One Supposes That "Elected Senate" Thing Is Looking a Whole Lot Better Now

Stephen Harper appoints underwhelming batch of new Senators

For Canadian opposition leaders who have opposed Senate reform under extremely specious pretenses, one would have to imagine that an elected Senate must look pretty good today.

Yesterday, Prime Minister Stephen Harper appointed nine new Senators to Canada's upper chamber. His choices are far from inspiring.

One has to wonder if NDP leader Jack Layton is rethinking his argument that Canadians would be confused by Senatorial elections when he reviews Harper's new appointments to the red chamber. Perhaps Stephane Dion would have fewer objections to "piecemeal" reforms, as opposed to broad-sweeping reforms, if he stopped to think about it today.

The Conservative party will henceforth be further represented in the Senate by Jacques Demers, former Nunavut Premier Dennis Patterson, Tory election campaign chairman Doug Finley, Conservative party President Don Plett, Linda Frum, Judith Seidman, former Harper spokesperson Carolyn Stewart-Olsen, Kelvin Ogilvie, and Claude Carignan.

While some of the appointments can be justified on the merit of the appointees, some of them clearly cannot. One further is utterly baffling.

So far as the necessary evil -- necessary so long as the opposition continues to oppose Senate form on less-than-inspired grounds -- of appointed Senators goes, Patterson, Frum, Seidman and Oglivie can be easily justified.

As the former Premier of Nunavut, Patterson can bring his expertise to bear on relations between the federal government and the Territories -- something that has been notably neglected over the past few decades. Patterson was also involved in the negotiations that led to the establishment of Nunavut in the first place. As far as unelected Senators go, Patterson is as worthy as any.

Linda Frum Sokolowski, sister of David Frum and daughter of Barbara Frum, spent three years as a board member of the Ontario Arts Council. Her work as a journalist stands apart -- although infuriating to ideological opponents of conservatism (then again, perhaps that's why she stands apart).

Judith Seidman's work as a medical researcher will help round out expertise on matters related to health care in the Senate.

Former Acadia President Dr Kelvin Oglivie also has solid medical credentials. He's considered by many to be a global leader in biotechnology, including genetic engineering. His appointment will certainly broaden the Senate's expertise on bio-ethics.

While these appointments were wisely made, some were not.

Of those appointments regarding which wisdom was rather lacking, Claude Carignan is the most defensible of them. A Conservative candidate defeated in the 2008 federal election, Carignan was also the mayor of Saint Eustache, Quebec. His presence will certainly help the government in terms of municipal affairs.

When one regards the appointments of Stewart-Olsen, Plett and Finley, one simply expected better from Stephen Harper. Their presence in the Senate is as partisan hacks, pure and simple.

The appointment of Jacques Demers is more than a little puzzling. While his story -- becoming an NHL coach and winning the Stanley Cup with the Montreal Canadiens in 1993 -- is inspiring, his appointment shares the same virtues as that of the Liberal appointment of Frank Mahovolich: slim and none.

At least Liberal MP Ken Dryden -- also a former Hab -- and former Liberal MP Red Kelly had to win to get into Parliament.

When one considers that, in Harper's batch of appointments, only four of the nine can be justified based on their own merits, one has to imagine that an elected Senate must look much better to them now.

An elected Senate certainly wouldn't bar partisan hacks from the upper chamber. But at least in an elected Senate, individuals like Carignan, Finley, Plett, Stewart-Olsen and Demers would have to win an election to get into Parliament.

That prospect alone should help still the tongues of those who, out of partisan self-interest, continue to oppose Senate reform.


Other bloggers writing about this topic:

Joseph Uranowski - Senate Appointments, Harpocrisy, and Awesomeness"

Pragmatism Is No Excuse

Democracy in short order in Conservative party

The Conservative party has surrendered any democratic high ground it may have had today, as all of its sitting MPs have been automatically renominated for Canada's next federal election -- whenever that may be.

The party had sent mail-in ballots to all of its members to ask them whether or not they wished to challenge the nomination of their local MP. A two-thirds "yes" vote was necessary in order to challenge.

Conservative party President Don Plett and sometimes-Tory strategist Tom Flanagan have both defended this move based on pragmatism.

