Be Free Liberal Senators!

Mr Harper made light of Mr Trudeau's recent action of removing ALL Liberal Senators from caucus. "They have gone from being unelected Liberal Senators to unelected Senators who happen to be Liberal." derided Mr Harper in the House. His suggestion was that this was a distinction without a difference but in that, he is quite incorrect.

Being outside caucus and not beholden to the leader of the party frees these members of the Upper Chamber to exercise their privileges and prerogatives without encumbrance or outside direction. While they never technically answered to the leader there was certainly pressure from time to time on Senators to carry out the wishes of the Centre. This is more true of the Conservative Senators who dare not cross the PM, but Liberals are hardly innocent.

This is not to say that there will be a remarkable change of attitude or action in the Senate on the part of these now Independent Senators since their hearts and minds have always had liberal (and hence Liberal) leanings on the national issues of the economy and social justice, for instance. No matter how or why people find their way to the Senate they will bring with them their political leanings, even if they don't have official membership in one of Canada's many political parties.

Mr Trudeau has also indicated that, if it were up to him, the PM would no longer be the sole arbiter of who enter the Red Chamber. Instead, an independent and transparent group, not necessarily consisting of elected folks but perhaps citizens of note, will review and appoint new members. This is about as much as can be done without a Constitutional amendment. It isn't enough for some and too much for others. It may not be perfect but it stands a very good chance of removing the patronage aspect of appointments. We may in fact see Senators who were picked for their demonstrated ability to analyze and reflect on the proposals of the government of the day rather than as a reward for bag men and political cronies who then owe a duty to their party.

Personally, that sounds even better than electing Senators, but that's me. I remain open minded on that one.

Mr Harper would like us to believe this is a non-event. More likely it is big move in a very good direction.

"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war"?



NDITF

Harper's Legacy

There has been some talk over the last few years about the legacy that will remain from the years that PM Harper's Conservatives controlled the agenda in Ottawa. And nothing comes to mind.

Having said that, if Mr Harper is re-elected in the next election he will join a very select group of Canadian political leaders elected 4 or more times (Macdonald, Laurier, King, Trudeau). And maybe that is what he is going for... to be elected as PM four times.

That isn't much in terms of ambition; pretty shallow and self serving actually. I guess it isn't really surprising since Harper has always been concerned about Harper.

I must say that while I did not agree with everything that P. E. Trudeau or Clark or Mulroney or Martin or Chretien I always believed them to have the best interests of Canada at the core of their actions. They were people who essentially owed no one anything and were, in many ways, free to focus on a path for the good of all Canadians as they envisioned it. They were not looking to become the leader of a nation for their own sake but to be known for making Canada a better country. They made unpopular decisions and often paid a heavy political price.

Mr Harper, by contrast, comes off as a guy wearing his father's suit. The rest of us notice that it just doesn't fit right but he believes he is pulling off looking mature and together.

His goal, it would seem, is not to make Canada a better place, but to play the political game to the max where he sees 'winning' as the measure of success, whether the lot of Canadians as a whole improves or not.

That is a sad legacy and probably doomed to fade as quickly as one of his pasted on smiles.