listen.
i happen to agree with the senate on this particular issue. there should not be restrictions on euthanasia. there should be oversight, but not restrictions. the law needs to be about putting in place the contractual requirements to carry it out, not about dictating terms or conditions. this is the kind of normative tinkering that the liberals are supposed to be opposed to. i know americans are reading this - you want to think of canadian liberals as social libertarians, and pretty literal and pretty strict ones.
so, this is actually an unexpectedly strict piece of legislation from that party. i've criticized it, and i think rightly.
but, the fact that i agree with the senate on this issue is less important to me than the premise of picking a side between the senate and the house in the first place. i would rather see the house pass a bill i think is too restrictive than set a precedent for the senate to interfere with the house.
i neither favour abolishment (i think some check on power is a good idea, as an emergency mechanism) nor an elected senate (i don't want to see the kind of gridlock that exists in the united states). what i actually favour is the status quo, as it previously existed. i don't care about the costs. and, i interpreted trudeau's talk as just that - talk. i didn't, for a moment, think he'd be insane enough to give an unelected body a mandate to modify legislation by an elected body.
the thing is that it wasn't broken. it really wasn't. i don't agree with those that claim that it was. so, why fix something that isn't broken?
should the senate start interfering with the business of the house, then the system will actually all of a sudden become broken. they have no mandate for this. i will all of a sudden need to switch my position to abolition, but with a caveat - there needs to be a suitable replacement that can act as an emergency block on power, but not interfere in the day-to-day business of the elected house.
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/the-senate-takes-on-the-house-over-assisted-dying/
the house should reject the amendments.
and, if trudeau wishes to block the rejection, there should be an immediate confidence vote that removes him from power.
it's really unprecedented. there was no referendum. and, it's a serious enough abuse of power for the canadian equivalent of impeachment.
yes: i voted for him. i support most of his platform. but, this is something that can't even be entertained.