The Pros And Cons Of Canadian Federal Reform

3068 Words13 Pages

The Senate is a chamber of "sober second thought" in which its members review the legislation that has passed through three readings in the House of Commons. They review most of the bills with a lens that explanations for their regional constituents, particularly those who may not have figured into the debate of the MPs who represent most their constituents, and evaluate how each new law or policy would affect the Canadian people (Dodek, 2015, 39). But this legislative body has long been criticized for not being representative of a democracy and there is no time in our history in which there have not been calls for its abolition or reform.
According to Docherty (2002) the Canadian Senate "represents and embodies some of the most anti-democratic …show more content…

In this model, each province has an equal representation, but each regional group votes as a block rather than as individuals. In the German Bundesrat, there is little in the way of policy debate, with a primary emphasis on evaluating and passing regulations. There is minimal room for individuality and in this only the regions would be represented, which would exclude special interest groups such as the First Nations. In this model, the regional groups may address the needs of the special interest groups, but they would be subordinate to regional interests.
Furthermore, Docherty (2002) suggests that the only province that appears to be fully committed to Senate reform is Alberta (the case 15 years ago anyway) while
Most other provinces are quite happy to complain about the Senate but care little for reform [because] executive federalism has provided provincial premiers with a national stage that would be compromised with a powerful Senate. Inter-state federalism gives the Premier of Prince Edward Island, a province with fewer people than many Ontario cities, as much national authority as the Premier of Ontario. (Docherty 2002,

Open Document