Senate appointments tomorrow

I’m hearing that the Prime Minister will be naming nine new senators tomorrow by 2:00pm.

Here are the party veterans that I’m hearing are sure bets
Manitoba – Don Plett
New Brunswick – Carolyn Stewart-Olson
Ontario – Doug Finley
Nova Scotia – Brooke Taylor
Quebec – Jacques Demers

In the running:
Ontario: Bob Runciman, David Braley
Quebec: Judith Siedman
Nunavut: Dennis Patterson

I’m still digging on this. If you’ve got any tips (anonymity guaranteed) please send them via email or bb pin.

UPDATE: Appointments will be announced between 1 and 2pm tomorrow
UPDATE: Brooke Taylor is a surer bet than Macdonald for NS from what I hear. Finley upgraded to a sure bet now that I’ve heard from more than a few sources.
UPDATE: Brooke Taylor sure bet for NS
UPDATE: Added David Braley to the shortlist of potential senators from Ontario
UPDATE: hearing rumour that the PM will only appoint 8 of 9 tomorrow, but cannot guess why
UPDATE: Senate seat from Nunavut open. Hearing that the PM met with appointee last week while on the northern tour
UPDATE: Added Dennis Patterson and Paul Okalik from Nunavut. Bet on Patterson.

Comments

comments

  • terry1

    These will be the last ones appointed before Harpo resigns as PM and moves on in mid September.

  • tedbetts

    “Despite the fine work of many individual Senators, the Upper House remains a dumping ground for the favoured cronies of the Prime Minister.”
    — Stephen Harper Leadership Website, http://www.oneconservativevoice.ca, January 15, 2004

  • tedbetts

    Now that Mulroney and Harper are apparently trying to kiss and make up, and with the upcoming 25th anniversary celebration of Mulroney's historic election victory, it is most appropriate to quote the former Prime Minister:

    “”You had an option, sir. You could have said, 'I'm not going to do it. This is wrong for Canada.”

  • wilson

    You wish!

  • wilson

    But it's right for Canada,
    reforming the Senate from the inside seems the only way Senate reform will happen.

  • batb

    tedbetts, I'm guessing you're a Liberal, so you put a high value on “equality,” right?

    The only way to get “equality” in the Senate is for Prime Minister Stephen Harper to appoint more Conservative Senators, seeing as there has been an over-representation of Liberal$ in the Canadian Senate for a very long time. And, seeing as the Liberal Senators will not hear of an elected Senate, the only option left open to Prime Minister Harper is to appoint senators.

    Those silly old Liberal Senators. They don't seem to want either equality or democracy.

    OTOH, doesn't good governance have more to do with policies which benefit the most Canadians than the concept of “equality,” which usually turns out meaning that one group of (special, usually connected with the party in power) people are more equal than other groups?

    'Just asking …

  • tedbetts

    At least the last time he broke his promise on appointing senators, he made an attempt at appointing Conservative loyalists like Duffy and not personal cronies from his staff.

  • Liz

    Great news. I would hope Runciman for sure.

    As we see by the first two comments the Liberal apologists will have nothing to offer but slagging the PM for doing what he has to do within the system we have. In order for our elected government to function without political gamesmanship being played in the Senate, holding up legislation unnecessarily, he has to even the playing field.

  • terry1

    You need a constitutional resolution with acceptance of 7 provinces and over 50% of the population of Canada to make those changes. Harpo hasn't the cojones to attempt that. and, he is currently in a minority government where his wishes will end up in the trash with him.

  • batb

    Right on, Liz.

  • terry1

    liz… just asking. why is Harpo trying to govern for the religious right who are not a majority in this country. Why does he favor the rich with tax cuts tha tthe middle class majority will have to pay back some day? I could go on but you won't understand in any event.

  • terry1

    Who is slagging the PM on this issue. Saying he is going to resign is not slagging per se and repeating his own words is just like the attack ads that you call truth ads. Funny thing about the shoe being on the other foot.

  • wilson

    So if by referendum,
    50% of the Canadian population in 7 provinces say YES to Senate reform,
    what Premier is going to go against their people and so NO?
    Would McGuinty refuse? Williams? Campbell?…….no.

    So it's really that easy Terry.
    Get a majority of people who can stay awake for a vote in the Senate to vote yes to reform,
    ask the people by referendum,
    the Premiers will follow.
    Presto, PMSH goes in the history once again.

  • terry1

    Yea, speaking of desperation; making up to a guy who took cash bribes while in office. Mulroney is even less popular in Quebec than Chretien so that should help harpo a lot

  • terry1

    Wilson, you are full of crap. Ontario has already said they are against the reform Harpo wants. quebec won't go along and I'm sure Newfoundland won't either. Quit making up stories. You and puss face eden are born liars and very typical tories.

  • Gabby in QC

    Ted, here's what a Liberal senator and a Liberal MP had to say about senate appointments last year.

    http://www.hilltimes.com/html/index.php?full_pa
    “The Hill Times, May 12, 2008
    Senator urges Prime Minister Harper to fill increasing Senate vacancies
    Currently, there are 14 Senate vacancies, but there will be 30 vacancies by the end of 2009.