"In a minority Parliament situation, our MPs were forever looking over their [shoulder] to try to figure out whether they were going to be challenged in a nomination and couldn't properly do their job they were elected to do," Plett explained.

"Politics isn't like mathematics," Flanagan mused about the decision, which is a departure from traditional Conservative party policy on nominations. "[it's] not a realm of eternal truths. When circumstances change radically you may have to change some of your organizing principles."

Yet when one of those organizing principles is a fundamental principle of your party -- in this case the populism championed by Reform party and Canadian Alliance founder Preston Manning -- compromising on it is a very bad idea.

In this case, the move has left the Conservative party facing a very severe democratic deficit within its own ranks.

NDP MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis hits the nail on the head when he suggested that, for any party with the ambition to lead democratically, democracy must begin within the party itself.

"Every nomination race is a challenge to the sitting MP to prove that they've still got the support of their riding's members," she said.

Which is a very important point. Even if the Tories wanted to reserve nomination contests for when they're truly necessary, a simple majority vote would be a much more democratic margin than a two-thirds margin.

Even Canadian Christian Coaliton President Charles McVety has his share of concerns about the move. "The democratic deficit in this country is already large enough," he said. "We don't need the governing party to be sinking deeper into ... a culture of entitlement."

Pragmatim is no excuse for a political party undermining its own fundamental principles -- particularly when one of thoe principles is supposed to be grassroots democracy.


Other bloggers writing about this topic:

Richard Evans - "Fiddlefudging by the Conservative Party"

Views from the Lake, eh? - "Where 'No' Means 'Yes'"

Undemocratic, Not Prudent

Tories make it harder to contest nominations

Most Canadians have long been fed up with Conservative MP Rob Anders.

A recent bid by Donna Kennedy-Glans to challenge Anders for his nomination has, unfortunately, hit a snag as the Conservative party national council issued a rule change requiring a two-thirds affirmative vote by the members of a riding association's membership in order to have a nomination challenge.

In Calgary, Anders must be breathing a sigh of relief.

But in Vegreville-Lloydminster, where local MP Leon Benoit is at no risk of a nomination challenge, Conservative riding association Danny Hozack doesn't like the change. Despite the fact that his MP is beyond secure in his nomination, Hozack has his concerns about the change.

“Imagine if the equivalent happened at a federal election,” he mused. “We just want to make sure everyone gets out and votes.”

“We spend a lot of time convincing people to become involved,” he added. “At least before they felt included, some might find the change offensive.”

If one accepts the rationale of Conservative party President Don Plett, the move was simply to keep Tory MP's attention focused on the current economic crisis.

“If we don’t do something like this then the incumbent doesn’t know whether he or she will be challenged and so they have to spend an unbelievable amount of time in the riding securing their own job if you will and not doing the work they were elected to do,” explained Plett. “We had nominations less than a year ago in many of our ridings across the country.”

“At a time like this when we are focusing so much and working hard with a serious financial crisis, it’s hardly time to take our attention away to fight nominations,” Benoit agreed. “I know the Prime Minister was very concerned that MPs [would] have their focus taken away from the business at hand."

"[My last nomination] a little more than two years ago was a very clear decision," Benoit added. "I’ve had five nomination races in my 15 years and none of them have been really heavily contested lets just say.”

All of this is well and fine for someone like Benoit who has served his constituents honourably.

But as it regards an individual like Anders, who has embarrassed Canadians on numerous occasions -- including denouncing Nelson Mandela as a terrorist -- this move may prove unwelcome to his constituents.

While Don Martin continues to hold out hope that Conservatives in Calgary West may yet get to Anders by throwing out the riding association board of directors that supports him, a two-thirds affirmative vote to challenge his nomination may be difficult to muster. A simple majority may not be.

If the Conservative party were really prepared to live up to the populist credentials its roots in the Reform party would otherwise demand it would scrub rule changes such as this and allow members of riding associations to make their decisions unencumbered by the fiat of the party's national council.


Other bloggers writing about this topic:

Buckdog on Politics - "Trouble Ahead for Rob Anders"

Pierre Trudeau is my Homeboy - "Does Stephen Harper Support Rob Anders?"

Calgary Grit - "Closet Liberals"