The Senate of a New Beginning

Canada's senate is an archaic institution. It is not democratic. It is not effective. And it certainly is not popular. How do we change this? How do we make it more viable? Should we? Or should we simply abolish it? These are all valid questions - questions politically minded Canadians have been asking ourselves for a long time. I do not think abolition is in the best interest of Canada. The senate can serve Canada in a useful and ongoing capacity, but not in it's present form.

We often here the terms equal, elected, and effective bandied about with respect to the senate. What do these terms refer to? Well, first of all equal suggests that the smaller provinces should have a more representative voice than they enjoy in the lower house. The theory here is that this will allow their interests a greater voice in confederation.

Elected means just that - elected. Mr Harper has often suggested that a system be established in which the provinces hold elections for the senate and then these selections would be presented to the Prime Minister's office for the rubber stamp. Those who oppose such ideas point out the unconstitutionality of this proposal. Look, if the political will existed it would get done. There are always ways of getting around the legal problems. So why would anyone oppose an elected senate? Simple, it doesn't suit their interests. The senate will never be effective if it is not elected. The impasse continues . . .