Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Tyler Sommers

GET UPDATES FROM Tyler Sommers
 

Forget Reform -- Let's Abolish the Senate!

Posted: 02/21/2013 4:01 pm

The recent scandals involving senators offer more reasons to question the Senate's continued existence. Senators currently control investigations into other senators' ethics, spending, attendance and actions overall. Enforcement of the rules, and the rules are very weak and/or there are no penalties for violations in most cases. This is a completely ineffective system undermined by rampant conflicts of interest -- and senators are not even talking about changing it.

While there are many proposals to reform the Senate, they all leave or create more problems than they solve, and all require changes to the Constitution (as Prime Minister Harper will soon learn when the Supreme Court of Canada rules on his reference case) -- so abolishing the Senate is no more difficult than any other option.

An elected Senate will result in gridlock with the House, as happens in the U.S., because both bodies will have the democratic legitimacy to reject each other's proposals. And term limits for senators will not solve any of the Senate's many other accountability problems.

The Senate supposedly exists to provide a "sober second thought" review of House bills, but many senators are on the boards of big businesses and so are essentially inside-government lobbyists -- again a system undermined by rampant conflicts of interest.

As well, the Senate has never developed a new proposal that was not already being advocated by some think-tank or advocacy organization -- so it is not needed to generate new policy ideas in any area.

Finally, the Senate is supposed to balance the representation of Canada's regions in the federal Parliament. This goal could easily be achieved by increasing the number of seats from some regions in the House of Commons. This would go against the democratic principle of representation by population, but so does an elected Senate, and in any case in a federation like Canada that principle is always ignored somewhat in order to fulfill the goal of ensuring all regions are well-represented.

For all these reasons, the most simple, least costly, and therefore best solution is to abolish the Senate and incorporate more regional representation into the House of Commons.

If Prime Minister Harper had initiated a broad consultation seven years ago to make these changes, instead of playing games by introducing so-called Senate reform bills again and again but doing nothing to move them through Parliament, we would be much closer to the goal of having an equal, elected and effective Parliament (which has always been the goal of Senate reform).

Loading Slideshow...

 

Follow Tyler Sommers on Twitter: www.twitter.com/democracywatchr

FOLLOW CANADA POLITICS
The recent scandals involving senators offer more reasons to question the Senate's continued existence. Senators currently control investigations into other senators' ethics, spending, attendance and...
The recent scandals involving senators offer more reasons to question the Senate's continued existence. Senators currently control investigations into other senators' ethics, spending, attendance and...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 33
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
08:40 PM on 02/26/2013
As a self-employed Canadian taxpayer I look at developments in the Senate with utter disdain. While the provinces face budget cuts and reductions to critical services (one local example: possible police force headcount reductions in Calgary), the Senate, an unelected, an-accountable, dysfunctional and incompetent bureaucracy, incurs $106.2m of expenses! (audited Statement of Operations, Canada Senate, Year ended March 31, 2012). I see a zero return on this 'investment' to Canadian taxpayers. And so-called Senate reform is just another monumental waste of taxpayers time and money. To my mind the solution is really simple – by popular national vote, abolish (not reform) the Senate and divert those funds to the real needs of Canadians living and working in the real world. If the House of Commons is doing its job properly, we don't need the cost burden of a Senate.
Mike Whitfield
10:56 AM on 02/23/2013
I'm all for Abolishing the Senate but you stopped too short. Let's abolish the Conservatives (Reform).
01:15 PM on 02/22/2013
At the very least, like so many other areas of government, the Senate should be put on a budget. $50 million per year should be more than enough for a few friends of PMs to spend a few weeks each year going over some legislation (and then voting the way the PM who appointed them wants them to).

