My interest having been piqued by this thread about recent Canadian political shenanigans, I had a browse through the website of the Canadian Parliament. I was a bit surprised to see that Senators are appointed by the GG (on the advice of the PM), rather than elected. Is this an issue at all in Canada? Is the Senate viewed in any way as less representative because its members aren’t elected? Are there any pressure groups pushing for direct election of Senators?
Do similar appointments take place to the upper houses of the provincial parliaments?
The Reform Party and its successor, the Canadian Alliance, used to push for what they called the Triple-E Senate, which stood for Elected, Equal and Effective. I haven’t heard the new Conservative Party making a real push for it, though, as there’s not much interest in the idea in Ontario or Quebec. I seem to recall the the NDP want the Senate abolished completely.
To be honest, not much attention is paid to the Senate in Canada, or at least here in Ontario. I seem to recall being taught that they couldn’t even defeat a bill from the House of Commons, only delay it indefinitely, but the Wikipedia article on the Senate contradicts me.
The provincial legislatures do not have an upper house, only a lower house organized like the House of Commons, with the Premier being the leader of the party(or in theory, coalition, although I’m not sure if it has ever worked out that way) controlling the most seats in the Legislative Assembly.
There was a serious constitutional effort (called the Meech Lake Accord, that was never ratified) that attempted to open the door to an elected senate. Specifically, the proposed new section 41 of the Constitution that outlined the way in which the senate could be reformed, and section 50, which required subsequent Constitutional Conferences to examine the matter.
I can’t imagine that there would be much enthusiasm in the House of Commons for an elected Senate. A Senate that saw itself as having a democratic mandate is much more likely to want to take an active hand in driving the legislative agenda, encroaching on territory now held by the Commons.
I can well imagine that the House of Commons would not be enthusiastic about the idea flurb. I suppose I was just a bit intrigued by the contrast between Canada and Australia: both federations of former British colonies, yet the Canadian Senate was set up as an appointed body whereas the Australian Senate has been fully elected from day one.
Saskatchewan at least has had coalitions. For example, following two successive terms of majority governments, the New Democratic Party did not receive a sufficient number of seats to hold a majority in 1999. It formed a coalition with the 3 elected Liberal members in order to govern. This coalition held for four years, even during the resignation/retirement of the Premier after 10 years, and the replacement by a new Premier, also of the NDP. The coalition held until the next election in 2003 when the NDP won a outright, but razor thin majority, and continue to govern (without a coalition).