Sorting The Canadian Senate

If I had my choice I would simply abolish the Canadian Senate but that would require a constitutional amendment and open a whole new Canadian proverbial can of worms.

However as far as the selection of Senators other than set regional distribution the only requirement is that they be summoned by the Governor General.

Summons of Senator

24 The Governor General shall from Time to Time, in the Queen’s Name, by Instrument under the Great Seal of Canada, summon qualified Persons to the Senate; and, subject to the Provisions of this Act, every Person so summoned shall become and be a Member of the Senate and a Senator. (Constitution Act, 1867 )

This means that Parliament is free to legislate the process of the selection of Senators by the Governor General however they wish.

Many would suggest an elected Senate, but besides the issues with constitutional wording that strongly implies the Senate must be appointed, the Constitution also provides a regional representation that does not reflect representation by population. An elected Senate might try to claim legitimacy it does not have to overrule or thwart the will of the House of Commons leading to a potential constitutional crises. There is no need for two elected Houses though there may be a need to make the House of Commons more representative through a system of proportional representation.

So how do we make the Senate more effective.

The Senate’s traditional role has been as a place of sober second thought in regards to ensuring the soundness of legislation originating in the House of Commons. Senatecommittees have also taken on the role of studying the issues of the day and issuing reports.

These roles do overlap with the House of Commons functions so how can we make the Senate better complement the role of the House of Commons. The current government has attempted, and succeeded to a degree, to make the Senate a less partisan body than the House of Commons but it is still by virtue of the type of people appointed a political body with appointment until retirement at age 75 (or earlier at the Senator’s choice).

What if we made the Senate representative of the Canadian public in a different way than election or appointment by the government of the day, with shorter terms.

What if we selected Senators randomly in a similar manner to selecting jurors taking into account the regional representation requirements. This is not a new concept, it even has a name.

Sortition

In governance, sortition is the selection of public officials or jurors at random, i.e. by lottery, in order to obtain a representative sample.[1][2][3][4] (Wikipedia)

Implementing sortition for the Canadian Senate will not be completely random and representative because of the geographic requirements and because many people will not accept the post for various legitimate reasons but it will still provide a different perspective than the House of Commons because the membership will mostly consist of non-politically active citizens.

I would propose appointment for a four year term with half of the Senate changing every two years so there is always fifty percent membership with some experience. Unlike a few weeks commitment for jury duty this would be too long a commitment to make it mandatory.

There would need to be some mandatory exclusions such as anyone holding public office and probably also judges and I would also exclude lawyers. Others might request exclusion because it might affect their career prospects negatively or they might have other obligations.

Fortunately the one group that most lacks representation now, the unemployed and underemployed or those with precarious employment would likely welcome a guaranteed four years of employment, with the bonus of being able to serve their fellow citizens.

A sorted Senate might be the unique Canadian solution we are looking for.

If I Was Teaching Writing

(Disclaimer: not a professional writer or teacher)

If i was teaching writing I would teach that writing is a process.

The first step is putting all your thoughts down on paper as quickly as you can before you forget any points. This can be a point form outline or stream of consciousness text but don’t interrupt your thought process to organize the material or optimize the sentence structure, That can come later.

I have ignored this advice and regretted it as I looked at the page thinking there wa something else I wanted to say but cannot remember it now.

Next you want to order your points in the most effective order to make your arguments. This may be something you redo as you go along, particularly as you add points you did not think of in stage one. Always jot those new points down as they come to you you can order them and refine them later.

So far grammar and sentence structure has been irrelevant as it has been all about ideas.

So now let’s make it look like writing, turning what you have into organized readable writing recognizing who your audience is and tailoring the style, academic, journalistic, or other to your audience.

After you have a properly written text it is time to optimize it by making sure you are using the most appropriate qualifiers, adjectives and adverbs, and that your spelling and grammar are correct. Everyone has their favourite errors so check especially for those. One of mine is thinking like I’m talking and not paying attention to there, their and they’re.

