Toronto Star: "Why the Senate deserves props"

[sorrywrongemail]

I must say I agree wholeheartedly with this editorial. One of the biggest issues, less than 1/4 of women in the House of Commons, yet 1/2 women in the Senate. It's startling to watch CPAC and see this huge divide.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ideas/article/326541

COVER STORY
TheStar.com | Ideas | Why the Senate deserves props
Why the Senate deserves props
GORDON KING/LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
The Senate is one of Canada's most powerful, maligned and yet least understood public bodies, writes Sarah Barmak.

Maybe our upper house of parliament isn't asleep after all. Its alert response to controversial bills on crime, culture and taxes is resonating with Canadians and furnishing it with the unexpected: respect
Mar 09, 2008 04:30 AM
Sarah Barmak
Special to the Star

It is the place where Canada's lawmakers go for sober second thought. Or, as one senator likes to call it, "the pause that refreshes." Or, as the public imagines it, the place where nothing important ever happens. Go on. Think about the Senate, and try hard to stifle a yawn.

Who knew that in 1991, a Senate vote kept abortion legal in Canada? Or that its research in 1971 led to important national poverty reform? Or that it battled to ensure NAFTA was supported by the public? That it has a greater representation of women and minorities than the House of Commons?

In a time when Senate reform has become a multipartisan issue, Canadians seem just as confused about the issue as ever. Our upper house of parliament is one of Canada's most powerful, maligned and yet least understood public bodies.

[Posteritatis]

1. It seems like a more loose-cannon-friendly chamber too

I'm not sure what I think about the life appointment part (although there's very good reasons to have one house with long-term service and one with short), but I've been impressed by stuff said by senators more than MPs lately.

I actually saw Senator/General/etc. Dallaire give a talk at UWO last night. He's, uh, rather more fiery and intense than I would have expected, and some of the stuff he said no MP would care say in front of a crowd. We need some more of that.

[IntravenousDemilo]

2. It's not a life appointment, only to 75 years of age.

There have been lots older than that in the House of Commons.

I think the reason Senators are more free with their talk is that they don't have to worry about being re-elected or, except very rarely, ousted, and I mean that actually in a good way. Do you think a panel of elected officials would have recommended the legalization of pot? They'd be too scared. They are too scared.