It's quite absurd though that a group who cannot even follow their own rules, makes decisions on the rules that everyone else has to live under.
01:05 PM on 02/22/2013
Give all the senators a pension they can't refuse and close down the damn place.
08:55 AM on 02/22/2013
The senate is there just so the ruling party can occasionally pat some friends on the back to give them the title, and in some cases, a nice bonus salary. It is a pointless body. I was even taught this in high school. Why it still exists is beyond me. $130k times 105 and you got at least $13m in savings per year.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DirkNeptune
I love raspberry pie, damn it.
11:12 AM on 02/22/2013
That's $13 million without including their expense accounts and pensions which would balloon that figure substantially.
02:59 PM on 02/22/2013
You are correct. The net cost of operations in 2011 was over $106m. Salaries, which does not just include the senators, and benefits clocked in at nearly $67m.

http://sen.parl.gc.ca/senproactivedisclosure/Document%5CFinancialStatement2010-2011_E.PDF
08:38 AM on 02/22/2013
Lets get er done!
08:30 AM on 02/22/2013
The current senate is a useless waist of money. An elected senate would just be the American system..and we all know how we'll thats working. Cue fiscal cliff. However after some senate reform we can make it useful. The senate more bipartisan than the House of Commons, which is currently a major issue within the commons.

perhaps if legislation would be reviewed by the senate(naturally more bipartisan) before a bill is introduced into the house we would have more cooperation amongst the parties rather than what we are seeing now within the house.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AuntiFascist
Taking back our democracy
08:20 AM on 02/22/2013
Yes Yes Yes

End this democratic abomination!
08:08 AM on 02/22/2013
The senate should be abolished, and the red chamber should be used to house additional MPs, to reduce the under representation of the more populous provinces in the House of Commons. This would increase the interaction between constituents and their representative, reduce the importance of lobbying and campaign contributions, increase the diversity of the representatives, increased voter turnout, increased competitiveness, and counterintuitively, decreased government spending.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robertmiller252
06:20 AM on 02/22/2013
No more difficult. I suggest you have a relook at just how difficult it would be be with the number of provinces who would need to approve and the veto power of Quebec.
08:55 AM on 02/22/2013
Quebec has no veto power.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robertmiller252
10:00 AM on 02/22/2013
It does claim to have under the British North American Act as you could find out if you took the time to do some research.
11:26 PM on 02/21/2013
The non elected senate is a legacy of the British system of government, which, at the time of the forming of Canada as a sovereign state, was an excellent model of democracy to follow. Since then, things have changed and appointed "governors" that keep in check the elected members of parliament, have no reason to exist. Rather, the reverse is closer to today's reality.
The British House of Lords has became in Canada a house of rather dubious representatives of the nation, let alone the electorate. Senators are often members of ethnic or regional groups needed to be appeased or incensed who, most of the time, end up representing only themselves. Or big business lobbyists, whose interests have little to do and sometimes go against those of the population at large.
However, I am very much in doubt that it will soon be abolished. Canada has a history of quiet evolution that has achieved slow but progressive change within the framework of institutional stability and conservative formality. We are fiercely independent, yet members of the commonwealth, with a foreigner as the formal head of state.
Our history is one of slow yet continuous reform which has made us similar, yet so different to the USA. We will all agree to abolish this arcane institution, but we will all remain at peace if it stays there.
01:01 PM on 02/22/2013
That is a good comment . However , although I have not researches it thoroughly , I think the British Northa America Act became obsolete with the patriation of the constitution . My personal take on the Senate is that it can be a very useful institution , but that it must be severely changed . The first and foremost change is to end appointment by a Prime Minister.

To me , the best way for it to become effective is if it were reconstituted on the same basis as the Supreme Court . Members should be appointed by a non-partisan committee of MP's . The number of Senators should be limited , perhaps two from each province and territory , but certainly far less than currently is the practice . Those chosen should be non -partisan and have demonstrated the ability to think critically on the policies , laws and programs or any issue being debated in the House . They should have the authority and responsibility to suggest changes on on submission to them , which then must be debated by the MP's .

