News 13 unchallenged and unchanging James Mangan Team Member t’s one thing for Canadians to complain about senate reform, but the two main solutions (abolition or election) seem unchallenged in current political discourse. Unless alternative ideas concerning senate reform are brought forward, northern British Columbia--as well as many other regions throughout Canada--will lose its influence in Parliament. As argued in the first issue of Over the Edge, senate reform must accommodate the demands that Canadians make without sacrificing the senate’s ability to practice regional representation. Both an elected senate and an abolished senate would fail to provide Canadians with adequate regional representation. Canadians have two major grievances with the senate: he appointment process for senators, and their term limits. Senators, who must represent the provinces in which they reside, are appointed by the Governor General at the request of the Prime Minister of Canada. Keep in mind that by failing to follow his advice, the Prime Minister can remove and replace the Governor General. In practice, the Prime Minister has the final word LES BILLETS SONT EN VENTE MAINTENANT! Ae TICKETS ON SALE NOW! Don’t get left out in the cold - get your tickets today! Ne manquez pas votre chance - procurez-vous vos billets aujourd’hui! AVAILABLE AT / EN VENTE SUR TICKETMASTER.CA PRINCE GEORGE a % OSs Canada regarding the appointment of senators. Canadians are uncomfortable with this practice, as it results in the Prime Minister possibly imposing theird influence in both the Senate and the House of Commons. Canadians worry that a personal relationship between a senator and the Prime Minister could compromise the principle of “Sober Second Thought.” Canadians are also upset with senate term limits. Currently, once appointed, a senator is considered to have the position for life, or until the age of 75. Although an elected senate may impede on a senator’s ability to practice “Sober Second Thought,” a life appointment leaves Canadians feeling senators are not held accountable to their actions. Unless directly breaking the law or engaging in a conflict of interest, a senator will not be held accountable for engaging in an unpopular act or promoting unpopular legislation. So what solution could accommodate Canadian grievances and still uphold efficient regional representation? Have the premiers appoint senators. A premier-appointed senate would have the Prime Minister appoint senators based on the council of the premiers of each province. Technically, the Prime Minister would still be fulfilling his constitutional obligation to appoint senators, though these senators would be associated with the provincial political parties rather than the governing federal party. The only constitutional amendment required would concern senate term limits. A senator could only keep his seat until the Prime Minister dismissed him at the request of the premier of the province the senator represents. For example, the British Columbia Liberal Party would present six senators to the Prime Minister. Those senators would only remain until the Premier of British Columbia asked for said senators to be dismissed and replaced. Therefore, if the BC Liberals lost an election to the BC NDP, the Senators associated with the Liberals would be replaced with Senators associated with the NDP by the Prime Minister at the council of the new premier. Senate appointment would become an electoral issue during provincial elections giving Canadians, not a vote, but a voice in their regional representation. Such an alternative would directly expand the provinces’ role in parliament. Although federal parties have not traditionally supported the provinces’ infringement on issues of federal jurisdiction, a party advocating for a premier-appointed senate would most likely enjoy support from all the provinces, who would appreciate their input on federal matters. If a federal party requires unilateral support among the provinces to engage in senate reformation, a premier-appointed senate would entice the provinces more successfully than either abolition or an elected senate. Also, the elimination of life- appointed senators and the diversification of appointment power among the provinces would reassure Canadians not only that senators can be held accountable for their actions by provincial parties, but that appointment power is not held solely by the Prime Minister. This example should be viewed as an alternative solution to the Senate Reform debate. An abolished or elected senate must not continue to be Canada’s only two options. If Canadians need to become creative in dealing with their incompetent political institutions, so be it. A premier-appointed senate would not reduce northern British Columbia’s influence in the senate while providing northern Canadians with the regional representation they are entitled to.