Legal opinion on Duffy in limbo
OTTAWA — The Senate won’t release the legal opinion it says it obtained about whether Sen. Mike Duffy met constitutional requirements to sit in the upper chamber — and indeed may not have it.
A report Thursday cleared all but three senators — Duffy, Sen. Mac Harb and Sen. Patrick Brazeau — over questions around expense claims they had made for housing. Sen. Marjory LeBreton, the government leader in the Senate, told reporters that afternoon that legal advice had shown all current senators were qualified to sit in the Senate. Prime Minister Stephen Harper also said, a day earlier, that they were qualified.
On Friday, LeBreton repeated that Duffy was qualified to be in the Senate, but cast doubt on whether the Senate’s internal economy committee actually had legal advice in its hands.
“The intent of my answer was not to suggest that internal economy has a legal opinion,” she said in an emailed statement. “Internal economy can only deal with the question of residency as it relates to the payment of expense claims. Sen. Duffy maintains a residence in P.E.I. and is qualified to sit in the Senate.”
A spokeswoman for LeBreton did not answer directly when Postmedia News asked for a copy of the legal opinion, saying simply that the senator’s statement “speaks for itself.”
The Constitution says that to be a member of the upper chamber, a senator must be a “resident in the province” for which he or she is appointed; experts have interpreted that as meaning senators must live in the province they represent. In the case of Quebec, there is a precise test: The person must either be a resident in, or own property in, their senatorial division, the Senate equivalent of a riding.
At the start of each new Parliament, senators sign a legal declaration of residency and are not asked to produce any documentation to support their oath.
“He (Duffy) signs a piece of paper and the Senate seems satisfied with that, and so do the Conservatives and Mr. Harper. That’s incredible. Imagine an employment insurance recipient just saying, ‘Yeah, I lost my job and I’m entitled, I promise.’ Would this government take that on face value?” NDP House leader Nathan Cullen asked.
“The double standard is extraordinary on this one,” he said. “A pinky swear shouldn’t cut it.”
Failure to meet the residency requirement could lead to disqualification from the Senate and the seat becoming vacant. The only time this wouldn’t happen is if the senator sat in cabinet, requiring him or her to stay in Ottawa more than in their home province. Questions about residency are, for the Senate, different from those around housing expenses.
To claim the $22,000 housing allowance afforded to senators who live more than 100 kilometres from Parliament Hill, senators will in future have to prove the location of their primary residence by furnishing government-issued identification showing their address.
Duffy could not be reached for comment Friday.