Have we had a PM or government in the past 60 years or so that respected the Constitutional role of the Senate?
Does that mean the Constitutional role of the Senate is meaningless and the place should be done away with?
What it does mean is that we haven't had a PM and government in over 60 years that respected the Constitution. Not even Pierre.
Harper has treated the Senate as a resort for retired bagmen and thugs and look where it's gotten him. Chretien and Mulroney did the same.
Mulcair, and presumably his squadrons of trained seals as well, would rather eliminate it, I suspect, because they'd prefer to avoid the possible legislative oversight and leave *all* oversight to the various Courts. Which judges would, naturally enough, be appointed by them.
But wouldn't it be marvelous if the Senate was treated with respect and actually *was* a house of sober second thought, a truly non-partisan chamber with no present ties to any political party, populated by Canadians of distinction and probity from all walks of life whose task was to examine proposed legislation to ensure that it would be to the benefit of all.
Because that is in fact it's Constitutional role.
We elect assholes, conmen and shysters, time after time after time, and expect them to behave like honest, upstanding citizens.
We are unworthy inheritors of democratic tradition and soon enough we'll have lost it.
Not because of some small man or woman in a big office somewhere but because we ourselves became distracted and sated and smug.
As well as more and more profoundly stupid and ham fisted even as we became more and more highly educated and specialized.
Blood soaked monkeys, that's us.