I'm a little embarrassed to be writing this, but I can't get the thought out of my head...
The news wires are reporting that PM Harper is appointing former NHL coach Jacques Demers to the Senate.
Demers admitted in 2005 that he was illiterate. Since that time, he has been learning to read, but he is still unable to read or write at his grade level, so to speak. In spite of all his good qualities, Demers is not the guy I want to be reading legislation with a view to "sober second thought".
Maybe he misunderstood the job offer. Maybe he received a call from someone in Ottawa saying "Hey, Jacques, how about a job with the Senators?"
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, we have the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried from time to time. If this is Harper's idea of Senate reform, count me out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Do we even have (entrance and/or performance) standards for "what makes a good senator"?
No. Therein lies the problem, methinks.
Historically I think it's fair to say that people had some degree of distinction or recognition in their field - not necessarily politics. One could conceivably argue that until the creation of the Order of Canada, it was one of the better ways of recognizing "great" Canadians, whatever that means: giving them a more active role in governing the country.
By the measure of professional success and admiration, Demers measures up. It's the obvious misdirection here that pisses me off - "hey look, everyone, we're senatorizing Jacque Demers!" while at the same time sneaking in party apparatchiks.
I'm not in favour of moving to an elected Senate, although I think there are some reforms that could be made. Nor am I aware of the similar excesses committed by previous governments of either stripe. Nor am I in favour of jettisoning the Red Chamber completely. It just irks me to see people appointed because of their political stripe rather than in spite of it.
Given Harper's undeniable, deep-seated and frightening partisan streak, I shudder to think of what - or rather, who - might be waiting in the wings as the next Governor-General. Looking back, Ed Schreyer and Ray Hnatyshyn were pretty good GGs because they left their party leanings at the door. I think someone like Gary Doer or Frank McKenna would do fine... which leads me to the inescapable conclusion that Harper won't even consider them.
-sigh-
Whoops. That would be "nor am I UNaware". Damn typos.
Ah, apparently there *are* qualifications:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_senate#Qualifications
Thank goodness they're not letting just *anyone* in...
See also the history section:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_senate#History
That's right -- gimme summa dat social and economic elites to keep dem democratic excesses at bay...
No you're not being petty. You have the right to expect politicians to be educated.
I see on the wires today that Harper is wasting no time in sending Gary Doer to Washington: www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5imABBW6BjMGys3UQMcezCOwSSWSg
Good news for Gary. I thought Harper might be jealous of a guy who won three successive elections with majority governments every time.
Could've been worse...lets not forget the chinless wonders and nouveau pillars of society our kin folk across the pond elevate to the House Of Lords. Lord Black of Crossharbour ring a bell?
Maj Gen Lou MacKenzie for GG in '10!
Post a Comment