‘Check’ needed

Given the extensive coverage of the expense scandal that has plagued the Senate these past few months, it’s not surprising that most Canadians appear ready to give the upper chamber the boot.
Of the 360-plus respondents to this past week’s web poll conducted by the Fort Frances Times, for instance, some 70 percent supported abolishing the Senate while just 20 percent backed reforming it. Only four percent wanted to maintain it while six percent were unsure.
But while the reaction may be understandable, it’s also a knee-jerk one that may cause more problems down the road than it solves.
Our “Fathers of Confederation,” sitting around a table almost 150 years ago, may not have devised a perfect system. And let’s be frank—Canadians looked the other way for far too long while the Senate became a haven for patronage rather than its intended function as a chamber of “sober second thought.”
While perhaps not perfect, however, creating an upper chamber independent of the House of Commons was critical to the foundation of Confederation and rightfully included mechanisms to ensure it could not be overhauled or abolished at the whim of a future government.
Those mechanisms are the subject of Supreme Court hearings this week—with a ruling expected next year.
Hopefully, the top court upholds the tough requirements that are entrenched to preserve the Senate. Canadians, meantime, hopefully will realize the wisdom of an upper chamber—in some form—acting as a “check” against the House of Commons.
We cannot foresee the future, and may rue the day we allowed that “check” to be erased.