| |
|
|
|
Here's
me on the Senate balcony from when I went to Ottawa
in 2005.
|
In the previous section, I mostly
discussed Canada's House
of Commons and its rules of operation. Though the House
of Commons is the most important part of Canada's Parliament,
there is also a second branch, known as the Senate.
After the House of Commons passes a bill, it must also pass
a vote in the Senate before it becomes law.
The Canadian Senate is very controversial. It is based on
the British House of Lords, and is an un-elected body. Senators
are unilaterally appointed by the Prime Minister, but he cannot
fire them. They serve until their death, resignation, or 75th
birthday. Until recently, they served for life.
Representation in the Senate
is not equal. Ontario has 24 senators, while Prince Edward
Island has four. The tiny province of New Brunswick has 10,
while the third-largest province, British Columbia, only has
six. The number of senators a province gets is generally connected
to the length of time that province or territory has spent
as part of Canada. So the two oldest Provinces (Quebec and
Ontario) have 24 senators each, while the provinces that joined
later have less. Today they justify this by arguing that even
though the Senate is not equal per province, it is equal per
"region". Here is the actual breakdown of seats:
|
Seats Per Province
|
| Ontario |
24
|
| Quebec |
24
|
| Nova Scotia |
10
|
| New
Brunswick |
10
|
| British Columbia |
6
|
| Alberta |
6
|
| Manitoba |
6
|
| Saskatchewan |
6
|
| Newfoundland |
6
|
| Prince Edward Island |
4
|
| Yukon |
1
|
| Northwest Territory
|
1
|
| Nunavut |
1
|
So if you count Ontario as one
region, Quebec as one region, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba,
and BC as one region, and New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and
PEI as one region then yes, the "regions" of Canada
are equally represented, with 24 Senators. Of course this
theory does not explain Newfoundland or the three Territories,
which don't quite fit in. Likewise, these "regions"
are quite arbitrarily defined, with no consistant political
or geographic logic. And therein lies the controversy.
|
|
|
"Nice Work" by Claire Hoy is an excellent
book about the sad state of Canada's Senate.
|
Though we say "the Prime Minister
appoints the Senate," it may be more accurate to describe
the Senate as a political hodgepodge, crafted from the appointments
of many different prime ministers. Thus, even though the current
Prime Minister of Canada is a member of the Conservative Party,
there are still many Liberal senators, left over from the
previous Liberal administration. The Liberals and the Conservatives
are the only parties that have ever governed Canada, so there
are no senators from any other parties. Appointment opportunities
arise numerous times during a PM's tenure as sitting senators
slowly die off or resign, and on average the Prime Minister
gets to appoint a few every year.
Canada's first Prime Minister,
John A. MacDonald, once famously described the Senate as a
"House of Sober Second Thought" that could help curb
the "democratic excess" of the House of Commons. Canada's
political founders were all staunch British Loyalists, and
thus were not too keen on embracing American-style democracy,
instead believing an elite "check" on elected politicians
was needed. Thus, they imposed a rule on Senate membership
that mandated that only men who owned land and property valued
at least $4,000 could serve as senators, in an attempt to
exclude the poor riff-raff from a presence in Canada's upper
house. $4,000 is not the vast fortune it once was, but the
rule remains. Canada's Senate was never exactly founded on
"noble principles", so it's certainly not an easy institution
for politicians to defend today.
While the Senate holds the power to veto
any bill passed by the House, these powers are rarely exercised.
Today, the Senate almost always quickly passes all legislation
it gets, with very little discussion or debate. It's in many
ways a figurehead institution, like the Queen or the Governor
General.
|
|
|
Here's a caricature of a generic senator
by Canadian editorial cartoonist Bruce MacKinnon. As
you can see, the stereotype is that a Canadian senator
is basically just a lazy, old, white man in a cushy
chair.
|
Because of its pointless nature, critics
of the Senate have alleged that the institution is fast becoming
nothing more than a "country club" for friends of the Prime
Minister. Senators get a lot of perks and high pay and they
don't have to do much in return. An Ontario professor recently
released a shocking report on the Senate, in which he revealed
somewhere around 20% of all Senators never even bother showing
up to vote. One Senator had even been living in Mexico for
the last year, and was still collecting his Senate paycheck.
The professor also pointed out that the only time all senators
ever showed up for work was on "pay raise" days, in which
they would vote to increase their salaries.
Scandals like these help explain the Senate's
inconspicuous existance. Canadians tend to only vocally object
to the Senate when it actually does something, so as long
as the senators do not make a fuss or undermine the democratically-elected
House of Commons, they will continue to get paid and enjoy
all the perks of the office.
Though it has remained quietly in the background
for many years, once in a great while the Senate will emerge
from its content slumber to duke it out with the House of
Commons and the prime minister. In 1986, for example, the
Liberal-controlled Senate attempted to reject Conservative
Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's controversial new Goods and
Service Tax. The Liberal senators filibustered and squabbled,
and had big noisy temper tantrums, but Mr. Mulroney evoked
an emergency clause in the constitution and appointed eight
new Senators to swing the control of Canada's upper house
back into the control of his party. So as you can see, even
in these sorts of dramatic situations the Senate is still
pretty useless.
|
|
|
The Governor General
reads the Throne Speech while her husband looks on.
|
Despite all the scandals, the Senate does
perform one somewhat dignified purpose. Every year, at the
start of the legislative session the Senate chamber hosts
a special event known as the Speech
from the Throne. The Speech from the Throne is
a very formal ceremony in which the ruling party outlines
their legislative agenda for the coming year. The prime minister
and his flunkies prepare a special speech, which is given
to the Governor General (or in rare cases, the Queen herself)
who in turn reads it from a special throne in the Senate before
the all the MPs, Senators, cabinet ministers, and Supreme
Court judges. There is a lot of tradition that accompanies
the Throne Speech, and before the Governor General is even
allowed to read it, there is this big elaborate ceremony in
which weird Parliament people like "The Gentleman Usher of
the Black Rod" knock on doors and give strange speeches as
part of odd traditions that evoke obscure events in British
history. Everyone dresses nicely for the Throne Speech, with
the Prime Minister wearing a morning coast, the judges wearing
their fur-trimmed robes, and the Governor adorned in all the
trinkets and ribbons of her office. The throne speech is always
broadcast live on TV, and it's generally treated as quite
a big deal in the Canadian news media.
What do Canadians think?
As I've mentioned, Canada's
Senate has a lot of critics. It very rare to meet
a Canadian who will defend the Senate, and even
rarer to meet someone who can actually name a single
sitting senator. So why has nothing been done about
it? Pretty much because Canadians hate making constitutional
amendments and do not want to be subjected to a
long, arduous debate about what, if anything, should
replace the Senate. As long as the Senate is invisible
and quiet, it is easier to forget about the large
chunks of tax money that pay for it.
There has been a
longstanding movement to make the Senate elected,
but to date no prime minister has agreed to go along
with this plan. The province of Alberta, for example,
has actually held senate elections for many years,
but these elections are always ignored. Even if
it was elected, however, the Senate would still
be subject to its bizarre distribution of seats.
Some folks thus champion the cause of a so-called
"triple E" senate that is elected,
equal, and efficient. Others just
want to see the whole damn thing abolished.
Canada's new prime minister, Stephen Haper, is the
first PM in Canadian history to officially be in
favor of an elected Senate. It remains to be seen
if he will actually be able to get any reforms through,
since he has said he does not want to go through
"the constitutional route" to change it.
|
|
|