Senator Bert Brown: It is time to reform Canada’s Senate

May 5, 2010

By Senator Bert Brown

Senator Brown presented the following speech in the Senate on April 29.

Senator Bert Brown

Honourable colleagues, the Senatorial Selection Act is an offer to the provinces to draft their own legislation to hold elections in their provinces and to fill future vacancies in this chamber with elected Senators. When the bill comes into effect, it will not be a legal directive to the provinces. The Senatorial Selection Act will give provinces an opportunity to democratically choose future Senators by the voters of each province or leave this decision to the office of the current Prime Minister and future prime ministers.

Honourable Colleagues, I will begin at the beginning with a little of the history of how we arrived at this bill and what motivated us to take on this cause. I quote from Claire Hoy’s book, Nice Work. “On Thursday, October 13, 1864, the fourth day of the Quebec conference, Macdonald introduced a resolution drafted by the Canadian cabinet on just what would happen to the Senate. The proposal ignited a full week of rancorous debate over both the composition of the Senate and whether members would be appointed or elected. It’s important to recall the population disparity between the various players at the time of the Confederation debate since fears from the smaller groups of being smothered by the larger ones were at the heart of the disagreements.”

Two years before the Act of Confederation was signed in Prince Edward Island, a man by the name of George Brown explained, “Our Lower Canada (Quebec) friends have agreed to give us representation by population in the Lower House on the express condition that they shall have equality in the Upper House. On no other condition could we have advanced a step.”

Mr. Hoy also quotes Sir John A. Macdonald, in the 1865 Confederation debates, “In order to protect local interests, and to prevent sectional jealousies, it was found requisite that the three great divisions into which British North American is separated should be represented in the Upper House on the principle of equality.” That’s how this chamber began. The desire for equality of the provinces in the Senate stems from those quotes. The provinces are sovereign and each has its own legislature empowered to pass legislation on health care, education, social services, manpower, and immigration.

Triple-E Committee

This is a Bill that has been over 26 years in the making. On August 13^th, 1983, a few Albertans decided to form a national Triple E committee to promote the election of Senators; change the representation by province; and preserve the powers of the Red Chamber.

For two years, forums were held in towns across the province to discuss Senate reform. The government became involved and, in 1985, a special select committee of Albertans filed a report to those ends. The legislature passed a Senatorial Selection Act. Despite nationwide media criticism of an election for Senators, the Alberta government chose democracy.

Early in the fall of 1989, the Triple E Committee was invited to speak to the Parliamentary committee on the Meech Lake Accord. Dr. David Elton and I made presentations to that joint committee of the House and Senate. A brief window of opportunity opened when Prime Minister Mulroney stated he would only appoint Senators from a provincial list of names submitted by a province. Alberta, in 1989, held the first Senatorial election concurrently with a municipal election. There were provincial Progressive Conservative, Liberal, and Reform Party of Alberta candidates. The names and the number of votes for each candidate were put on a list given to the Prime Minister. Months later, the winner of the election, Retired General Stan Waters, a Reform candidate, walked into history as the first elected Senator in Canada’s parliament in June 1990.

The Triple E Committee participated in the hearings of the Charlottetown Accord held in Halifax, Montreal, Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver. The Charlottetown Accord died on a vote in 1992 primarily because it did not, in the minds of most Canadian voters, meet their expectations. It took on the interests of the provinces, the interests of Quebec, the interests of the Aboriginal peoples, the issues of gender parity, and the issue of Senate reform. Too many ideas in one document gave each voter at least one reason to vote no. All but two provinces voted against the Charlottetown Accord in a referendum vote in 1992.

Senators-in-waiting

There were subsequent Alberta elections for Senators-in-waiting in 1998 and again in 2004. The two Reform candidates who won in 1998 were passed over by Prime Ministers (Jean) Chretien and (Paul) Martin, despite there being a number of Senate vacancies in Alberta during their tenures as prime ministers. In 2004, three Progressive Conservative candidates and one Independent were elected and they too were passed over by Prime Minister Martin. In 2007, Prime Minister Stephen Harper appointed the winning Progressive Conservative candidate to the vacancy created by the retirement of long serving Liberal Senator Dan Hays.

As that appointee, on behalf of Prime Minister Harper, I began a third Canada-wide trip to promote Senatorial elections. Five provinces and two territorial government premiers or ministers of intergovernmental affairs agreed with elections as long as the Prime Minister covered the cost of the elections.

