OTTAWA — The government’s representative in the Senate says its Westminster model of legislating “will disappear,” as senators clash over how to accommodate independents who are mobilizing to get their fair share of power.
Sen. Peter Harder told the Senate’s special modernization committee Wednesday he doesn’t think a fully independent upper house needs to be divided between government and opposition.
“One of the most fundamental changes that is currently taking place in the Senate is that the traditional Westminster model of an organized and disciplined government caucus versus an organized and disciplined opposition caucus, a dynamic that is largely predicated on partisanship, will disappear.”
It’s a huge shift. Senate rules have been built on the existence of Liberal and Conservative caucuses, which switch from government to opposition and back again. Independents are on the fringe and lack the resources of the two major parties — including significant research budgets.
But groups — whether by political party or some other criterion — will be needed to organize debates and procedure and, ultimately, to get government legislation through to royal assent so it can become law. But what shape those groups will take is being hotly debated.
Though consensus seems miles away, time is running out. This fall, up to 24 new independent senators will be appointed on the advice of a new, arm’s-length advisory council. By the end of the year, independents will be a plurality and by 2018, they will be a majority.
Sen. Elaine McCoy is co-ordinating the work of an Independent Senators Group. A release from the group Tuesday said each member is an individual legislator, but “we choose to co-operate for limited administrative and parliamentary purposes.”
Members want better representation on committees, to start with, especially on decision-making committees, which still contain Conservative majorities,but which some suggest should divide power evenly among groups of senators.
Harder urged senators to adopt more proportionality.
“Independent senators remain underfunded and under-represented in Senate business,” he said.
Some think the independents could become a third caucus, joining the Liberals and Conservatives, and being given a similar budget.
Or entirely different groups could be formed. Harder argued “comparative advantages and incentives of partisan affiliation” should be eliminated, adding he anticipates groups that are focused on regions or specific policies.
The idea of regionalism got some pushback. Sen. André Pratte, one of the new independents, worried members would be “subject to powerful pressures from provincial governments,” and could decide to vote “on regional solidarity.”
Conservative Sen. David Wells suggested there could be “horse trading” among regions.
Sen. Serge Joyal looked back on his years of experience and said he thought regional groups would be “a nightmare,” recalling tensions with Quebec during referendums on independence. “Disastrous,” echoed the longest-serving senator, independent Anne Cools.
Still, Harder said he thinks most senators aren’t of “extreme regional exclusionary views,” and regional groups could be an impartial way to make sure no specific “affinity groups” gain unfair advantage. The mandate of the Senate speaker could be adapted, too.
The bigger issue for some is letting go of the Westminster-style system that pits government against opposition, as in the House of Commons.
Conservative Sen. Scott Tannas said he didn’t understand how “sober second thought” could happen, and the government could be held to account, “without somebody whose job it is to get up and co-ordinate the folks that are going to poke holes in what’s being proposed.”
“It’s like saying, ‘We’re going to have a hockey game, ask everybody to mill around on the ice and throw a puck in the middle, and a hockey game will form up,’ ” he said.
Another Conservative, Sen. David Tkachuk, said “I totally disagree … that we should not have an official opposition,” adding he thinks structural changes can wait until “the next parliament vote rolls around.”
Harder rejected that timeline, saying “surely we can do better than that in the short term, in terms of recognizing proportionality and equality.”
The committee will unveil 21 initial recommendations on modernization for debate next Tuesday.
• Email: mdsmith@postmedia.com | Twitter: amariedanielles