This is a Senate of equals, of men of individual honor and personal character, and of absolute independence. We know no masters, we acknowledge no dictators. This is a hall for mutual consultation and discussion; not an arena for the exhibition of champions. -Daniel Webster, 1830
In Canada, everybody wants to reform the Senate. The West wants a Triple E Senate: elected, equal and Episcopalian. Or maybe that's Emo. I always forget the third one. The rest of the country isn't too crazy about our current Senate, either. On the rare occasions that most of us even think of the place, it's more as a home for retired MPs and party loyalists than anything else.
Anyway, now Stephen Harper plans to introduce an eight-year term limit as the first step in reforming the Senate, and ultimately wants senators appointed from a list of candidates elected by voters. Stéphane Dion prefers 12-year term limits, and Jack Layton wants a national referendum on abolishing the Senate entirely.
Let's deal with electing senators first. This is an idea that only politicians would like. The last thing this country needs is another stratum of professional politicians, let alone another set of elections. That's a dismal prospect, and I believe I speak for most Canadians on this notion when I say I'd rather drink Lysol.
As for abolishing the Senate entirely, that's an even dumber proposition. We absolutely need an "upper house of sober second thought" to provide checks and balances on the power of the Prime Minister's Office and to militate against Parliament's more hare-brained schemes. The current Senate isn't particularly effective at those tasks, but that's no reason to scrap the institution.
So, just to cut short the ongoing debate, I'd like to make a modest proposal of my own on how to reform the Senate.
Two words: jury duty. Our society already calls on its citizens to do their duty by sitting on a jury and participating in the enforcement of our laws. Why not have citizens do their duty by participating in the making of those same laws?
I honestly think that any Canadian can do just as good a job as any of the current denizens of the Senate. I'm not talking about selecting citizens at random for a lifetime sinecure, mind you. Here's how it could work.
You'd get a letter from the Governor-General's office:
Dear [your name here]
Canada needs you. As an adult Canadian citizen, you have been selected as a possible senator. Subject to your not being mentally incompetent (though that hasn't necessarily been an impediment in the past) or a wanted felon, convict or illegal alien, you may be appointed to the Senate for a period of not more than three years, with no extensions or second term allowed. You will receive the same salary, expenses and benefits as current senators but not the cushy indexed pension.
By legislation, your former job will be waiting for you when your term is over, even though the Senate only sits part of the time, so you'll probably be able to keep working on the side - what the heck, a lot of the current senators do already.
A portion of the Senate will be turned over every year, so there'll be some continuity. You wouldn't want to have to start over with a completely fresh crop of senators again every three years, although, come to think of it, that might not be so bad, either.
As with jury duty, some of you may not wish to serve. Maybe you're a hedge fund manager and don't like the pay cut you'll have to take. Maybe you're caring for an ailing relative, or have small children. Maybe you like your current job so much you don't want to leave it even for part of the time. No problem: Just like when you're called to jury duty, if you have a real reason for it, you can be excused.
If selected, you'll have to do a little training before you get to the Senate. Nothing too onerous, just a recommended reading list to get through before the session starts. For a start, I'd recommend Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom; Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations; anything by Tom Paine; Tom Bethell's defence of property rights, The Noblest Triumph; and Charles Adams's great history of taxation, For Good and Evil. Beauchesne's Rules of Order and Decorum couldn't hurt, either - this isn't the House of Commons. In the Senate, you won't heckle the other side; you'll be there as an involved citizen doing your civic duty, not as a party loyalist.
When your three-year term ends, you will, like Cincinnatus, return to your previous life with the gratitude of your fellow citizens and the knowledge that you have done your duty for your country, as well as a new respect for and understanding of the legislative process.
Jury duty as a model for Senate reform - it's not rocket science, folks. Canadian citizens already make decisions as jurors that affect people's lives. Government does that, too, often in a particularly ham-fisted manner.
Unlike a reform that creates a new layer of professional politicians in an already overgoverned Canada, a Citizens' Senate would provide a much-needed check on the growth and intrusion of government. Government is supposed to be the servant of the people - thus, it behooves the people themselves to oversee the labours of their servant.
Harry Koza is senior Canadian markets analyst at Thomson Financial and a columnist for GlobeinvestorGOLD.com.