    … Sen. Moore wants to address the number of vacancies in the Senate, currently at 14 and rising to 30 by the end of 2009, by forcing the prime minister to make appointments within six months of a Senate seat being vacated. …

    Sen. Moore disputed Mr. Van Loan's assessment, saying that the Constitution requires that the governor general, traditionally on the advice of the prime minister, make Senate appointments when seats are vacated. He said until the Constitution is changed, the government should follow the existing law.

    Liberal democratic reform critic and MP Brian Murphy (Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe, N.B.) said the government is not following the law by refusing to appoint Senators and is doing “a disservice” to provinces with vacancies. “I think it matters because you have a Senate that exists and it should be fully filled,” Mr. Murphy told The Hill Times last week. …” [my bolding]

    What's the matter with you? Would you have the PM go against the Constitution by refusing to appoint people to the senate?
    Tsk, tsk.

  • wilson

    Sucks to be in opposition , eh.

    Hard to watch the Senate take on a Blue hue,
    hard to watch you party struggle with
    'what cabinet positions do we offer Dippers' when we lose again.
    Hard to watch your appointed man at the top fall short of every expectation supporters had.
    I feel for yah.

  • calgaryjunkie

    The Liberal trolls are still upset that Dion couldn't play the system well enough to take power, and appoint his sweetheart Lizzy May to the Senate.

  • wilson

    Did McGuinty and Williams ask the people?

    What they say isn't the last word.
    The last word goes to their BOSS, the people.

    I think Ontario wanted to abolish the Senate, right?

    Look at New Zealand and their people uprising,
    with no upper chamber,
    Parliament made spanking a criminal charge.
    Now the people want their say… by referendum
    http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/07/31/new-ze

  • tedbetts

    Hey, I thought quoting someone in their own words was being “truthful” and could not be slagging.

  • terry1

    Who killed Meech lake….one MPP in manitoba and the Nfld legislature. Not the voters of those provinces. Same deal applies for the senate

  • Ronald

    Terry: Cry me a river – Your bunch of bunglers are getting scared now and rightly so.
    Standing on the overpass and dropping boulders on passing vehicles is your favorite pastime.
    And the plot thickens.

  • jake

    Tedbetts

    These senators are not cronies. They are public servants who are working for Canada and not stealing taxpayer money like the Liberals.

    Congratulations new senators!

  • Gabby in QC

    Terry1: “Mulroney is even less popular in Quebec than Chretien …”

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/mu
    H/T National Newswatch
    “… Mr. Mulroney still casts a long shadow in the party, particularly in Quebec.
    There, he is revered by many as the man who achieved the historic feat of bringing both nationalists and federalists into the Tory tent — something Mr. Harper has tried to repeat, with limited success.”

    Wrong again, Terry1.

  • gimbol

    In the next election during the leaders debate, Harper can look Iggy straight in the eye and ask why he signed the coalition agreement when he had the choice not to.

  • terry1

    For someone who continuously complains about the press that quote is a hoot.

    In a recent poll Mulroney was almost the lowest rated PM, just ahead of turner if I remember correctly, and by far the worst in Quebec. yhou can believe all you want but Muldoon won't deliver votes for the tories in Quebec and Charest will go with the wind.
    harpo won't be running in the next election so that becomes the next question mark.

  • Gabby in QC

    Unlike you, I don't make wild predictions nor unfounded assertions.

    You said “Mulroney is even less popular in Quebec than Chretien …”
    Jennifer Ditchburn and Tobi Cohen, two journalists with the G&M, a newpaper you often reference, say the opposite.

    You were and are wrong. Point final.

  • Jeff

    The PM never broke a promise with regards to appointing senators Ted and you know this but don’t let that get in the way of your spin.

  • wilson

    PMSH will get it done!

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Let's work on reforming the upper house. You in?

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    I will delete every comments which reaches this level in abusive tone to others. On both sides

  • East of Eden

    Hey, I'm a puss face. Oh, I'm just all agog with excitement. Parnel loves me – oh, I'm so thrilled. Oh baby, baby.

  • East of Eden

    Religious right? I'm part of that group and as far as I'm concerned, PM Harper has not catered to us. Just another sockpuppet quote from Parney.

  • terry1

    Here's two good articles on why harpo should be turfed:
    http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/front/ar

    “The current government ran for election in 2006 on a platform promising integrity, accountability and transparency,” John Gomery said in a speech on Wednesday.

    ……………………………………………………………..

    http://www.calgaryherald.com/columnists/patrona

    “An ideological politician who was disgusted at watching Parliament's upper house turned into a vote-stacking exercise, where only the faintest of serious or sober second thoughts actually take place, Harper has turned ruthlessly partisan in making his Senate appointments, elevating party loyalty into the sole consideration for the cushiest job on the Hill.”

  • terry1

    Gabby, this one's for you…you can share this good ditty from gritgirl whom all reformatorts have come to love and admire:

    http://www.warrenkinsella.com/index.php

  • Liz

    Thank you Stephen!

  • Liz

    Where or when was it evidenced that Duffy was a conservative Loyalist?