When you think you have it right do a read through to make sure everything flows correctly and you have not missed any necessary corrections,

If you are writing for the web, nearer the end is a good time to add any “code” you need for links. My blog uses Blogger so if I am writing for that I embed the links in Libre Office because they will translate directly to Blogger, only requiring a quick edit in Blogger if I want them to open into a new window, which i always do. Alternatively, near the end is a good time to add traditional footnotes. Most word processor will handle the formatting for you.

Time for a last read through to make sure everything is correct and flows well. Unless you are me. My process includes a final read through, but if I make any changes during that read through I do another and continue until I read the full text through without making any changes.

I have saved the most important advice for the end. The best way to improve your writing is to read a lot, especially they type of writing that you want to write.

The Tyranny of Growth – How Raising Our Standard of Living Destroys Our Quality of Life

In 1972 the world respected Club of Rome issued it’s report, Limits to Growth which concluded:

Conclusions

After reviewing their computer simulations, the research team came to the following conclusions:[2]: 23–24 

1. If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years.[c] The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.

2. It is possible to alter these growth trends and to establish a condition of ecological and economic stability that is sustainable far into the future. The state of global equilibrium could be designed so that the basic material needs of each person on earth are satisfied and each person has an equal opportunity to realize his individual human potential.

3. If the world's people decide to strive for this second outcome rather than the first, the sooner they begin working to attain it, the greater will be their chances of success.

— Limits to Growth, Introduction

The introduction goes on to say:

These conclusions are so far-reaching and raise so many questions for further study that we are quite frankly overwhelmed by the enormity of the job that must be done. We hope that this book will serve to interest other people, in many fields of study and in many countries of the world, to raise the space and time horizons of their concerns, and to join us in understanding and preparing for a period of great transition – the transition from growth to global equilibrium.

We can contrast this with the general societal term for economic disaster, referred to as a recession, although in reality it is more a matter of economic decline rather than disaster, but mention the word and wait for the ensuing panic.

The Canadian Encyclopedia defines recession as:

A recession is a temporary period of time when the overall economy declines; it is an expected part of the business cycle. This period usually includes declines in industrial and agricultural production, trade, incomes, stock markets, consumer spending, and levels of employment. In purely technical terms, a recession occurs when two or more successive quarters (six months) show a drop in real gross domestic product (GDP), i.e., the measure of total economic output in the economy after accounting for inflation. In this sense, recessions are broad and can be particularly painful and challenging times for a country.

It is ironic that we have a problem, unrestrained growth that we know is not just bad for the planet environmentally but also a threat to our economic system and yet we consider the solution, degrowth as the worst thing that can happen to the economy.

The middle class of western industrialized countries have been taken in by the myth of raising one’s standard of living being the be all and end all. The point of an increased standard of living is to increase one’s quality of life which is about more than just producing and consuming more stuff at the expense of the habitat we have to live in. Indeed this myth is used to promote an anti-taxation theology that leads to the under-funding of the very things that increase a society’s quality of life, health care, education, social safety nets and environmental protection among others.

Yes a certain level of income is necessary for a good quality of life and this can be provided by raising minimum wages to a living wage and providing a guaranteed annual income (universal basic income) for everyone.

The problem is that we measuring the wrong things when we want to measure how successful our economies are. A strong economy must be a reflection of a strong society. If we want to measure the success of our society it is not by measuring how rich the wealthiest people are or even so-called per-capita GDP numbers that are distorted by excessive wealth and income levels of a minority of privileged people. If we want to improve the quality of life of a society we must improve everyone’s economic status and build a society that provides everyone with more than just more stuff.

We need to start by measuring poverty and inequality and setting our economic goals at reducing those rather than increasing abstract measures of stuff acquired.

The Ten Commandments vs The Five Commandments

 

So the all powerful god of the Bible issued 10 Commandments, The first four are devoted to telling you to worship him and the fifth to worship your parents. The last five are the Shalt Nots, fine as far as they go but should we not expect something more positive from a so-called loving god.

So I propose instead:

The Five Commandments

1. Love thy neighbour and strangers alike, without discrimination.

2. Accept and respect other people for who they know themselves to be.

3. Devote yourself to building a better community and society.

4. Using critical thinking skills and the scientific method base your decision-making on facts and reason.

5. Do no harm to others (except in exceptional circumstances and only if absolutely necessary to prevent greater harm).