By John Gray

When they set out their election platform two and a half years ago, Stephen Harper's Conservatives set high standards for a reformed Senate. The Conservative platform of the day promised that a new upper chamber would be "an effective, independent and democratically elected body that equitably represents all regions."

The reality of Canadian politics crashed in on the Conservatives after that and persuaded them to lower their standards for what they hope will be a new effort at reforming the Senate.

The Conservative government did try to re-make the Senate but the Senate itself — largely populated by Liberal-appointed Liberals — was a stumbling block and forced the government to shelve its reform plans.

The senators, who hold office from the day they are appointed until the day they reach 75, did not like a time limit on their careers.

They did not take kindly either to the idea that candidates for the Senate would be nominated by the federal government after being elected by voters from their respective provinces or territories.

Under the existing system, senators are named by the party in power without any electoral sanction.

The PM's preference

The senate reform package was known to be of particular interest to Harper because he shares the long-held view of the old Reform party that the West particularly suffered from the lack of democratic representation in the Senate.

The new Conservative platform is insistent that the Senate "must be either reformed or abolished. An unelected Senate should not be able to block the will of the elected House in the 21st century."

In addition to insisting on the election of nominees to the Senate, the new platform also specifies a term limit of eight years.

One feature that is different from the 2006 platform is that members of a reformed Senate would be covered by the same ethics rules as the House of Commons.

But the real difference may be that the new platform does not include the earlier proviso that a reformed Senate would "equitably" represent all regions. An oversight? Probably not.

That term — a throwback to the old Triple E cry of equal, elected and effective — has always been a red flag to the larger provinces like Quebec, Ontario and B.C. in particular who have not wanted to see their clout in Ottawa's legislative chambers on par with that of their smaller cousins.

Taking that term out of the equation might help a prime minister sell the idea of an elected Senate in skeptical, populous Central Canada, especially as it seems coupled with a pledge "to move closer towards representation by population in the House of Commons for Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta, while protecting the seat counts of other provinces."

That is, of course, if we are not reading too much into this pledge. The entire plank goes on only for a couple of sentences.