Abolish Senate, but introduce democratic reform so that smaller provinces like NL have equal seat at Confederation table
I gave the followed 10-minute speech on Tuesday (March 5th) in the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker,
I stand in support of today’s motion, as tabled by the
honourable member for Toronto-Danforth, that immediate steps should be taken
towards abolishing the Senate.
One of the debates in this country involving the
Senate – a debate that I followed as a young journalist covering former
Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Clyde Wells in the 1990s - was the debate
over whether the Upper Chamber should be reformed into a Triple E model.
Elected, equal and effective - a Triple E Senate.
Today there’s no debate, Mr. Speaker, the Upper Chamber
has become a Triple U Senate.
Triple U as in unaccountable, unelected and unapologetic.
Abolish it, Mr. Speaker.
There is no alternative, the Senate is too far gone to
save.
It has become a gated country club, a political
pasture, a golden handshake for friends of the Conservatives and Liberal
parties, for fundraisers, for partisans, for failed politicians.
The Senators do the bidding of the parties they
represent.
They are unelected; they are unaccountable to the
people; they are unapologetic for the embarrassment they have become.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Senate is an embarrassment, an
embarrassment to Canadians from one end of this country to the other.
An embarrassment to Canadian politicians – real ones,
like elected Members of Parliament who stand before you today.
I have no excuses for the Mike Duffys of this country,
for the Mike Duffys of this country who take months to figure out exactly where
they live.
What a joke, what an embarrassment.
To quote Michael Bliss, a professor and historian at
the University of Toronto: “This is a classic case of Canadians discovering that
Senators have no clothes. They’ve turned themselves into our daily comic relief
segment of politics.”
I was a journalist in my previous life, Mr. Speaker,
and I have no defense for Mike Duffy or Pamela Wallin.
Wallin’s supposed to represent Saskatchewan, but her
primary residence is in Toronto and she holds an Ontario Health Insurance card.
I find the Duffy and Wallin cases particularly appalling.
Journalists should know better when we spend our
working lives holding politicians to account.
It is bred into us.
We know instinctively where the line is, where the
line is that must NOT be crossed, and it has most definitely been crossed.
Then there’s Conservative Senator Patrick Brazeau.
If it wasn’t bad enough that he’s facing allegations
of abuse of his housing allowance, there have also been sexual assault
complaints lodged against him.
The embarrassment has become constant, the
embarrassment is daily.
The scandal over Senatorial housing allowances has led
the Senate to seek legal advice, legal advice that says as long as Senators
sign a declaration of qualification form that says they reside where they
reside, that it’s OK.
The honourable MP for Timmons-James Bay stood in this
House yesterday and equated that declaration to a pinky swear.
A pinky swear, Mr. Speaker.
In my home province of Newfoundland Labrador, there’s
Senator Fabian Manning.
He was an MP. He lost his seat, and was appointed to
the Senate.
Then he was cherry picked for the 2011 federal
election to run again in the riding of Avalon.
Manning lost again, and then he was appointed to the
Senate again.
So we have a Senator who was rejected by the people twice,
speaking on behalf of the Conservative government all over my riding of St.
John’s South-Mount Pearl.
Is Senator Manning supposed to be Newfoundland and
Labrador’s voice?
Because he’s not.
We’re supposed to represent Newfoundland and Labrador
in Ottawa.
We’re not supposed to represent Ottawa in Newfoundland
and Labrador.
That’s now how it’s supposed to work, Mr. Speaker.
Senators are held to one level of account; Canadians
are held to another.
EI claimants, for example, Mr. Speaker.
They have investigators knocking down their doors,
while Senators HIDE behind their doors.
If you can find the doors.
The budget of the Canadian Senate is $92.5 million a
year, Mr. Speaker.
Most Canadians can’t even fathom that much money, Mr.
Speaker, so let me bring it home.
Senator Wallin’s $350,000 in travel expenses would
cover old-age security for 57 seniors a year.
Mike Duffy is eligible to collect another $1.3 million
in salary before his mandatory retirement at age 75.
Patrick Brazeau will bring in another $7 million in
salary before he turns 75.
These are basically jobs for life, Mr. Speaker, jobs
for life.
Well, not really even jobs for life, Mr. Speaker, more
like salaries for life.
The average number of work days in 2011/12 for a
Canadian Senator was 56 days.
Fifty-six days, and an annual salary of $132,000 a
year, plus living expenses, for a job they will hold until they’re 75.
You don’t have to run for election, you’re not
accountable to anyone, you don’t have to apologize to anyone when you flees the
taxpayer.
So yes, Mr. Speaker, the Senate should be abolished.
Senators vote according to the interests of the party
they represent, rather than the regions
they are SUPPOSED to represent.
Mr. Speaker, the Senate was created as a chamber of
sober second thought, it was created to offset the representation by population
in the House of Commons.
Again, it was envisioned that Senators would vote
according to the region they represent, to offset representation by population.
Small provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador have 7
seats in the Commons.
Small provinces like Prince Edward Island have 4
seats.
Altogether, the Atlantic provinces have 32 seats.
Then you have provinces like Quebec with 75 seats, and
Ontario with 106 seats.
The bigger provinces, with larger populations, have
more seats in the Commons.
And those totals are destined to increase.
The number of Seats in the House of Commons will rise
by 30 in the 2015 general election.
Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta – will
all see their number of seats increase.
Meantime, provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador, provinces
like the three that make up the Maritimes, won’t see any increase.
Our representation will be watered down.
The point I’m getting to, Mr. Speaker, is while I
agree with the abolition of the Senate - 100 per cent, take it out.
There’s a bigger debate taking shape in this country,
Mr. Speaker, over the need for democratic reform.
Let me cut to the chase: How do smaller provinces like
Newfoundland and Labrador, with a population of about 514,000, half the
population of Ottawa, how do we ensure we have an equal seat at the
Confederation table with larger provinces like Ontario and Quebec that have
more representation because they have more population.
How do we ensure that the interests of Newfoundland
and Labrador are heard and acted on?
This week in my province, Mr. Speaker, we have news
that three more groundfish plants will shut down, throwing 300 rural Newfoundlanders
out of work.
More than 20 years after the northern cod moratorium
and there’s still no recovery plan in place.
Ottawa’s handling of the fisheries has been a disgrace
and an affront to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Again - how do we ensure that smaller provinces have
an equal seat at the Confederation table?
From Newfoundland and Labrador’s perspective, from the
perspective of smaller provinces across this country, that’s the debate that
must happen, Mr. Speaker.
That’s a debate that’s destined to happen, Mr.
Speaker.
Yes, the Senate must be abolished.
But the question must also be asked, how do we offset
representation by population so that smaller provinces have an equal footing?
For the good of our culture, for the good of our identity,
for the good of future generations.
So that smaller provinces, provinces like Newfoundland
and Labrador, aren’t make to feel like they’re LESSER provinces.
So, Mr. Speaker, abolish the Senator and the
abomination it has become, but then let’s get to the real work of democratic
reform.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Comments