An elected Ontario Senate?

Twit This!

Those of us living in the rural areas of Ontario know all too well how the current political climate in this province has not suited us for a long while.

Representation by population works when populated areas are balanced, and have similar needs, issues and concerns. At Confederation this was more the case, but the mass population explosion of the 401 corridor has turned the balance in the legislature upside down. 

I was reading a piece today by Randy Hillier, ex-President of the Ontario Landowners Association, and current maverick Tory MP for the area 500 metres from my home in  Lanark, Frontenac, Lennox, and Addington.

In it he states:

An elected provincial senate whose representation is based on communities of interest, not population, would have the advantages of the federal senate without the failings of political patronage. Arguably, sober second thought and review is more relevant provincially than federally, as there is a more substantial and direct relationship of services between the people and their provincial governments. [...]

The priorities of Ontario's urban politicians and bureaucracy are bans and restrictions, and they are out of sync with the people of rural Ontario. This has resulted in Ontario going from first to worst in economic performance, a painfully dismal record in health care, high taxes, a ballooning bureaucracy, deficits, reduced individual responsibility and freedoms, and have-not status. This dismal performance is a reflection not of coincidence, bad luck, or external factors, but of the wrong priorities. In a democracy, people, politicians, and governments are the authors of their fortunes, good or bad. But institutions matter as well as personalities. An improved bicameral political structure is needed so that the urban drum is not always the loudest.

He also goes onto stating that municipalities should be enshrined into a provincial constitution that cannot be arbitrarily reset by the government du jour.  I agree with this in principle, however there needs to be a provision for portions of the municipalities who did not choose to be amalgamated to separate or adjoin to a different municipality. 

Same thing, there needs to be some way enshrined in this new constitution for municipalities to mutually agree to a boundary change that happens time-to-time because development doesn't always happen where municipal  planners plan it.

The main issue here is there MUST be a debate on how to get the diverging regions heard in a fair way in a province so wide and diverse.

I thank the Western Standard for giving Mr. Hillier some inkspace.

Spare me the constitution, I know better!

Twit This!

Forgive me my ignorance, but my understanding is that licensing and regulating insurance and securities was a provincial responsibility.

Now, the National Post is reporting that the Federal Government is leaning towards one federal regulator.  I haven’t decided whether this is a good or bad thing, but it is yet again another area where a federal government decides to intrude on provincial responsibilities without reopening the Constitution.

This must stop.  Besides, we’d be better off letting the free market work, instead of rethinking it.

After the Speech from the Throne last November, Mr. Flaherty said Ottawa would forge ahead with "willing" provinces to create a national securities regulator.

Indeed, the rules governing the new regulator will give provinces the option not to participate.

Quebec has long objected to the national scheme, and Alberta and British Columbia have been lukewarm about joining such a body.

However, the regulator's proposed structure would allow publicly traded companies based in the no-go provinces the ability to bypass the provincial watchdogs and file their documents -- such as prospectuses, financial statements and proxy circulars -- with the national regulator. This is likely to be addressed in the legislation, because currently companies need to file in each province if they want to sell shares to its residents, including large institutional buyers such as the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Quebec.

In an attempt to appease provinces, the national regulator would keep regional offices in provinces that have certain expertise -- such as Alberta with energy and British Columbia with mining.

Just what we need.  Another Super Govt organization with split federal/provincial responsibilities/organizations.  Whatever “savings” businesses will find in dealing with one regulator will be passed down to us consumers as taxpayers paying fore more bureaucrats to run things.  It doesn’t really work that well in the US with the SEC…