  • east of eden

    Did you mean bunglers or burglars. I think you might have meant the latter. LOL.

  • east of eden

    And perhaps delete comments which call our PM Harpo or the leader of the Opposition Iffy. If Parnel/Terry1 stops with the insults and calling our PM Harpo. I'm all for restroring some maturity to the exchange. As for being called a puss face – well, when somebody calls me something like that it signifies to me that the person has lost control and that I have maintained control of the exchange.

  • east of eden

    You know, if PM Harper stuck to his original theme, he'd be derided for being a hard-headed dinosaur. He has adapted to the environment in which he finds himself and he is derided for “breaking” his promise. I do with the opposing side would pick a stance and stick to it. I have not heard one LPC supporter ever make a derisive comment about Chretien's broken promise re: scrapping the GST. Why is that?

  • east of eden

    Hmmm – I know that you are not singling out Christians because I know you are such a fair and reasonable person. Now, add all the Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and all other faiths together and you come up with a fairly substantial number. So, are you implying that all people of faith do not count or are you just singling out Mr. Harper and those who belong to his particular faith community? Surely, you must be referring to all faiths – after all, to do otherwise would be un-democratic and could even be considered parallel to racist sentiment.

  • Liz

    I don't get the “religious right” label either. There's none of that evident but just being Conservative is all it takes for those who have little else to rail about. Many Liberals share the same religious beliefs, do they pin the same label on people like John Manley or John McKay who are evangelical Christians?

  • east of eden

    Funny how Ignatieff was making nice with Mulroney a few weeks ago. And Lib supporters were siding with poor Mulroney being betrayed by that evil Harper.

  • Liz

    Why? Because it's the biggest boner ever pulled. The GST was the most hated tax at the time and when asked if he would get rid of it if elected his answer was “It's gone”. He later said he didn't say it even though it was on video tape.

    Sheila Copps believed him as did millions of Canadian voters. Sheila ran her campaign on that promise and had to resign and run again to win her seat without the promise to scrap the GST.

  • Casual observer

    Can just hear the weeping and gnashing of teeth, and the whinging from the Bald Commie Dwarf, and the Unibrow Carpetbagger. The MSM of course, will give them all the airplay they want to criticize, and not once, no not ever mention, how the CPC has been pushing for Senate reform, and how the opposition tools continue to block it every chance they get.

  • east of eden

    Oh, Liz, you silly girl, you. Of course, when non-Conservatives are religious, it's okay. But let one Conservative believe in God and all heck breaks loose. After all, we would not want to practice such Christian beliefs as charity, not murdering, not harming children, not stealing…being good stewards of what God gives us, being responsible for our lives,etc. Oh no, we would not want to have that kind of country, would we?

  • east of eden

    I have always felt that Sheila was not well-treated by her party. I'm not her biggest fan but she is intelligent and I believe that she was dedicated to her riding. Now, I have no proof of this but my impression had always been that she was the token female to be trotted out to make the LPC look progressive. PM Harper, on the other hand, appoints female Ministers and allows them to actually do something meaningful. Can anybody justifably criticize our Health Minister, for example?

  • east of eden

    Oh, and speaking of female Ministers, what was done to Mme Robillard in order to give Stronach a seat was disgraceful.

  • Gabby in QC

    Terry1, try to diversify your reading material and your sources.
    Instead of limiting yourself to WK’s blog, widen your horizons, let in some fresh perspectives!

    You said (probably quoting your preferred source): “You need a constitutional resolution with acceptance of 7 provinces and over 50% of the population of Canada to make those changes.”

    But here's a more credible source:
    “Legislative Committee on Bill C-20
    EVIDENCE
    Wednesday, April 16, 2008 …
    Mr. Fabien Gélinas (Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, McGill University, As an Individual):
        As a constitutional lawyer, I naturally asked myself if the bill [Bill C-20, An Act to provide for consultations with electors on their preferences for appointments to the Senate] is valid constitutionally. In legal terms, the answer seems quite simple. The bill does not seem to change any provision of the Constitution within the meaning of section 52 of the Constitution Act of 1982. The constitutional amending procedure in section 38 of the act and those following does not come into play. It simply does not apply.

        The Bill under study organizes the mechanisms of an optional consultation process that might well look like an election for senators. These provisions in no way require the Governor General to appoint the senators receiving most popular support at the end of the consultations. They do not even require the Prime Minister to accept the result of the consultation when formulating his advice to the Governor General. In fact, no requirement is placed on the Governor General or even on the Prime Minister. There is therefore no impact on section 24 of the Constitution Act of 1867. …

    …. If we consider the bill in isolation and in its current form, I believe that no fault can be found with its constitutional validity. …” [my bolding]

    Sorry, I decline your invitation to visit your idol's site.

  • east of eden

    Well, thank you so much, Terry, for providing us with enlightening material. I do appreciate your thoughtfulness and consideration. It always warms my heart when some highly intelligent, well-read, enlightened and informed person takes pity on my poor limited vision and tries to help me. Respectfully, however, I decline your kindness. But it was really sweet of you to think of us.