The Canadian Senate In Bicameral Perspective

The Canadian Senate in Bicameral Perspective is the first book-length scholarly study of the Senate in over a quarter century and the first such analysis of the upper house as one chamber of a bicameral legislature. David E. Smith's aim is to demonstrate the inter-relationship of the two chambers and the constraint this poses for Senate reform. He analyzes past literature on the Senate and current proposals for reform such as Triple-E Senate drawing detailed comparisons between Canada's upper chamber and the upper chambers of Australia, the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom. There is a revival of interest and literature abroad in upper chambers and also in bicameralism. Using Parliamentary debates and committee reports, as well as a broad reading of comparative literature, The Canadian Senate in Bicameral Perspective sets the Canadian Senate into this international milieu, contextualizing the debate and arguing for a renewed investigation into its future.

The Canadian Senate in Bicameral Perspective sets the Canadian Senate into this international milieu, contextualizing the debate and arguing for a renewed investigation into its future.

This first in-depth analysis of Canada's Senate in 40 years.

The Canadian Senate has long been considered an institutional pariah, viewed as an undemocratic, outmoded warehouse for patronage appointments and mired in spending and workload scandals. In 2014, the federal government was compelled to refer constitutional questions to the Supreme Court relating to its attempts to enact senatorial elections and term limits. Constitutional Pariah explores the aftermath of Reference re Senate Reform, which barred major unilateral alteration of the Senate by Parliament. Ironically, the decision resulted in one of the most sweeping parliamentary reforms in Canadian history, creating a pathway to informal changes in the appointments process that have curbed patronage and partisanship. Despite reinvigorating the Senate, Reference re Senate Reform has far-reaching implications for constitutional reform in other contexts. Macfarlane’s sharp critique suggests that the Court’s nebulous approach to the amending formula raises the spectre of a frozen constitution, unable to evolve with the country.

This book addresses the highly contentious subject of Canadian Senate reform. Its conclusions reject conventional recommendations and argue that the Senate should remain an appointed body with a more expansive appointment process and restrained powers.

In 2006 Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government introduced two bills to reform the Senate: one to establish limited terms for senators, replacing the existing system of appointment until age 75 and the other to establish consultative elections for the Senate with the prime minister nominating the winners of the election. Both bills have been heard in the House of Commons and the Senate but neither bill has been enacted into law. The government's initiatives are proving controversial for two reasons. One is the contents of the bills. The other is procedural and concerns the federal government's strategy of treating Senate reform as a matter for Parliament alone to determine - a matter of federal legislation rather than an amendment of the constitution. Contributors examine all angles of the debate on Senate reform. They address the constitutionality of the proposals and bring to light features of the bills that have not yet been analyzed, assessing their significance for the conduct of a reformed chamber. They consider whether the objectives of the reformers are likely to be met by these proposals or whether the result will have unintended consequences. They demonstrate how complicated Senate reform is, full of unexpected twists and turns, and show that successful reform requires a deep understanding of the country's parliamentary system and culture and a delicate approach to institutional change.Contributorsinclude Jane Ajzenstat (McMaster University), Peter Aucoin (Dalhousie University), Louise Carbert (Dalhousie University), Don Desserud (University of New Brunswick in Saint John), Andrew Heard (Simon Fraser University), Tom Kent (Institute for Research on Public Policy and Queen's University), Stephen Michael MacLean (independent scholar), Lorna Marsden (York University), Vincent Pouliot (lawyer and entrepreneur, Quebec), Hugh Segal (Senate of Canada), David Smith (University of Regina), Nadia Verrelli (Queen's University), Ron Watts (Queen's University), and John Whyte (University of Saskatchewan).

This little book is written for Canadians who care about our democracy and the future of our planet. The Senate, surprisingly, could make major contributions to both. A People’s Senate for Canada explains how we can make that happen. What if we had a Senate that was independent of party politics, truly committed to “sober second thought” and dedicated to the common good? What if Senate appointments focused on experience, integrity and creativity, and flowed from a non-partisan participatory process based on merit and reflective of our country’s diversity? What if senators were able to fully devote themselves to their proper legislative and investigative work, cooperating wherever possible, free of party control and electoral worries, and financially accountable to the Auditor General? As Helen Forsey demonstrates, such a People’s Senate would not require risky and questionable constitutional amendments: the needed changes could be made within the present framework. In fact, some hopeful initiatives are already under way. A People’s Senate for Canada combines grassroots experience, thorough research and critical commentary to create a people’s resource for positive change. This book offers a rationale, an analysis and a feasible proposal for an upper house that would restore citizen participation and help check government power. It is an antidote to cynicism and a prescription for a truly honourable Senate, one that would make us proud.

Examines the upper houses of the world's parliaments within their own political systems, capturing their development over time and characterizing their relations with the lower house, the government of the day, and extraparliamentary political parties. Begins with the US Senate, then analyzes the German, Australian, and Canadian federal senates. Remaining chapters look at senatorial segments of parliamentary life in the unitary systems of France, Britain, Italy, Spain, and Poland. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR