More J.T. anti-West bigotry
Liberal MP Justin Trudeau is pictured at the Liberal Party of Canada (Alberta)’s Stampede breakfast held at the Calgary Zoo in Calgary, Alta., July 7, 2012. (JIM WELLS/QMI AGENCY)
Who wants to reform the Canadian Senate?
The Media Party says they do. At least those journalists who have given up hope of personally being appointed to it.
They say that controversies about Senate housing and travel expenses prove the need for reform.
The official opposition wants Senate reform, too. The NDP’s position has always been to abolish it. Normally the NDP loves more government.
But like the Bloc Quebecois, they have not yet tasted the power of appointing their cronies to the Senate.
That’s a perk available only to parties who win national elections.
So the NDP has embraced their exclusion as moral superiority. Good for them.
And the Conservative government itself is for Senate reform.
For the first three years of his tenure as prime minister, Stephen Harper appointed just two senators, the theory being that to let the place empty through the passage of time was a passive way to marginalize, then destroy it.
It was only when the Liberals, NDP and Bloc signed a public letter to form a coalition government, and were horse-trading amongst themselves who would get which of the 18 empty seats, that Harper panicked and filled all those vacancies in one day.
Harper has also appointed a number of elected senators from Alberta, the one province that has made that baby-step reform.
And in February, Harper asked the Supreme Court of Canada to review the constitutionalism of possible reforms, including term limits, changing the way senators are selected, changing the net worth and land ownership requirements, and possibly abolishing the Senate altogether.
Those are debates all
35 million of us should have, not just the nine judges on our high court.
But it would be useful to have their guidance on how such a major change to our Constitution could proceed.
So there you have it: Harper-haters, NDPers and even Harper himself are all finally looking at Senate reform.
Harper’s right-hand woman in the Senate, Sen. Marjory LeBreton, did the media rounds over the weekend, suggesting that if the Senate did not reform itself, it could be abolished.
Everyone seems to be on board except one person: Justin Trudeau.
Is there some secret value it has that the rest of us have missed? No.
Here he is in his own words: “We have 24 senators from Quebec and there are just six from Alberta and six from British Columbia. That’s to our advantage.”
Of course, he actually said it in French.
That’s become Trudeau’s signature — disparaging western Canada while in Quebec, while speaking French.
He doesn’t think the Senate should be reformed, because we, as in Quebecers, would lose out to them, as in people in B.C. and Alberta.
As it so happens, B.C. and Alberta together have a greater population and a far greater economy than Quebec.
But democracy and fairness take a back seat to Trudeau’s tribalism; like his father, he’s running to be prime minister for all Quebecers and the west can go to hell.
This isn’t the first time.
On a Quebec TV show in 2010, he boasted that Quebecers made better prime ministers than Albertans, who are destroying the country’s social fabric.
Following Trudeau’s Senate comments, his campaign spin doctor, Gerald Butts, quickly tweeted Monday, “He was explaining why it would be so hard to change.”
Which is worse — Trudeau’s anti-western bigotry, or that he thinks we’ll believe his insult is actually a statement of solidarity?