Accessibility navigation


Constitutional conventions and senate reform

Gelinas, F. and Sirota, L. (2013) Constitutional conventions and senate reform. Revue québécoise de droit constitutionnel, 5. p. 107.

Full text not archived in this repository.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Official URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2330805

Abstract/Summary

Constitutional conventions are of central importance to the operation of the Canadian constitution; the constitution cannot be understood without reference to them. Yet their effect on the constitutionality of the federal government’s successive proposals for reforming the Senate, which aim at making most or all senators elected rather than appointed at the Prime Minister’s discretion as they are now, has not received much attention. Constitutional conventions are essential to an assessment of the constitutionality of the proposed Senate reform. Although the government’s proposal does not affect formal constitutional provisions, it would change the actual operation of the constitution by subverting the conventions which make the prime minister responsible for senatorial appointments and require the unelected Senate to yield to the House of Commons. We argue that he amending formula of the Constitution Act, 1982, must be interpreted to take these conventions into account. Conventions are underpinned by constitutional principles and are an essential part of the context in which constitutional text must be understood. For the constitution to be a "living tree," its interpretation must, so far as possible, be consistent with the way it is actually lived. The "method of selecting Senators" and the "powers of the Senate," which par. 42(1)(b) of the Constitution Act, 1982, protects from unilateral amendment by Parliament are not those that exist only on paper, but those of the living constitution. Because the government’s Senate reform proposal would change them, it can only be enacted under par. 42(1)(b). In its present form, it is unconstitutional.

Item Type:Article
Refereed:Yes
Divisions:Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Law
ID Code:104309
Publisher:Association Québécoise de Droit Constitutionnel

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Page navigation