Senate turmoil casts shadow on Saskatchewan
With each passing day of Sen. Mike Duffy’s testimony, one is struck by how seemingly impossible it will be to fix this dysfunctional institution.
But it just isn’t the likes of Duffy from faraway P.E.I. (or not) who solely bear the brunt of the blame for this.
Consider Duffy’s recent testimony that he was just following the sage advice of Sen. Dave Tkachuk to claim expenses from Duffy’s Ottawa home to support his claim that he was eligible to be a P.E.I. senator.
Now, add this to the fine examples we’ve seen from Pamela Wallin (also under expense investigation), Pana Merchant (the auditor general questioned $5,500 of her expenses) and Eric Berntson (booted out for criminal convictions) and it’s easy to see how Saskatchewan has been part of the Senate problem, rather than a solution.
Alas, this does a horrible disservice to Saskatchewan senators like former judge Raynell Andreychuk, who, despite the Senate furor, have continued with important work.
Andreychuk reminded a luncheon crowd in Regina last week that it is often senators who impartially approach politically contentious issues like euthanasia and the legal rights of children that MPs in the House of Commons hesitate to discuss.
In her view, the value of the Senate also “is not in what it does, but in what it prevents others from doing” by its ability to delay or “complete” legislation. In theory, a noble notion.
But even Andreychuk acknowledged that the upper chamber is in serious ill-repute — largely because of expenses for partisan activities that have manifested in scandals and criminal charges, like those against Duffy.
And even Senate advocates like Andreychuk seem sincerely puzzled how the core problems of the Senate will change through the supposedly non-partisan appointments now proposed by Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government.
According to a Hill Times story, confusion reigns supreme in the absence of firm details of the Liberal Senate reform plan.
“I have no idea what they are even talking about,” said British Columbia Liberal Sen. Larry Campbell.
“It’s nothing anybody’s ever heard of in the Senate before.”
Amid this current chaos comes a reminder, in the form of Duffy’s testimony, of how dysfunctional the Senate is.
According to what we heard from Duffy on the stand in his defence against 31 charges, there simply were no expense rules or other issues of conduct limiting senators from doing whatever they wanted — whether it was for partisan political activities or not.
Duffy freely admitted paying friends for advice — expense money largesse extended to makeup artists, fitness trainers or media personalities like Ezra Levant to write speeches. And there is the coincidental nature of finding one’s self in the near vicinity of Conservative politicians in need of fundraising support.
Let us not forget that Duffy is a man fighting for his reputation and trying to avoid possible incarceration.
But the sheer volume of Duffy’s receipts for events that common sense would tell you had nothing to do with the valued Senate work that Andreychuk described is a troubling indictment of the upper house. Clearly, Andreychuk and Duffy seem to be living in completely different Senate worlds.
And with all due respect and credit to Andreychuk, it’s a sad commentary that some see her as an exception rather than the rule — a Senate appointee untouched by the corrupt nature of the place.
Then there’s the advice Duffy received from Tkachuk, Grant Devine’s former principal secretary, who was selected by then-Progressive Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney in 1990 as a “GST senator” to stop scrutiny of the most-hated tax of the past quarter-century.
Tkachuk told CBC that “I would have told them, that, if you’re staying here in Ottawa, that you should be claiming expenses because your primary residency is in your own province.”
All too many senators have only added to the upper house’s ill repute by either directly engaging in, or encouraging, questionable behaviour.
And all too many of them have come from this province.