Senators Don Meredith and Pamela Wallin sit in the Senate following a ceremony investing a new senate speaker on Thursday.Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press
So Justin Trudeau has "reformed" the Senate. We use the word "reform" in quotation marks because the new Prime Minister has not, in fact, reformed the Senate – he has instituted a new way of selecting its occupants, one that his government will follow but which will not be binding on future governments.
This is an important distinction. Reforming the Senate to make it an elected body, or to redistribute its seats to better represent Canada's provincial populations, or to impose term limits – or to bring about the ultimate reform, abolition – requires constitutional change. As we've learned from recent history, that's a difficult if not impossible undertaking.
Aware of this, Mr. Trudeau will "fix" the Senate the only way he can: by ostensibly picking better senators than his predecessors did. That was never going to be a difficult task, given the rogue's gallery of disgraced senators – Patrick Brazeau, Pamela Wallin, Mike Duffy – of the past five years. Canadians have a justifiably low opinion of the Senate these days, and it was incumbent on Mr. Trudeau to find a way to restore its reputation.
His solution is to try to rid the Senate of partisan appointees. Conservative and Liberal prime ministers of the past have stacked the chamber with bagmen and cronies, some of whom had dubious qualifications for a job that is held until age 75 and carries critical responsibilities.
The new PM is making a great show of creating a five-person independent advisory board that will select candidates based on merit, and provide him with a non-binding shortlist of nominees. Candidates for the shortlist can come from anywhere; some time next year, there will be a webpage that will explain how you, too, can apply to be a Canadian senator.
There are two things worth noting here. One, the board's nominee list is non-binding. The Prime Minister can still appoint superannuated journalists and failed Liberal candidates to the Senate. Then again, he could appoint highly qualified people without a cumbersome, decorative process, if he wanted to.
The second issue is more serious. Mr. Trudeau hopes to create a Senate filled with non-partisan, enlightened, progressive people who suit his Liberal vision of Canada. But non-partisan or not, they will still be unelected Senators, and they will still be required to respect the primacy of the House of Commons. Will they do that? Or will their lack of party affiliation and their life-time job guarantees go to their heads?
Every political institution seeks the most power it can get. Mr. Trudeau risks creating an overreaching monster that challenges the will of our elected representatives. The Constitution allows that; all that's standing in its way is convention, born of the sense that the Senate is less legitimate than the Commons.
Partisanship can produce lousy senators. But it has also produced many qualified ones who have done excellent work. And the current legitimacy-impaired Senate generally ensures the smooth passage of legislation introduced by the elected Commons. Is empowering and giving new legitimacy to an otherwise status quo Senate – where British Columbia has only six seats, but New Brunswick has 10 – an idea that might have unintended consequences?