So, in the wake of Auditor General Michael Ferguson’s report that thirty senators made questionable expense claims, a few of those senators came out swinging — and by “swinging,” I mean saying all sorts of ridiculous things about the Auditor General and then rejecting his findings despite the fact that the Auditor General is an Agent of Parliament and operates with absolute independence from the executive. As if the Senate didn’t need another round of calls for reform after the circus ignited by the spending habits of Conservative and Liberal senators, that is what it got anyway. Certainly, the reports surfacing about newly ex-Conservative senator Don Meredith’s tryst won’t help the Senate’s image, especially considering that he (1) was one of the thirty senators who Ferguson flagged in his report, (2) has been calling himself “Dr. Meredith” even though he obtained that title from an “institution” that has no authority to grant degrees, (3) allegedly acts like a tyrant towards staff in his office, and (4) showed up to a cultural event hosted by Iran’s embassy. (As an aside, how exactly the Prime Minister’s Office can say that Meredith wasn’t representing the Canadian government at Iran’s event with a straight face is rather amazing!)
However one may feel about the future of the Senate, there needs to be a reality check about the purpose of the Senate. First and foremost, the Senate was established at Confederation to do the prime minister’s bidding. In theory, the Senate is supposed to perform the function of regional representation. In practice, the Senate’s regional representation function went out the window in 1867 thanks to Sir John A. Macdonald’s vision for a centralized Canada, which meant the prime minister selects senators and the governor general appoints them on his or her advice. Throughout Canada’s political history, the provinces’ premiers and governments and, at times, sitting MPs have been the ones to advance and defend the interests of Canada’s provinces and regions, not the Senate. If the Senate did fulfill its regional representation function, then it surely would have approved Bill C-290 in 2012. Though forgotten, C-290 proposed the legalization of betting on single games in pro sports; it was unanimously approved in the House of Commons and a majority of the provinces wanted C-290 to become law. Furthermore, the Senate had been intended by Macdonald to act as a conservative voice in Canada’s political system and it has done so with aplomb. The Senate defeated the first Old Age Pensions Bill in 1925; it refused to repeal section 98 of the Criminal Code, which was passed during the Winnipeg General Strike of 1919 and used to harass labour organizations and Left groups in general, until 1936 even though it clearly violated Canadians’ rights; and it rejected the Climate Change Accountability Act in 2010. This conservative orientation is not surprising in light of the fact that the Constitution Act of 1867 requires a senator to own a minimum amount of property. The intent of property qualification in 1867 was straightforward: the Senate would act to protect the interests of the propertied minority in case the popularly elected House of Commons ever threatened them. While the property qualification was never constitutionally indexed to inflation — the minimum $4, 000 requirement in the Constitution Act of 1867 would be around $65, 000 in 2015 — its effects on the institutional behaviour of the Senate cannot be underestimated for it continues to be the house that is the most sympathetic to business interests. Indeed, it is not unusual for senators today to sit on boards of directors. For example, in 2009, Pamela Wallin was appointed to the Senate while sitting on the boards of directors of Gluskin Sheff and Associates and Porter Airlines.
So, what does all of this say about the Senate? It is a decrepit institution that was specifically designed to be undemocratic. While all three of Canada’s major political parties have recognized that the Senate is a problem, perhaps the most ridiculous statement comes from Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party. Somehow, Trudeau and his Liberals begin with conclusion that the Senate is a noble institution and it became corrupted over the years due to “the party structure” (whatever that means). According to Trudeau and the Liberals, “The Senate is broken, and it needs to be fixed.” Actually, the Senate is working just fine and it doesn’t need to be fixed since it’s working exactly as Macdonald intended — and a reality check on the Senate shows that’s the real problem.