Exploring the Senate referendum question
Summary
Host Andrew Brown and guest Graham Thompson analyze Alberta's upcoming referendum question on abolishing the federal Senate. They discuss the constitutional barriers to abolition, the history of the "Triple E" reform movement, and the Senate's role as a chamber of sober second thought. Listeners debate whether the Senate should be eliminated, reformed, or replaced with an elected body, while Thompson argues the question is largely performative politics given the impossibility of unilaterally changing the constitution.
Topics discussed
Sponsor: Perk travel and spend platform
Introduction to the Senate referendum question
Guest introduction: Graham Thompson
Analysis of the loaded wording in the question
Overview of the Senate's role and purpose
Historical origins of regional representation in the Senate
Partisan politics and the Free Trade debate
Caller David: History and arguments for reform
Discussion on elected vs. appointed senators
Caller John: The role of professional experts
Partisan appointments under recent Prime Ministers
Caller Greg: Constitutional barriers to abolition
The failure of the Triple-E Senate movement
Political motivations behind the referendum
News update: Pipeline and Lake Louise study
Revisiting the Triple-E history and provincial agreement
Alternative reforms: Electoral changes and courts
Caller Bruce: Westminster vs. Republican systems
Analysis of government background text on reform
Caller AJ: Proposing a 'Double-E' Senate
Caller Phil: Arguments against an elected Senate
Lack of provincial interest in Senate reform
Caller John: Critique of inflammatory language
Discussion on leading questions and bias
Role of Territories and Indigenous representation
Conclusion: The referendum as performative politics
Closing remarks and sign-off
Listen ad-free on Castria