In the wake of Michael Ferguson’s scathing audit into Senate expenses, some are suggesting Canada needs to go a step beyond the “transformational change” the auditor general is calling for.
Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall and NDP Leader Tom Mulcair are among those calling for the Senate to be outright abolished.
The comments come as Ferguson released his 116-page report on Tuesday, calling for independent oversight and stronger accountability in the way senators’ expenses are governed.
There are precedents for abolition. Nova Scotia got rid of its Senate in the 1920s, New Zealand closed its Senate in the 1950s and Quebec shut down its second chamber in 1968.
Still, experts disagree on whether reform or abolition could be achieved after the Supreme Court’s landmark 2014 decision.
Canada's top court ruled that the substantial reforms proposed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper -- including Senate elections and term limits -- would require approval of at least seven provinces representing 50 per cent of the population, and outright abolition could occur only if all 10 provinces agreed.
Getting all provinces – especially the smaller ones – to agree to abolition may be difficult. That’s because one of the main purposes of the Senate is to give less populous provinces more power than their populations would warrant with just the House of Commons, which is based on representation by population.
The Maritime provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and P.E.I., for example, might lose out under abolition considering they collectively hold nearly a quarter of Senate seats (24 of 105) despite having only about five per cent of Canada’s population.
Former Senate clerk Gordon Barnhart, who is now interim president of the University of Saskatchewan, said he doesn’t have much hope that enough provinces would ever agree to a constitutional amendment to substantially reform or abolish the Senate.
“On the other hand, I do see a solution,” Barnhart told CTV Power Play. “If the Committee of Internal Economy sets very clear (rules) and then the Clerk of the Senate was entrusted with enforcing them equally for everybody -- without political interference -- that would solve a lot of the problems.”
Mulcair disagrees. The NDP leader recently told CTV Question Period he is “convinced” that, after negotiations, the provinces would agree to “solutions that will allow us to get rid of this archaic system.”
In question period Tuesday, Parliamentary Secretary for Intergovernmental Affairs Paul Calandra said “we know there is not unanimous support to modify the Senate, so (the Conservatives) are going to continue to focus on jobs and growth.”
McGill University political scientist Antonia Maioni said there are plenty of options for Senate reform, calling it “disconcerting” that some argue “we can’t do it because we can’t get all the provinces together.”
“We need to be able to innovate our institutions,” she said. “If we can’t innovate, then we have some serious questions to ask ourselves about the way our Constitution and our system of amendment works.”
With files from Ottawa Deputy Bureau Chief Laurie Graham
