the Cdn Senate is STILL superior to the House of Commons

Dear Editor, and through you to Mr Maurice Quinn,

Re: Senate’s $4,000 requirement $56,750 in today’s dollar -Letter-  Mr M. Quinn , Ottawa

Mr Quinn - I stand corrected.

Please allow me to repair any mistakes, errors or misapprehensions that are standing in the way of you considering my main point - the purposefully-designed, hierarchical structure of our BNA /Constitution Acts' power-sharing agreement.  (here's the whole Triple E-E-Effrontery letter)

First, a small editing omission at the paper deleted the P.A.C (political action committee) from the name The Majority of Canadians included on the Letter to the HT Editor. 

Second, I acknowledge often being accused of having an arrogant style of expression - in this case the feeling may simply flows from my continued use of the name "The Majority of Canadians", which was registered with Elections Canada for my national NO committee in the Federal Referendum on the Charlottetown Accord in 1992. 

NB. I thought the "M.of C's" were dazed, confused and overwhelmed by the implications of THAT omnibus set of amendments, too.

Third, on the calculation of 2012 Value

- 1) The Bank of Canada's website Inflation Calculator was the primary official source of my dollar adjustment from 1914 to date ($1.00 = $20.59) and I have also been told by other frail, human beings that the 1867-2012 adjustment should be between 60 times and 80 times. 

These two sources combined with my personal experience [ C$-1961 is a 7.74 times adjustment, C$-1971 = 5.79 times, C$ 1981 = 2.43 times, C$ 1991 = 1.46 times , C$ 2001 = 1.23 times] had lead me to think that the Senate's net-worth and property-equity qualifications(s.23) / disqualifications(s.31),  twenty-first century equivalent would be in a range from $280,000 to-$320,000. 

This amount seemed to be in keeping (in 2012 dollars) with my reading of the BNA 1867's intention to have our Upper House be a chamber representing property-owners (equally from the 3, now 4 divisions). 

I dare not point the finger at any sitting Senators regarding their holdings vis a vis an approximate $300,000 adjusted standard - but I will wager that more that one (see below on the late Senator Butts from Nova Scotia) past appointee would have failed the $4,000.00-adjusted-to-their-appointment-year test of their financial "quality".

- 2) Your precision re $57,650 has made me re-examine the Bank of Canada online publication "A History of the Canadian Dollar (2 charts below) which seem to corroborate your assertion of the $2,800 value of 1867 C$ in 1914. 

Page 36 -----Chart 1 

Canadian Dollar in terms of the U.S. Dollar

Monthly Averages (1861-79)

Page 38 -----Chart  2

Canadian Dollar in terms of the U.S. Dollar

Monthly Averages (1914-26)

Fourth, on the 'precious' $4,000.00  - I cannot think of one other "dollar amount" in use within all of Canadian government or administration that has NOT been adjusted for inflation - can you suggest one?

Fifth, as above-mentioned re: the late, former Senator Mary Alice "Peggy" Butts. My criticism here is directed at the all-political actions of the government-of-the-day not Ms Butts. 

Perhaps a review of her 1997 appointment as described here (from Wiki) will provide the example on non-qualification as well as an example of party-hackmanship, and the collusion/confusion/obfuscation of the BNA/Constitutional facts that have undermined the "value" of the Senate in the minds of "a lot of" Canadians ( I dare not say 'majority' again).

Ms Butts (according to her bio) an extremely well-educated woman, a catholic, a Cape Breton-er and of a mature age was appointed, in my opinion, by Mr J Chretien as a representative of all those voting-blocks - with total disregard for/ nescience of s.23 &. s31: 

At the age of 73, Peggy was appointed to the Canadian Senate.[1] 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,[2] Butts was able to officially be sworn in only after her order formally transferred a small parcel of land to her name.[2] Butts resigned at the age of 75 as required by law,[1] and for her two years of service donated her entire salary to charity

My point here is based on a comparison of that narrative to the text of the Oath designed expressly for Upper House members in the Fifth Schedule of BNA 1867

DECLARATION OF QUALIFICATION

I A.B. do declare and testify, That I am by Law duly qualified to be appointed a Member of the Senate of Canada [or as the Case may be], 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 [or seised or possessed for my own Use and Benefit of Lands or Tenements held in Franc-alleu or in Roture (as the Case may be),] in the Province of Nova Scotia [or as the Case may be] 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 [or as the Case may be], and that my Real and Personal Property are together worth Four thousand Dollars over and above my Debts and Liabilities.:

In summary and to re-state my original letter's intended response to Senator B Brown's cheer-leading regarding the revived (for appearances sake) Senate reform Bill, "the Senate IS superior to the Commons", but inflation and all-political machinations over time have undermined the public's perception of the Upper House's position, value and place within our perfectly-suited,  constitutionally-limited Monarchy system (with a democratic element at the bottom) as presciently devised in 1864-67.

rce