A number of Liberal MPs and Senators protested that Senate elections could be constitutionally challenged. To date, there has been no constitutional challenge after three elections. The New Democratic Party has, for many years, claimed the Senate should be abolished. That is not politically possible and it is not what the people of Canada want!

For over a generation, numerous polls in every province have shown a large majority of Canadians everywhere want future Senators to be elected by the same people who vote for provincial MLAs and federal Members of Parliament. I quote “Probably on no other public question in Canada has there been such unanimity of opinion as on that of the necessity for Senate reform.” The author of that quote is Robert MacKay. The book is The Unreformed Senate of Canada. The year was 1926.

During the life of the Triple E committee, we have communicated verbally and in writing with sixty provincial premiers and Prime Ministers Trudeau, Clark, Trudeau, Turner, Mulroney, Campbell, Chretien, Martin and recently Prime Minister Harper.

Prime Minister Harper is the only Prime Minister in Canada’s history who has ever committed to Senate elections from the time he was an MP, a Conservative party leader and up to and including his years as Prime Minister.

Despite the desires of Canadians for election of Senators, neither the House of Commons members nor the Senators have voted to begin a serious attempt to elect future members to the Red Chamber.

Senate vacancies

Prime Minister Harper was faced with growing Senate vacancies after more than a year in power. A Liberal Senator introduced a bill proposing that the Prime Minister should be constitutionally required to fill Senate vacancies. Lacking any Opposition support for Senate elections in either the Commons or the Senate, Prime Minister Harper appointed 18 Conservative Senators in 2009. The steadfast reluctance to embrace any form of elections would, over a nearly two year period, make appointments of Conservatives predictable until a majority is reached – that was the only way to end the 13 year Liberal majority in the Senate. The Liberals have held Senate majorities for 70 years with only two brief exceptions to date. The last Liberal majority in the Senate refused to deal with Canadians’ expressed desire to bring democracy to the Red Chamber and refused to open the door to Senate elections. Senators and colleagues, that situation has changed.

That brings me back to (the) Senatorial Selection Act, the bill I speak to today, honourable colleagues.

This bill is not constitutionally challengeable because it is an “offer” from the Prime Minister to the provinces to hold Senatorial elections. It is in no way a legislative command.

For those provinces that develop their own legislation to elect Senators who would represent their voters in a Senate of the future, the provinces should know that Prime Minister Harper will consider the outcome as he has with Alberta’s senatorial elections and will in Saskatchewan’s and Manitoba’s future senatorial elections.

Provinces will not be forced to hold such elections. There will be no threats, no pressure, and no penalty – only the will of the Canadian voters.

Only the first step

Provinces that do not hold democratic elections for future vacancies created naturally by retiring Senators will again force Prime Ministers to appoint without the votes of the people.

This Bill is but the first step to a reformed Senate. The next two steps can only be done when elected Senators prove their worth to their provinces and when elected Senators are close to a majority in the Senate.

Within a decade that is possible. At some future point, the provincial governments and/or Parliament will need to draft a stand-alone constitutional amendment to agree on the future representation in the Senate and retain the supremacy of the House of Commons without crippling the powers of the Senate. Faced with a confirmed constitutional reform of the Senate, the Senate chamber has only a 180 day suspensive veto.

Honourable Senators, this is an historic act by our Prime Minister and it will ultimately lead to the provinces and territories having a real voice, a vote, and if or when necessary, a veto. This will constitute sober second thought backed up by the elected members in both houses of Parliament. At the same time, a veto of a bill by the Senate would not be a vote of confidence.

The bill would simply die and the Commons could rewrite the bill or, realising that a majority of elected Senators in each of seven provinces representing more than 50 per cent of the population are opposing the bill, let it expire.

Honourable colleagues, I propose A Senatorial Selection Act for your thoughtful consideration on behalf of Prime Minister Stephen Harper who made possible its journey here to this Chamber, and at this time.

I quote Lord Andrew Adonis, who recently spoke to the 700 year old House of Lords, when he said, “The time has now come to make it legitimate in the only way a legislative assembly can be legitimate in the modern world, which is to be elected”.

I am prepared to answer all the questions that the members of this Chamber ask of me in the coming months. However, at the end of each question or concern you put forward, the over-arching final answer will be – we do this not for any political affiliation or philosophy, we do it to give voice to the Canadian people, and for democracy in this chamber, and for this century.

Channels: The Calgary Beacon, May 7, 2010