That qualification is enshrined in the Constitution, and says senators must be residents of the province they represent. Senate insiders say that all current senators, including Sen. Mike Duffy — whose residency requirement was questioned — don’t appear in danger of losing their seats.
However, the Senate should soon interpret the residency requirement to settle questions that have swirled for months and longer about Duffy but fellow Conservative Sen. Pamela Wallin.
Underlying that decision will be a legal opinion about the section of the Constitution dealing with senators’ qualifications. The Senate’s powerful internal economy committee has asked for the legal opinion, but it has not yet arrived at the committee’s table and it’s unlikely the conclusions will ever be made public.
Experts say the question about what constitutes a “resident” for senators has never been clearly answered.
“Does it mean you have to own a house? Does it mean you have to spend a minimum number of nights per year there? Does it mean you pay house taxes there? Does it mean you get your mail there? This has never been defined,” said Ned Franks, a constitutional expert from Queen’s University.
It has been left undefined partly because the Senate has fallen short of its original intent of protecting provincial interests. Donald Savoie, an eminent constitutional expert from the Universite de Moncton, said the Senate has “failed miserably” to be a voice for the regions at the national level.
“If your feet are not planted in the region that you represent, I find it very difficult that you can articulate the wants and needs of that region,” he said. “If the appointee wants to ignore all that, well then I would call it a lack of integrity.”
The residency requirement has been a separate, yet intertwined issue with the housing allowances claimed by senators. The former is a constitutional issue; the latter is an administrative one.
The Constitution says that to be a senator, one must be a “resident in the province” for which he or she is appointed. In the case of Quebec, there is a precise test: The person must either be a resident in, or own property in, their senatorial division, the Senate equivalent of a riding.
At the start of each new Parliament, senators sign a legal declaration of residency and are not asked to produce any documentation to support their oath.
Earlier this year, Duffy found himself the target about that oath, and whether he was a resident of the province he represents: Prince Edward Island. The same question was raised of Wallin, who answered questions about her residency qualifications by saying she spent 168 days in her province of Saskatchewan last year.
The Privy Council Office, the central bureaucracy that aides the prime minister and cabinet, vets each Senate appointee to ensure they meet all requirements, and Duffy, along with everyone else, was cleared to take a seat in the red chamber. In late February, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said the constitutional rules were clear and that every senator met the qualifications.
Savoie said the Constitution spells out the number of senators from each province, and its intent that each senator represent a particular province, he said.
He also questioned how the Senate could enforce stricter regulations on residency and time spent in home regions given the unelected nature of the Senate.
“I don’t think you need statutes and constitutions; you need the right appointees that know why they’re being appointed in the role,” Savoie said. “If you are a person of integrity, you will do what you are expected in the role of being a senator. I think some have lost sight of that.”
However, the Senate has the ability to interpret the Constitution as it relates to the qualifications of its members.
“The Senate tries to act like a gentleman’s club, and it keeps its rules informal. By and large, over the years, that’s worked,” Franks said. “But there are some egregious exceptions and it might – in its own self-interest in preserving its own reputation – want to make the rules more formal and police them better.”
Original Article
Source: canada.com
Author: Jordan Press Michael Woods
No comments:
Post a Comment