Skip to content

Senate plan full of half measures

It’s a matter of history that prime minister Stephen Harper has had problems with the Supreme Court of Canada on various issues — including Senate reform. So you’d think he would take a measured guess as to the court’s reaction before announcing his moratorium on appointing new senators.

It’s a matter of history that prime minister Stephen Harper has had problems with the Supreme Court of Canada on various issues — including Senate reform. So you’d think he would take a measured guess as to the court’s reaction before announcing his moratorium on appointing new senators.

My guess, he has taken that measure and that a more rounded plan will be forthcoming before the election campaign becomes formal.

Announcing he’ll not be naming any new senators until the provinces solve his Senate problems for him is only a half measure. And a weak one at best.

So, really, what’s the plan?

A federal court case has already begun, with Vancouver lawyer Aniz Alani asking the court to demand that Harper begins filling the 22 vacancies on the 105-seat upper body, on constitutional grounds.

Alani says he’ll drop his case, and even swallow his costs, if Harper makes a request of the Supreme Court of Canada to rule if his moratorium is legal.

I’m guessing they’d rule against him. The court has already said the feds need support of seven provinces representing 50 per cent of the population to reform the Senate, and unanimous provincial support to abolish it.

They also said the prime minister can’t abolish the Senate by simply allowing membership to dwindle to zero. (Actually the magic number is 15, which is the quorum for a legal meeting, set in the Constitution.)

So I’m asking myself, what’s the real game here?

Part of Alani’s suit points out that our Constitution requires the Governor-General to appoint senators. By convention, that’s always been done on the advice of the prime minister. But Section 32 of the Constitution does not say it must be done this way

Retiring Edmonton MP Peter Goldring has suggested as much himself, pointing out that if we really do want a Senate that is not a partisan wart on the nose of the Prime Minister’s Office, well, just let the Governor-General do his or her duty, and appoint all new senators.

Since you or I are just as qualified to judge who is or is not senatorial material, as much as any Governor-General, it makes sense that the G-G would appoint senators on your advice and mine, through a provincial vote.

No prime minister needed. And no prime ministerial baggage to be held when it is discovered that too many senators have too little a sense of personal honour around access to taxpayers’ money.

This little change would require the agreement of the provinces, according to the 7/50 formula laid out in the Constitution. A difficult consensus to achieve, perhaps, but not impossible.

So why is this not what prime minister Harper is asking directly?

For Harper to suggest that not filling the 22 vacant seats saves the taxpayers millions of dollars, is a joke. What has the Harper government spent on self-congratulatory advertising in the past nine years?

Getting the provinces to agree to senatorial elections, setting reasonable terms of office and ensuring proper financial oversight should not be an impossible thing to arrange.

I would think the task of leadership is to challenge the provinces directly to do this, not to announce some arbitrary moratorium that nobody even accepts is legal.

Stephen Harper has personally appointed 59 senators to the 105-seat chamber in his years as prime minister. He’s alternately said he wants to change how senators get their jobs, how long they hold their jobs, and what they do on the job. He’s also suggested he’d prefer Canada had no Senate at all — which is now the official position of the NDP.

The Liberal Party stripped all Liberal senators of their party membership, unilaterally, with leader Justin Trudeau saying the Senate should have no party affiliations.

At the very least, it seems reasonable that voters might decide to elect MPs from one party, and senators from another, if only to double-check their omnibus bills.

But while the status quo cannot stand as regards the Senate, neither can Harper’s half measure to get the ball rolling to fix it.

So, prime minister, tell us: what’s your real plan?

Follow Greg Neiman’s blog at Readersadvocate.blogspot.ca