Senate abolition a non-starter despite Mulcair's push
Supreme Court's requirement for provincial consent is a fatal obstacle, but that won't stop debate
Politics is filled with sloganeering and feel-good promises that have little if any chance of being delivered.
And that's the best way to describe NDP Leader Tom Mulcair's renewed promise to abolish the Senate after the auditor general reported Wednesday that too many senators treat taxpayers' money as a kind of personal expense account over which they accept few controls and even less oversight.
- Interactive: Who owes what in the Senate?
- N.S. Premier Stephen McNeil offers conditional support for reforming Senate
- 'Major changes' needed in Senate, Elizabeth Marshall says
- Auditor general Michael Ferguson breaks down $23M cost of Senate audit
No one's questioning whether Mulcair's sincere in his determination to make the Senate an election issue this fall, or that he can make a convincing case using Michael Ferguson's report to argue that the upper chamber is so corrupt, so filled with partisan hacks, so bereft of credibility, that it must be abolished.
What makes this promise a non-starter is a Supreme Court of Canada ruling from April 2014, when the country's highest court said abolishing the Senate would require the consent of all 10 provinces.
As of today, only one premier, Brad Wall of Saskatchewan, is in favour of abolition. This week he compared reforming the upper chamber to lavishing money on restoring an old car, knowing it will never run properly.
But Wall made it clear he has no intention, as in none at all, of actively campaigning to scrap the Senate.
"Everyone knows Saskatchewan's position," he said. "I would like to see other provinces come on board but if they don't, even in light of this latest mess, then it's not really worth the effort to try to change their minds."
In other words, good luck there, Mulcair.
'Not in Quebec's interest'
On the other side is the premier of Mulcair's home province of Quebec.
Premier Philippe Couillard insisted Wednesday that the Senate's troubles are what he called ''administrative dysfunction" that can be fixed. He vowed to fight any effort to scrap the Senate because it would eliminate the important role the chamber plays, as an institution, in balancing regional interests.
"Of course it's not in Quebec's interest to recommend abolition of the Senate."
Mulcair said he recognizes the historical context of the Senate and understands how nuanced the issue is. But he's undeterred.
"People are telling me they want us to work towards Senate abolition. That is what we are going to talk to Canadians about during the election campaign," he said Wednesday. "And the NDP will be seeking a mandate in October from the Canadian voting public to continue our work of trying to abolish the Senate."
Mulcair has ample ammunition from the auditor general's findings.
Michael Ferguson's report is littered with example of mis-spending, of examples where taxpayers paid for fishing and golf trips, wedding anniversaries and funerals.
- Auditor general cites poor oversight for Senate spending mess
- Senators defend their expenses, call report a 'defamatory affront'
- NDP's Pat Martin wants MPs to defund the Senate
That's bad enough. What's worse, says the NDP, is that the 30 senators flagged for inappropriate spending rejected his findings, defending their right to those expenses. Most are planning to challenge the AG's findings before a special arbitrator. None will face the same, immediate judgment of suspension without pay dispatched to former colleagues Mike Duffy, Patrick Brazeau and Pamela Wallin.
But is that enough to galvanize Canadians to vote NDP, or to crystallize public anger around abolition instead of reforming the upper chamber to make it more representative?
Reform, of course, is the route the Conservatives took when they came to power in 2006. But since the last year's Supreme Court ruling, Stephen Harper has shown little interest in opening up talks with the provinces on even his preferred reforms of electing senators and imposing term limits.
Those changes, the court said, could be made under the Constitution's general amending formula that requires seven provinces representing 50 per cent of the population to agree.
Let the people decide?
Some Conservatives privately float the idea of a national referendum on those reforms, but so far the party is saying little publicly about how it will counter Mulcair's push for abolition in an election campaign.
- NDP Leader Tom Mulcair says he'll seek mandate for Senate abolition
- Senate reform can't be done by Ottawa alone
The official line on Wednesday is that Canadians aren't seized with Senate reform, that the initiative for reform must come from the provinces.
In the meantime, the prime minister isn't filling any vacancies that arise. There are now 20. More are on the way. Don't bother applying.
"We are focusing on jobs, economic growth and what matters to Canadians,'' said junior cabinet minister Tim Uppal, one of many to make the same point. "We will not be drawn into long constitutional battles with the provinces."
But the Conservatives also can't abandon the field to the NDP.
New Democrats are already taking every opportunity to remind potential voters that Harper appointees Mike Duffy and Patrick Brazeau are currently before the courts, and that another handful are among the group of 30 senators flagged by the auditor general this week for claiming improper expenses.
The Liberals are just as keen to exploit any inch the Conservatives might give. Party leader Justin Trudeau tried this week, challenging Harper to follow his lead in banishing senators from the Conservative caucus.
"After a decade Canadians don't want excuses, they want to know why Conservative have done nothing for real, meaningful Senate reform.''
So cue the sloganeering. Just don't expect anything to actually change.