The long, uncertain path to Senate reform

 "Two of the most controversial cases heard by the Supreme Court of Canada recently both happen to involve lines of work not always held in high repute. There was the prostitution case, in which the court ruled last month that laws around the sale of sex violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by exposing prostitutes to grave danger and gave the federal government a year to reform the laws. And then there’s the matter of the Senate. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has asked the judges, in what is called a “reference,” to give their opinion on his plan to set term limits for senators and appoint them based on the results of elections. The key question is: Can the federal government make these reforms unilaterally, or does it need most, or even all, of the provinces to agree?"

http://www2.macleans.ca/2014/01/03/public-enemy-no-1/

Manufacturing Con-Senate

How could one make a Senate that is non-Partisan? Jean-Rodrigue Pare has an idea.

A non-partisan Senate

The NDP's position on the Senate is that it should be abolished.  Here is the NDP proposing some sort of reform.

Distraction Obsession

Dylan Jones, President and CEO of theCanada West Foundation talks about The Senate reform obsession.

Obsession with Senate reform is a costly distraction. The true cost of the endless debate over how to modify or eliminate the Red Chamber is how much it has diverted attention from governance reforms that would actually improve the lives of Canadians. The idea that the Senate is an essential forum for representing regional voices reflects the bias that the only government that matters is the federal one. In reality, as has been well argued by Premier Brad Wall of Saskatchewan, it is the division of powers between the federal and provincial governments that actually shapes how our country is governed.

The dominant fact of Canadian federalism is that provinces are strong and important actors. This fact is overlooked by the many academics and journalists enthralled by the political theatre in Ottawa.

If it's the obsession of anyone, I suspect it's only of a few, otherwise the chamber would have been reformed by now, or at least be making some sort of progress.  Most people don't concern themselves with the components of our legislative institutions.  The Senate rarely gets noticed until there's a scandal.

Why Canada needs the Senate

Eugene Lang explains why we need the Senate

A conventional wisdom has emerged that goes something like this: Canada’s Senate is an anti-democratic anachronism stuffed with self-absorbed party hacks who care more about their perks than the public interest. The Red Chamber operates like the worst kind of private club and is rife with corruption and possibly criminal conduct. The Senate serves no useful purpose, costs lots of money, and if it cannot be reformed it should be scrapped.

The outrageous expense habits and grotesque entitlement mentality of a handful of senators lend credibility to such generalizations. Nevertheless, Canadians cannot afford to scrap the Senate because it serves an increasingly important function in our increasingly dysfunctional Parliament.

...

On Senates and Scandals

Senate scandals teach us about senate reform

In 2009, the United Kingdom was rocked by scandal, after the Telegraph revealed that MPs were abusing taxpayer funds. As it turned out, MPs from all parties were claiming illegitimate expenses for personal gain. The public outcry that resulted did lead to a change in policy. But more importantly, it caused many elected officials to lose their jobs. Knowing that voters would boot them out of office as soon as they got the chance, many decided not to run in the next election; others resigned before the writ was dropped; a few ran and lost; and some were charged with crimes.

Canada is currently in the midst of an expense scandal of its own. Over the past few months, we have been learning about how Pamela Wallin, Patrick Brazeau, Mike Duffy and Mac Harb have misused their Senate expense accounts, with each one looking more crooked than the last as details continue to emerge.

Reform Impossible, Abolition Necessary

Jeremy Harrison, MLA and Government House Leader in the government of Saskatchewan and former Conservative MP, explains how the Saskatchewan government came to its abolition position.

 In Saskatchewan we know what to do with machinery that’s broken down and impossible to repair. In the Aug. 2 edition of the National Post, Senator Bob Runciman wondered why Saskatchewan advocates abolishing the Senate and why my party hasn’t called senatorial elections as we’d originally hoped. The answer is simple: the Senate is too broken to serve Canadians and it’s impossible to fix. Holding elections for a broken Senate is a waste of money, as the Upper Chamber itself has become.

People are frustrated with the Senate. Our government has heard that frustration and recently put the question to a vote of our Saskatchewan Party members. The members voted to change our party’s position from reforming the institution to abolishing it. The majority was 86%. We believe this sentiment to be widely shared among the people of this province.

...