“About 9 chances out of 10, [Bill C-7] is unconstitutional and it will be found to be unconstitutional and so it won’t happen unless they change their approach and the federal government tries to get the provinces to support it which will be very difficult,” said University of Toronto political science professor Peter Russell, who is also a constitutional expert. “You can’t predict entirely what courts will say but it’s pretty obvious that it would change the method of selecting Senators and the constitution is clear about that, you need seven provinces representing 50 per cent of the population if you’re going to change how Senators are selected.”
Québec Premier Jean Charest has filed a motion against the bill in the Québec court of appeal to declare it unconstitutional should it pass and become law.
Prof. Russell told The Hill Times that the only way to defend Bill C-7, the Senate Reform Bill, is to claim that it won’t affect the method of selection, which is in fact what the Conservative government has tried to do. He speculated last week that Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) must entertain Senate reform for appearances’ sake.
“Certainly a majority of Canadians don’t respect the present Senate, so if you’re trying to reform an institution that people don’t think is acceptable as it stands, then you’re seen to be doing a good thing and if you’re just prevented by the courts and the provinces, then so be it. So you get some political brownie points. That’s what it’s all about,” he told The Hill Times.
Bill C-7 has been called for debate seven times since it was introduced June 21, 2011 and has received 20 hours of debate. It is the eighth piece of legislation the Conservatives have introduced since forming government in 2006.
The Senate Reform Act, if passed, would impose a term limit of nine years on Senators and create a framework for the provinces to elect Senators, from which the prime minister would select appointees.
Liberal MP Stéphane Dion (Sain Laurent-Cartierville, Que.), his party’s democratic reform critic, said he opposes the flawed bill.
“Of all the bills currently in discussion in the Parliament of Canada, this could well be the most dangerous for the future of our country,” Mr. Dion said, noting that he’s worried the government will try to rush the bill through committee hearings when the House returns this fall.
“It’s such an important bill. It’s important that the committee has the time to do its job properly,” he told The Hill Times, adding that Democratic Reform Minister of State Tim Uppal’s (Edmonton-Sherwood Park, Alta.) argument that the opposition is stalling the bill’s progress is “nonsense.”
NDP MP Joe Comartin (Windsor-Tecumseh, Ont.), his party’s democratic reform critic, said while the NDP believe the Senate should be abolished, there’s a larger question of the bill’s constitutionality. He pointed to a 1980 Supreme Court decision which said that Parliament cannot alter the fundamental feature or essential characteristics of the Senate. The decision stated that to make the Senate a wholly or partially elected body would affect a fundamental feature of that body. The decision means that Parliament cannot unilaterally change how Senators are selected.
“The Supreme Court was really quite adamant at that time and I don’t have any sense at all that the Supreme Court has changed their interpretation of the constitution in regards to electing the Senate. If you’re going to elect the Senate you have to go through an amendment that is approved by the provinces,” Mr. Comartin told The Hill Times.
In an emailed statement to The Hill Times on Aug. 10, Mr. Uppal said: “Senate reform is a long-standing commitment of the Government and the Conservative Party of Canada. Senators make, review, and pass laws that affect Canadians every day, so it makes sense that Senators have a democratic mandate from the people they represent.”
In a Charlottetown Guardian article, Mr. Uppal called on the opposition to “stop stalling” the bill and “let it come to a vote.”
In response, Mr. Dion wrote an open letter accusing Mr. Uppal of being dishonest about the bill’s progress.
“In fact, it is the government that has chosen to move other priorities ahead of the debate at the second reading of Bill C-7. Had you decided otherwise, this proposed legislation would already be debated in committee,” Mr. Dion said in the Aug. 3 letter.
Mr. Comartin said that given the Conservative Party has a majority in both Houses, the reason for delaying the bill’s progress is because there are some Conservative MPs and Senators who are against the bill. “I think at this point they’ve done some head counting and they’re not sure they can get it through the senate. So stalling it and delaying it is their tactic right now,” he told The Hill Times, noting that “it is highly likely” the Conservatives will try to rush the bill through to avoid a “full hearing” on the bill’s inadequacies. “The messaging that goes out at that point is pretty damaging to them not just on this bill but to their role and credibility as a government. I think the PMO looking at that kind of messaging quite clearly coming out of this, they will try to shove it through in a minimal number of sessions,” he said.
Mr. Dion maintained that Bill C-7 represents a serious threat to Canada that must be seriously considered.
“I am very concerned for the future of Canada,” he said. “The institutional reforms of today may be the nightmare of tomorrow. The Prime Minister must come clean with Canadians. Does he want to reopen the constitution? Yes or no? If the government is unwilling to do the right thing, it should at least allow the Supreme Court to do so.”
Currently there are five Senate vacancies and there will be eight by the end of the year.
Tim Powers, vice-president of Summa Strategies, said that it can be difficult to predict when Senate vacancies will be filled but that the electoral math can play a role.
“It’s hard to tell but the one consistent thing historically has been that the Prime Minister tends to fill them in batches and more often than not they’ve tended to be around the Christmas-New Year period. But there are a number that are now up in the fall and he does tend to do it before a sitting of Parliament returns,” Mr. Powers said. “I think that the supporting of the reform initiative and supporting that whole heartedly is what he looks for in Senators and that’s part of the factors that goes into the timing around it.”
Original Article
Source: hill times
Author: JAMES GRIGG
No comments:
Post a Comment