Campbell's Gift to Harper?

Fraser Institute fellow Gordon Gibson is reluctant to criticize Premier Gordon Campbell's recent support for an elected Canadian Senate. He explained, "When they say dumb things, I try not to take shots at them in the hopes that they'll say smarter things later."

Campbell has been quoted in national media in the last few weeks saying that he'd prefer the senate be abolished, but he would support Prime Minister Stephen Harper's push for electing senators as long as the federal government pays for the elections.

That has Gibson and others scratching their heads because B.C.'s population is under-represented in the Senate, and Harper hasn't promised to change that fact once senators are elected instead of appointed.

Campbell was unavailable for an interview, but his press secretary, Bridgette Anderson, confirmed the premier's position.

"Who pays for the election is a very minor part of the equation," said Gibson, the author of a 2004 Fraser Institute report, Challenges in Senate Reform. Whether or not to elect senators at all, he said, is "a great deal more important than who pays the cost of the election."

Gibson and other observers say Campbell's new position is a serious mistake that would damage the interests of British Columbia.

Current imbalance

There are 105 Senate seats. But B.C., a province with over 13 per cent of the country's population, has six seats, or fewer than six per cent of them.

Newfoundland and Labrador, a province with a population one-eighth the size of B.C.'s, has the same number of senate seats. So do Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta, all of which have fewer people than B.C.

New Brunswick and Nova Scotia each have 10 Senate seats, despite the fact Nova Scotia has a quarter of B.C.'s population and New Brunswick is even smaller.

Put another way, in New Brunswick one senator represents 75,000 people. In B.C., one senator represents some 710,000 people, almost 10 times as many as in New Brunswick.

Of B.C.'s six senate seats, three are now vacant while the federal and provincial governments negotiate how to fill vacancies across the country.

New legitimacy

"Our current system is bad enough," said Mike Farnworth, the NDP house leader. "To entrench inequality is a very dangerous thing, certainly from British Columbia's perspective."

Right now the inequality doesn't matter much, he said, since the senate never uses the power it has on paper. "If you're going to start electing, that's a whole different story," he said. "Once you elect somebody, you give them authority, you give them legitimacy.... Once you get elected, you have a mandate."

Campbell's position is fraught with danger for B.C., he said. "I don't think he's thought this issue through," he said. "Clearly he doesn't seem to have a clue what he wants. Nor does he seem to recognize the dangerous position he's leading British Columbia in."

The NDP supports abolishing the Senate, he said, adding the province should fight Harper's plan to have senators elected.

While electing senators is popular in Saskatchewan and Alberta, it is meeting skepticism elsewhere and virulent opposition in Quebec, where the province has said it will sue Ottawa if Harper doesn't fill the two vacancies in its 24 senate seats.

Gibson said Harper has a base in Alberta that has long called for a Triple-E senate that is equal, elected, and effective. It stems from the Pierre Trudeau era and the ability eastern politicians had to pass the National Energy Program against the wishes and interests of Alberta. The Triple-E idea was later championed by the Reform Party under Preston Manning's leadership. Harper was a founding member of the Reform Party.

"Harper's got his Alberta constituency," said Gibson. "The Albertans, goofily, have no idea what their real interest is in this." The province's power would actually be reduced if the senate gained legitimacy with the current levels of representation, he said. "The same thing applies to British Columbia."

His 2004 report warned, "Senate reform itself should be seriously questioned by those concerned with further empowering the central government and reversing decentralist trends."

'Campbell wasn't interested': Carney

Recently retired senator Pat Carney said she supports an elected senate. In fact, when Ray Perrault retired in 2001, she was prepared to step down so an election could be held for two positions at once.

B.C. has legislation in place from the Bill Vander Zalm era that allows for electing senators, she said. It would have been easy to do, but it never happened. "Gordon Campbell wasn't interested," she said.

But what about the argument that it would guarantee B.C.'s under-representation for years to come? "A pre-condition is more equality in senate numbers," she said. "You can't have an elected senate if we only have six."

Aside from a Globe and Mail column by Norman Spector, the issue has received little attention in British Columbia. The lack of attention allows Campbell to follow Harper's lead, said University of Victoria political science professor Dennis Pilon. "I think in this case Campbell is just going the easy route."

It would be foolish to introduce a first-past-the-post system of electing senators, said Pilon, the author of a book on electoral reform. "Neither house will be properly representative," he said. "You're adding another layer of bad representation into a system that isn't working already. If you want a system of checks and balances... the answer is to introduce a proportional system in the lower house."

Senates are at best unnecessary, he said. At worst they are a tool for elites and vested interests to block positive legislation. "It's a fundamentally negative vision," he said.

Related Tyee stories:

• Senators Let Big Media off Hook
  Committee's long-awaited report shrugs at CanWest, targets CBC.
• How to Tell if a Politician Is Brave
  If he's in power, and would change what got him there.
• My Joust with Senators over Free Speech in FilmJitters, the F word, and what I told the Bill C-10 hearings.