Since I just heard Peter Van Loan on CBC radio pitching senate reform, I figure it is a good time to mention my senate stance:
.....Strongly in favour of senate reform.
.....Strongly in favour of term limits.
.....Strongly against appointment by the Prime Minister.
.....Strongly against elected senators.
Yep. I'm not on the Triple E or even Partial E bandwagons. After looking at the issue for several years, I cannot logically foresee any possible way that electing senators will not make the body function worse rather than better.
Back in university, we learned about the German system where the equivalent of provinces do the appointments. That sounds pretty solid to me. Unlike the German system where the appointments are very short lived - often to deal with only a specific issue in front of the Bundesrat - I would appoint senators for a six-year term, once renewable. This way the Senate would reflect the political differences amongst the provinces, with a bunch of Liberals, a bunch of Tories and a handful of NDP and/or Parti Quebecois senators. As provincial governments change, some changes would occur in the senate.
Make the body accountable to the provinces, the way it was always supposed to be, and keep the profile of senators the same.
To me that makes the most sense.
PS: Oh yeah, and lose about half the numbers.