Time to reform the Senate or time to abolish it? Maybe it’s time we Canadians took time to understand it.
At the time of Confederation, the Senate was created to be a body independent of the elected House of Commons. It was expected to protect provincial interests, provide impartial revisions to House of Commons non-money bills (sober second thought), and represent property and Canada’s conservative influences. These expectations have never been met – certainly not the first two. The reason for this failure is not unexpected. Appointments to the Senate are constitutionally made by the Governor General. When that office had political independence from the prime minister, provincial rights could be heard in the Senate. However, William Lyon Mackenzie King adeptly destroyed that function so that Senate appointments must now be made on the advice of the prime minister. Provincial interests and impartial reviews of the federal cabinet’s legislation are now to be avoided at all costs.
The allocation formula for appointment to the Senate was designed to recognize provincial equality, modified to concede that some provinces have much larger populations than others. It also recognized Confederation regions with the original formula giving a quixotic two dozen seats to the Maritime group of three, Quebec, Ontario and the western group of four. Joey Smallwood negotiated a neat half dozen seats when Newfoundland joined Confederation in 1949 and one each has now been allocated to Yukon, Nunavut and Northwest Territories. There is a small matter of a requirement of the persons appointed to maintain a residency and be a property owner in the province they represent. This must have been seen as an insignificant political nuisance to the prime minister when he gave his “advice” to the Governor General on some of the more recent appointments. However, the buck stops at the Governor General’s office, so that constitutionally the PM is off the hook. One wonders if anyone has asked the GG what happened with his constitutional advisors?
So what is really going on? Senate appointments are rarely made to honour the person’s service to Canada or to the province in which the Senator resides. They are almost exclusively made for faithful service to the political party in power or to individuals to whom the prime minister feels personally obligated. This is not to say that these folks are without merit. Some indeed are highly experienced former politicians, lawyers, business and community leaders whose advice is worth having – witness Sen. Tommy Banks, now retired. Others, however, clearly are party faithful hacks and fundraisers. And there is a troubling perception in the public’s mind, not without reason, that a Senate appointment is a reward for past achievement. For some, entering the Senate admits one to a collegial political retirement home, with an unfettered travel allowance and a pension – and not a place to actively represent one’s province in making a continuing contribution to public life.
So what about Senate reform? First, the original reason for creating a Senate is still valid. Otherwise we give unbridled dictatorial power to the prime minister (and the Prime Minister’s Office). We are presently seeing both the good and the bad of that arrangement. Secondly, we need to go back to basics and alter who makes the appointments. Logic tells one that if the Senate is to fulfill its responsibility of being an independent federal legislative body to provide a regional or provincial perspective to our federal lawmaking, it is the provincial governments that should advise on the appointments through the office of their lieutenant governors. If a province decides on selection by election, so be it. It would not be without inconvenience. I reckon Quebec’s government may well appoint separatists to the Senate. We might even have an elected Green Party representative from beautiful B.C.
Sometimes, reform means going back to basics. It also takes vision and intellectual flexibility. Oh, well. It is a nice thought.
Alan Murdock is a local pediatrician.
