REPO: Trudeau's Senate move unwise

[Oscar]

REPO: Trudeau's Senate move unwise

[ http://www2.canada.com/saskatoonstarpho ... a420fb864b ]

Marjaleena Repo, The Starphoenix Published: Friday, February 07, 2014

- - - - -

QUOTE: "What was long overdue was a principled defence of the Senate, its constitutional role and its history, which includes many accomplishments unknown to most Canadians - such as blocking the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and forcing prime minister Brian Mulroney to call the 1988 election, voting down a law to criminalize abortion in 1990, and keeping bovine growth hormones out of Canadian milk in 1999."

- - - - - -

Repo, a Saskatoon resident, has been active in the Progressive Conservative and Liberal parties as a riding president, national executive member, campaign manager and chair in three leadership campaigns and in two federal elections.

As a Liberal party member who had registered to attend the policy convention in Montreal, I am dismayed by the unilateral move by party leader Justin Trudeau to remove Liberal senators from caucus.

In one fell swoop he cut the caucus in half, significantly reduced regional representation - Saskatchewan went from three caucus members to one, and Alberta and the Northwest Territories have none left - and demonstrated that he need not consult caucus or party members to make major decisions with only his unelected senior staff in the picture. House leader Dominic LeBlanc and deputy leader Ralph Goodale participated in some manner in the decision to expel Liberal senators, but it is not clear whether they were included in the decision-making or were mere messengers afterward.

Liberal senators are now scrambling to figure out how to function in the Senate, as the Independent status thrust upon them without warning handicaps them in the red chamber, where the Conservative majority is highly organized. Current rules ban Independents from sitting on Senate committees, and they will have far fewer resources to do their work because they no longer can share with Liberal caucus colleagues in the Commons.

The senators can keep their offices, staff and salaries, but as their ability to function effectively in the Senate has been severely curtailed, Trudeau's action has brought disaster in more ways than one. He has unilaterally disarmed the party in the Senate and therefore in its overall functioning, while naively exhorting the Conservatives to follow suit.

Clearly, Trudeau dropped this bomb on the party because of his willingness to cater to the public's media-generated hostility - over the years and more so recently - to the very existence of the Senate, and particularly to the current "scandal" in which Senators Mike Duffy, Patrick Brazeau and Pamela Wallin were expelled for "corruption." Actually, denying them due process to defend themselves likely is the real Senate scandal.

There has been enthusiasm among the pundits and the public, particularly among those who have no clue of the Senate's constitutional role and its accomplishments, while the arduous task of defending our institutions and even our party system is now left to - who?

The Conservatives and New Democrats, who have been temporarily outshone in the media by Trudeau's brazen act, are not being challenged in their efforts to fundamentally alter the institution to make it an elected body (another can of worms) or, equally disastrously, to abolish it altogether. Meanwhile, the Liberal party has been weakened in ways that can only benefit its opponents on the issue of Senate's functioning as well as other important issues that require a strong, united caucus.

MORE:

[ http://www2.canada.com/saskatoonstarpho ... a420fb864b ]

[Oscar]

Trudeau’s Senate plan is rash constitutional adventurism

[ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-de ... d/follows/ ]

Gordon Gibson Special to The Globe and Mail

Published Wednesday, Feb. 05 2014, 6:00 AM EST
Last updated Wednesday, Feb. 05 2014, 7:30 AM EST

- - - - -

QUOTE: "This illustrates the other constitutional problem. Accountability is at the very heart of our system. How can you possibly hold to account more than 100 independent senators who can’t even be deselected in an election? The current party system provides for such accountability through the need for caucuses to get along. But Mr. Trudeau no longer has any leverage over Liberal senators. He might live to regret that, and the country would certainly live to regret the Senate he contemplates."

- - - - -

Justin Trudeau’s Senate bombshell has three characteristics. First, a maybe – it may be politically popular. Second, a certainty – it is rash constitutional adventurism. Third and most important, it gives us a look – a disturbing one, in my opinion – into the mind and modus operandi of the man who would be prime minister.

Let’s take these in turn.

We will need to wait and see how this bounces and whether the Conservatives and New Democrats are successful in discrediting the idea, but for now, the politics look good. People are fed up with the Senate (mostly with a few senators appointed by Mr. Harper) and this is the first time that anyone has actually done anything about it. That, plus Mr. Trudeau’s sunny disposition, good looks and winning style, have coupled with the general unease Mr. Harper has generated, and may make people want the Liberal leader to succeed without too carefully examining his policies. Politics was no doubt the motive behind this move.

The constitutional matter is much more serious. If Mr. Trudeau becomes prime minister and fully initiates his policy, here is where we will end up.

Recall that the Senate is co-equal with the House of Commons. It can initiate any legislation, save money bills (which it can amend), and more importantly, stop any Commons bill of any kind. That gives the Senate enormous blackmail power – which it has very seldom used, being made up mostly of political types who, understanding that the people’s business must be done, have been content to defer to the elected chamber.

Now, consider a non-partisan Senate. It has already been suggested that senators will become much more regional, pursuing their province’s interests without too much concern for the greater good. (Couldn’t happen? Cast your eyes southward.) Some in my province, British Columbia, have speculated that this might be a good thing. But think again, and imagine an alliance of senators from the poor provinces, who could easily outvote the rest. No measure would come up from the House without being tweaked to siphon money east of the Ottawa River. That would be senators doing their new job.

Even a federal budget might suffer. The Senate certainly has the power to refuse a budget until it gets what it wants, which might be one senator’s bridge for his hometown, another’s grant for her pet project and a third’s complete boondoggle. Alliances to raid the public purse will be quickly and easily formed in the new system.

MORE:

[ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-de ... d/follows/ ]

- - - - - -

More Related to this Story - (LINKS at Original URL above)

Lawrence Martin Is this democratic reform’s Big-Bang moment?

Mike Coates Why partisanship is good for the Senate

Bob Rae Harper’s three big Senate blunders