This country badly needs a new system of government based upon consensus ; one dedicated to the needs of the Canadian people as a whole , not special interests , particularly not corporate interests which have far too much control over the political process . A non-partisan , equal Senate could be a useful body .
10:17 PM on 02/21/2013
Hear, Hear.
Let's do it, the sooner the better, so that all the senators can find other work like real work a.s.a.p.
The RED chamber could be used as a br#&+l for all the h#^%&rs that are already on the hill.
The income would be a real windfall and the national debt would be paid off in no time.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robertmiller252
06:21 AM on 02/22/2013
To scared to write the correct words are we?
08:50 AM on 02/22/2013
No, not at all, I was just thinking about the innocent children.lol
I am very politically in-correct.
piekeboe12
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:45 PM on 02/21/2013
The abolishment of the senate will never happen . We have a leader in government who does not want to change the Constitution . Or I should say there is no one in Canada with the know how to fix the many problems that exist in the Canadian Constitution. It is very old and there are issues that neat attention and reform . So we in Canada have this wonderful Party controlled Senate, that is draining the money bank ( tax payers ) dry. But what going to be done , lots of talk , but nothing will happen except maybe one or two Senators will lose there Pension for life. Ridiculous
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:43 PM on 02/21/2013
I personally would rather keep the Senate & reform it. I also agree the reforms mentioned to date are a crock, worthless beyond measure.

What we need is a Senate made up of real Canadian's, not one of politician's & their supporters. To achieve that end I propose a national lottery to determine Senators. All registered voters have their name included in the lottery, the number of Senators required for each Province is drawn from that Provinces registered voter pool. All Senator's currently get training, no qualifications exist, so there's no reason any Canadian couldn't be a Senator.

As for reforms, I am certain every Province would agree to changes that would correct these excesses. Thus solving the Constitutional problem. A Provincial government not supporting changes to fix these problems would not be viewed in a very good light by it's citizens.

I could draw up such a document with the proper changes that nobody would contest, I am certain many others could do the same. Our political parties of course wouldn't like it but I'm not asking them to like anything. The Senate is for all Canadian's not political parties.

The Senate is needed, the problem is it has been broken for so long Canadian's don't know what a real Senate is like.
01:32 PM on 02/22/2013
The senators cannot follow rules, they should have no say in the enactment of rules for us.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:02 PM on 02/22/2013
That's why the Senate needs proper reforming, so that the Senate will once again act as it was intended. The Senate did work very well, but that was many years ago. Our political parties have corrupted the Senate.
Deux-Montagnes Anglo
Vacuous must not be a state of being
07:37 PM on 02/21/2013
I agree completely with the abolishment of this archaic and elitist institution. The idea of the Senate being a place for "sober, second thought" is used only as a means of justifying this outdated model of a non-elected and highly partisan body that has the 'authority' to over-ride the democratically elected House of Commons. It is a gross waste of money and an insult to the intelligence of Canadians to continue supporting this institution in any which way, shape or form.
I agree with Pjtycm that we already possess more than enough levels of elected officials nursing off the taxpayers teat. A council formed with each Premier and Territorial Leader is more than sufficient "sober, second thought" and representative of the various regions of the country.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robertmiller252
06:27 AM on 02/22/2013
America used to have non-elected Senators where each State Legislature picked two people to represent them. Since that changed we have a non-workable, obstructionist Senate where the majority Party can refuse to put forward Bills. For example, Harry Reid has refused to put forward a budget for more than three years even though it is required by law. Is that what you really want?
08:05 AM on 02/22/2013
I have not seen conclusive evidence that state legislatures appointing their senators would result in no obstructionism than directly elected senators. Part of the problem in the US is that gerrymandering in the congressional districts has resulted in one party controlling the House of Representatives in spite of the other party receiving the plurality of votes in the most recent election. The U.S. senate should also be abolished, as it under represents the more populous states, and by extension, the electoral college.