Sober Thoughts on Senate Reform

There's a big difference between saying you'll make the Senate more accountable and actually making it work.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is promising to introduce term limits and then provincially held elections for the Senate, which could drastically alter the political makeup of the country. The National Post's editorialists herald the proposals as the fulfilment of one of the Conservatives' (and before them, the Reform party's) longest-held tenets. “Term limits will be a welcome change from the current senatorial 'retirement age' of 75, which effectively guarantees employment for life no matter how good – or bad – a senator's performance,” they write. “While provinces are naturally concerned about the financial cost of [holding Senate elections] ... since these measures would increase provincial input into senatorial appointments, they should be considered good value for money.”

The Globe and Mail applauds the Tories for finally tackling Senate reform, but it has reservations over how all of it, as proposed, will unfold. Harper “needs to manage the issue carefully, and dispense with the curious notion that eight-year, non-renewable terms for senators is an enhancement of democracy,” the editorialists say in calling for six-year, renewable terms, like most other countries with two levels of legislature. The purpose of the Senate is to have experienced minds reviewing the work of the ever-changing House of Commons – and allowing them to run again would force them to do more productive work in the Upper Chamber to increase their chances of re-election.

Harper might be out of his depth in taking on the Senate, the Edmonton Journal warns. “This could eventually turn out badly for his government and for a land that is hard enough to rule without adding another class of politicians to the mix,” an editorial says, suggesting that voters could very well elect more opposition senators than those from the government party, paving the way for all sorts of legislative bottlenecks. In addition, “powerful new provincially based politicians in Ottawa might compete with provincial legislatures as the true spokesmen of their provinces,” which would surely rankle the premiers. Harper should be commended for using his majority to attempt to bring more democracy to his constituents. But he must be cautious, and willing to heed the advice of the provinces, the opposition, and constitutional scholars alike – something he's rarely done before.