The Future of the Canadian Senate
 Should the Senate be reformed or abolished?

by Rhonda Parkinson

Both experts and the public agree that the Senate should not continue in its present form. However, there is disagreement over whether the Senate should be substantially reformed or abolished. Public support for abolition has increased in recent years. A 1998 Angus Reid poll found almost as much support for abolishing the Senate as reforming it. (Only five percent supported maintaining the Senate in its current form).

Arguments for abolishing the Senate include the following:

It fulfills no useful purpose.
It does not have public support.
It is too difficult to get the agreement needed for constitutional reform. Under the Constitution Act of 1982, Senate amendments require the support of Parliament and seven provinces representing at least fifty percent of the population.
A reformed Senate may not fulfill the expectations of reform proponents.

Arguments for reforming the Senate include the following:

  • A reformed Senate could fulfill the roles originally intended for it: regional and minority representation and serving as a check on the House of Commons.
  • The Senate has taken on other roles, which it performs very effectively. These do not receive much media coverage, increasing the public perception that Senators do very little.

Other Roles Performed by the Senate

Besides considering House of Commons legislation, Senate standing committees undertake in-depth inquiries into issues. For example, the Senate Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science, and Technology released a report into Canada's Health care system one month before publication of the Romanow Commission report. Other recent Senate investigations include poverty in Canada and the legalization of marijuana. Since Senators are already paid and have access to the Library of Parliament's research staff, Senate investigations normally cost the taxpayer less than a Royal Commission or task force.

While less important, the Senate also keeps private bills that don't impact a large proportion of the public off the House of Commons busy schedule. Called "Private Senator Private Bills," they concern an individual, group of individuals, or a charitable organization. Prior to 1968, many of these were divorce applications from residents of Quebec and Newfoundland, the only two provinces without divorce courts. Today, most involve organizations, and include matters such as acts of incorporation or an application by two associations to amalgamate. Technically, these bills can be introduced in either House. In practice, they are always introduced in the Senate, partly because Parliament has made it less expensive to do so. It would be extremely difficult to fit these bills into the House of Commons' tight schedule.

Links and Further Reading

"A Legislative and Historical Overview of the Senate of Canada," - Includes excerpts from the Confederation Debates. Parliament of Canada.

The Canadian Senate in Focus. Parliament of Canada.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/process/senate/legisfocus/focus-e.htm

Senators and Members - Historical Information since 1867. Parliament of Canada.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/SenatorsMembers_senate.asp

Party Standings in the Canadian Senate - 1975 to Date. Parliament of Canada.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/people/Senate/SenStAge.asp

Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982. Department of Justice Canada.
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/const/

"Australian Constitutional Crisis of 1975" Sound and video archives from the australianpolitics.com site
http://www.whitlamdismissal.com/sounds/

"Italian Regional Reform in Constitutional Context" - The political process leading up to Italy's 2001 Constitutional Amendments. Cardiff University.
http://www.psa.ac.uk/cps/2003/paul%20furlong.pdf -

In-depth Look at Autonomy Statute for Italy's Province of South Tyrol. Civic Network of South Tryol.
http://www.provinz.bz.it/english/overview/autonomy_statute.htm

Italian Constitution
http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/it00000_.html#S001_