational self-interest doesn't help people, arguments for a low-regulation, free-market taxi industry do not hold water.
Gemma Johnson, Toronto
.........
Eco expectations are slim
Re Why Harper's G7 Signature Is No Green Epiphany (June 10): Given the Conservatives' record, it's hopeless to expect action from them. Except for the Greens, we can't expect much from other parties either, based on their dance around the oil sands. Canada hasn't had a serious national conversation (similar to Europe's) on how to deal with climate change.
We need an extensive debate on the costs of acting, relative to the environmental benefits. This would help direct the economy, including the protection of our coastlines in the long run.
Ali Orang, Richmond Hill, Ont.
.........
'Terribly disappointed'
Re Hybrid Option: Tory Wins Gardiner Vote (June 12): I was terribly disappointed that council kept the eastern section of the Gardiner Expressway, mostly because of what it says about Mayor John Tory. We've had visionary leaders, but what do we have with Mr. Tory: Rob Ford – without the crack?
John Arnott, Toronto
.........
What a lost opportunity. Maybe one day John Tory will be able to say, as New York's Fiorello La Guardia did in 1936, "When I make a mistake, it's a beaut."
Trevor S. Raymond, Georgetown, Ont.