The Triple E Model of Senate Reform

Last week, Prime Minister Chretien announced his decision to appoint Tommy Banks to the Senate. The former bandleader was a replacement for Alberta Senator Ron Ghitter, who retired on March 31, 2000.

Although not unexpected, Chretien's announcement ruffled a few feathers in the west. Why? The reason is simple - western Canada is the birthplace of the movement for a Triple E Senate. In fact, in a provincial vote held in October, 1998, Albertans elected two "senators-in-waiting" - Bert Brown and Dr. Ted Morton. The hope was that the Prime Minister would appoint either Brown or Morton the next time a vacancy arose for a Senator from Alberta. The not-so-subtle strategy was a way of trying to introduce Senate elections "through the back door" so to speak. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister didn't play along.

With all the discussion surrounding the recent appointment, it's an appropriate time to take a closer look at the term "Triple E." While many people are familiar with at least one or perhaps two of the "E's," there does seem to be some confusion over exactly what the Triple E model entails.

I believe it was Ted Byfield, publisher of the Alberta Report, who came up with the name Triple E, which stands for "equal, effective, and elected." Under current proposals for a Triple E Senate, every province would be represented in the Senate by an equal number of Senators, who would gain their seat through election. Furthermore, the Senate would have effective powers to promote and protect regional interests. It is no accident that the movement for a more powerful and effective Senate came in the west, in the wake of western alienation and frustration with the federal government over policies such as the National Energy Policy (NEP). It was felt that a more dynamic Senate would help provide a counterbalance to the House of Commons, where 178 of the 301 federal ridings are in Ontario and Quebec.

How does the Triple E Model differ from the status quo? The first E stands for equal, which means equal representation of all the provinces. Currently, the composition of Senators is divided roughly among Canada's four regions (the west, Ontario, Quebec, and the Atlantic provinces) with twenty-four Senators from the west, twenty-four each from Ontario and Quebec, another twenty-four from the Maritimes, six from Newfoundland and Labrador, and a few Senators from the north. Apart from the fact that each province does not have an equal number of Senators, the composition reflects the greater status of the Maritimes at the time of Confederation, and their determination to have equal representation with Ontario and Quebec within the Senate, if not within the House of Commons. Thus British Columbia has only six Senators while - despite having a much lower population - New Brunswick has ten.

Go To Page: 1 2

Articles in this Topic    Discussions in this Topic