| Dear Ms Goar & Editors
I congratulate you on being the only political writer in Canada who sees the significance of adjusting the 1867 Standards for Senators to today's purchasing-power parity. I believe is the only Canadian government dollar-amount that has been ignored in this way.
Further you are the only writer who has noticed the irony in the appointment of the late M. A. "Peggy" Butts:
At the age of 73, Peggy was appointed to the Canadian Senate. However, qualification laws for senators caused problems with her appointment. All Canadian senators are required to possess land worth at least $4,000 in the province for which he or she is appointed, as well as own real and personal property worth at least $4,000, above his or her debts and liabilities. Having taken a vow of poverty upon becoming a nun, Butts was able to officially be sworn in only after her order formally transferred a small parcel of land to her name
These facts are particularly interesting as a reflection on the lack of awareness of these qualifications/ disqualifications exhibited by the Person nominating this devoted, extremely well-educated and widely-honoured Sister (ie expressly NOT an unkind reflection on the late Ms Butts personally) when you consider the Special Oath (in the Fifth Schedule of 1867) that Senators are exclusively required to swear, because their Office is the ONLY Canadian post with Net-Worth and Net Property-Equity a) Qualifications s.23 and b) Disqualifications s.31.
I __ do declare and testify, That I am by Law duly qualified to be appointed a Member of the Senate of Canada, and that I am legally or equitably seised as of Freehold for my own Use and Benefit of Lands or Tenements held in Free and Common Socage in the Province of Nova Scotia of the Value of Four thousand Dollars over and above all Rents, Dues, Debts, Mortgages, Charges, and Incumbrances due or payable out of or charged on or affecting the same, and that I have not collusively or colourably obtained a Title to or become possessed of the said Lands and Tenements or any Part thereof for the Purpose of enabling me to become a Member of the Senate of Canada, and that my Real and Personal Property are together worth Four thousand Dollars over and above my Debts and Liabilities.
Ms Goar, perhaps you might follow up with an article on how Ms Butts' employer and the Prime Minister of the day were allowed to "colourably collude" to deftly side-step the 1867-level dollar/property qualifications? Was it an error on all parties, a cover-up by one or the other or did simply no one (within the Senate/ the Courts/ Poli-Econ or Poli-Sci Academia) care enough to rock the boat on this very small breach of the "as-written" foundational laws of the land?
I favour the idea of adjusting the $4,000 in s.23 & s.31and the Oath to reflect today's purchasing power, in hopes of prompting Canadians to examine the "rationale/purpose" behind the framers' decision to "wealth-quantify" the type of person they deemed suitable to represent Canadian 'patricians' (equally-from-all-divisions) in our Senate ie our "similar in Principle" House of Lords.
rce
Robert Ede,
Spokesperson,
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860)
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment