Senate's usefulness potential undercut when lined with cronies
"The upper House remains a dumping ground for the favoured cronies of the prime minister," said Stephen Harper, accurately enough, back in 2004, when Paul Martin was appointing senators and Harper was scowling on the other side of the House.
He would say no such thing now, since now that's where he dumps his own cronies.
He appointed Norm Doyle, for instance, on Friday. Doyle is a former MP from Newfoundland, a gentlemanly, experienced Progressive Conservative who won eight straight elections at two levels of government before retiring in 2008.
He'll be a good senator, but he is a crony, at least in the sense that Harper meant. He wisely opted not to run in the 2008 election after voting with Harper and against his province on the Atlantic accord. The Senate appointment is his reward for voting against the clear wishes of the people who elected him, which is exactly the sort of thing that used to send smoke pouring out of the ears of the Reformers who pushed so hard for an elected Senate.
Harper was among those Reformers, speaking out repeatedly against Liberal appointments, and for good reason. Why should Alberta have been represented by Liberals in the upper chamber when Albertans were voting Conservative year after year? Whatever fine things you might say about Alberta's Liberal senators, you can't say that they are there because Albertans want them there.
The Senate does useful work, fixing mistakes in legislation and doing good committee studies, but it lacks democratic legitimacy.
In opposition, Harper said that he would not appoint senators. In power, in 2006, the first thing he did was appoint Montreal banker Michael Fortier to the upper chamber.
Fortier, co-chair of his 2004 Conservative leadership campaign, was one of Harper's cronies.
Other cronies Harper put in the Senate:
- CFLer David Braley, who donated $46,500 to that long-ago leadership campaign, and tens of thousands more to other Conservative candidates.
- Leo Housakos, a key Quebec organizer who learned the ropes fundraising in Montreal at the provincial and municipal level.
- Patrick Brazeau, the only prominent aboriginal leader to support Harper, who wanted to keep picking up his paycheque as a leader while sitting in the Senate.
He appointed campaign manager Doug Finley, fundraiser Irving Gerstein and spinner Carolyn Stewart Olsen, where they can help him behind the scenes while we pay their salaries.
My favourite appointment is likely Newfoundlander Fabian Manning, who lost the same 2008 election that Doyle would have lost, and was appointed to the upper House as a reward. He stepped down to run in 2011, and when he lost that election, the prime minister put him right back in the Senate.
How much would you bet that he knew Harper would reappoint him if he lost that second election? How about $132,300 a year, until you turn 75? Would you take that bet?
Then there's former minister Josee Verner, who lost her Quebec City riding in 2011. After Harper appointed her, she told reporters that she didn't intend to represent the region in Ottawa since the people there voted NDP. She's not too proud, though, to cash her paycheques from those taxpayers.
Even many of Harper's seemingly non-partisan appointees have helped him in some way. Philanthropist Nicole Eaton's family were big donors to Harper's leadership. Ottawa police chief Vern White helped the Tories by casting doubt on claims from other cops about the usefulness of the gun registry.
Harper has taken cynicism about the Senate even further than the Liberals ever dared, appointing campaign donors, bagmen and failed candidates with a straight face, naming fewer non-partisan worthies than Jean Chretien and Paul Martin did.
He hasn't quite matched Pierre Trudeau's breathtaking round of parting-gift appointments in 1984, which helped make Brian Mulroney prime minister.
But Harper didn't get elected by promising to be just as bad as Trudeau, and you can tell that he isn't proud of his appointments, because he announced the latest batch at 4:30 on a Friday afternoon, which is how you bury news.
Harper has promised to reform the Senate, but doing so through constitutional amendment is all but impossible. He can impose term limits and allow for provinces to hold elections, if the Supreme Court doesn't find those unconstitutional.
If those two reforms succeed, and senators are emboldened by elections, they might defy the House, which could lead to American-style gridlock —although it would likely be less common than south of the border — and the West's under-representation would be more problematic.
But the status quo breeds a terrible cynicism about politics. The institution was designed to protect the interests of the propertied class from mob rule in the House of Commons, represent the regions and act as a chamber of sober second thought.
It now serves as little more than a dumping ground for the favoured cronies of the prime minister. It could be much more useful, and that's likely worth the risk.