Thread by @AndersonBooz

1/ Can we think for a moment about the @UCPCaucus and Postmedia "journalists" misinformation and lies about the selection of @SenateCA members for Alberta?

Because there's some really serious crap going on there, and the situation ISN'T what @jkenney is falsely claiming.
#abpoli

2/ First, the selection process. Kenney and his lackey Postmedia columnists want you to think Albertans have no say in the current selection process - that an election would be more democratic.

This is not really true.

The Senate selection process was changed. There is now an

3/ independent committee with a changing membership that uses an open application process and then makes recommendations to the PM.

The committee is reconstituted based on which region's going to have senate vacancies.

So there are Albertans on the Alberta selection committee

4/ And who are they? Well, maybe it could have been you. Why? Because ordinary Albertans can apply to be on the committee to select potential senators. That's right - the selection committees are open to applications each cycle.

Has Kenney told you that? Have Postmedia writers?

5/ No. Because Kenney beeds you to believe Albertans have no representation, no say.

Here's something else: the current process for selecting a senator allows ANY eligible Albertan to apply. What makes you eligible?

The Constitutional eligibility looks at age (30 to 75) and

6/ citizenship (Canadian citizen) and residency (principal residence in the area you represent at the time of appointment; 2 years' residency before appointment). There's also a net worth provision: $4000 net value in real property in the province and at least $4000 net worth in

7/ real and personal property.
Because those are Constitutional requirements, they'll apply whether or not someone gets votes in a bogus election.

There are some requirements the govt has added, and these are interesting.

The partisanship one, particularly.

8/ Here's what it says:

9/ This is part of the senate reform after decades of questionable selection process by both governing parties. You no longer have to be a political party operative to be considered.

Contrast that with a Premier wanting the nonpartisan selection process to be delayed so his

10/ party operatives can qualify through a politically charged expensive election process where popular vote based on party affiliation counts for more than the quality of the candidate.

That's what we want to .ove away from, because it isn't truly more democratic; it restricts

11/ viable candidacy to those with resources to campaign - which turns it into a party support issue.

The 🇨🇦 senate shouldn't be the hyperpartisan toxic dysfunctional institution we see in the US. We can do better, and the selection process is part of doing better.

Kenney wants

12/ his people in the senate. When you consider how poorly his people have performed in government, maybe it's not a good idea to suspend a more open process.

The fact is, if his operatives qualify, nothing stops them from applying. Even now. In a fair competition.

13/ Here's another requirement:

14/ So, really, if someone doesn't understand why we don't have an elected Senate and chooses to waste Albertans' money on an election and can't be bothered to apply through the open process - what does that say about their suitability?

15/Another requirement:

16/ We have amply seen that elections are no guarantee that only people with exemplary ethics are selected. We have also seen that PM appointments are no guarantee - we have had our share of senators who have shown themselves to be racist, or cheats, or in extreme cases

17/ pedophiles or assailants. So the committee process and subsequent vetting are important. Consider that Alberta elected someone who came to leadership in a campaign that included harassment, moneylaundering, identity theft and election fraud. There is nothing about election

18/ processes that seems to guarantee a superior selection in terms of personal qualities.

19/ So there is an expectation of some knowledge of and interest in senate processes.

20/ An election in no way guarantees these qualities.

One of the things to remember is that there are reasons the Senate isn't subject to an election process - and that the lack of elections doesn't mean it's not a valid part of a democracy.

21/ Because senators will be dealing with long view, maybe through decades, their political position on today's issues is not as important as their approach to the job and their ability to operate without having been elected on a specific slate of issues that won't be relevant in

22/ 5 years' time.

But senators are still appointed by the government - the democratically elected government.

As we see the non-Constitutional elements of senate reform settling in, and as senators like @Paulatics lift the veil on Senate processes and the experiences and

23/ thinking of senators, we can see how the "sober second thought" role is well-served by removing partisanship while retaining the awareness that senators represent their regions.

Partisan elections work against that.

Now, about the lie that the PM "should" be guided by a

24/ provincial election.

The government in the past sought clarification on several points of senate reform from the Supreme Court of Canada.

The resulting reference from the SCC is nicely summarized here:
lawnow.org/the-senate-ref…

25/ Note that from a Constitutional point of view, the PM shouldn't be giving Alberta special consideration by including Alberta's senate election results in the selection process.

That Postmedia pundits with party leanings ignore these points discredits them.

26/ I am running out of time today to finish this thread, jughling meetings, so I might take it up againater. But the main point here is that politicians and some media are not being honest in the way they portray the senate selection process or the issues around it.