More Thoughts On Senate Reform

Term limits can't be passed as a stand alone bill. There are just too many "what-ifs". Apart from challenging the constitutionality of the term limits, the major objections to the bill were as follows:

1) Limiting the Senate term to 8 years would allow a second-term Prime Minister to reappoint the entire Upper Chamber, clearing it of the opposition and turning it from Sober Second Thought to a mere rubber-stamp.

2) Depending on which party is in power, Senators approaching retirement would either become "lame ducks" (knowing that there's no way they could be reappointed by the governing PM) or they could go as far as crossing the floor to toe the line with the current PM - just to get reappointed for another term.

The opposition suggestion - extend the proposed term to 12-15 years and limit the Senators to just one term, thus making every new Senator a "lame duck". My suggestion - integrate the bill that limits Senate tenure with another piece of legislation which specifies the actual process of electing new Senators. Once it's clear that all further appointments would be made following a province-wide vote using a preferential ballot - that will address most of the concerns if not all of them. So there would be no need to limit Senators for just one term (why?) or to extend the term beyond 8 years.

Bill C-43/C-20: Keep it within Federal jurisdiction. I understand those who suggest that if there is a provincial election (general or municipal) being held already, then we might as well add another ballot to it, so it doesn't cost as much as a separate vote. Except - the provinces don't like the idea. They don't want the extra headache.

Plus - if we hold an election to a Federal house, using a Provincial electoral body - what jurisdiction should apply? Each province has different rules on election funding. And, to make things worse, each province has its own political parties with the known affiliations not always matching their Federal counterparts.

The only way to address those ambiguities is to keep the process entirely within the jurisdiction of Elections Canada. The latter could have an agreement with its provincial counterparts, so that they could share offices, personnel and equipment if a Senate by-election is held in conjunction with a province-wide non-partisan vote (such as municipal elections). But the actual process of electing Senators should take place under Federal jurisdiction, using Federal political party affiliations and with Federal funding/campaign spending limits applicable.

Seek input from the voters on future directions. The NDP wants a referendum on whether or not the Senate should be abolished. The Conservatives could use the very same referendum, not just to fast-track the reforms, but also - to seek input from Canadians on the future directions of the Senate reform. Primarily - whether or not the current seat distribution (24 seats per region, 1 seat per territory with Newfoundland as a "stand alone" province) should be changed and whether or not there should be an equal number Senate seats for each province, including Ontario, Quebec and PEI. Holding a referendum would be far more effective and less costly than having those questions studied and debated by a Parliamentary committee or by a randomly-selected Citizen's assembly.