| Here is an excellent article on Senate Reform. I don't like the idea of an EEE Senate, but I'd support the kind of reform described in this article. | Voici un excellent article sur la Réforme du Sénat. Je n'aime pas vraiment l'idée du Sénat EEE, mais j'appuierais le genre de réforme décrite dans cet article. |
The author of the article you linked to appears to favour an effective and elected senate, just not one that is equal.
I'm not sure the argument the some provinces may oppose and equal senate is a good enough reason to dismiss the notion out of hand.
One of the compelling aspects of an equal senate is that it reflects Canadian reality in a way our current parliament doesn't.
The house of commons can provide for representation by population and ensure individual Canadians are equally represented by government (my vote counts as much as anyone elses). And as the primary house, the commons will continue to drive the legislative agenda based on the expressed desire of Canadians in direct proportion.
However, an equal senate can provide for the expression of provincial concerns as equal parties of a confederation. This can serve as a balance against decision-making driven purely by the interests of the most populace provinces in central Canada.
If both houses are based on representation by population, I feel we'll be unlikely to ever address the feelings of marginalization experienced by the less populous regions of the country, as there will be no political impact to ignoring the concerns of the West and Atlantic Canada.