Provincial Integration Through the Senate: Trudeau’s (Not Quite) New Era

  • Francisco J. Romero-CaroEmail author


The controversy about the role of the Senate in Canada dates back to the very beginning of the Confederation. The lack of legitimacy of the Senators, the inability of the Upper House to be a forum where regional diversity is represented and the role of the House in the federal system have been the key issues.

In 2011 S. Harper tried to introduce several reforms in the House by a unilateral constitutional amendment made by the Parliament. After the discontent showed by some provinces—mainly Quebec–, the PM asked the Supreme Court about the constitutionality of his reform plan. The SC answer was clear: all the proposed reforms, but one, needed a constitutional amendment in accordance with section 38 of the 1982 Constitution. Therefore, a wide provincial support is needed. After this ruling the conservative government dropped its reform plans and Harper decided not to nominate anymore senators.

The liberals opposed Harper’s plan from the beginning and once Trudeau reached the leadership he started to put in place his own reform plans. Trudeau promised to review the role of the Senate in order to make the house less partisan and more independent by appointing independent and highly respected figures from the civil society. He promised that the provinces will have a say in the nomination of senators and that he will institute a consultation committee for the appointment process. To show his commitment he expelled the liberal senators form the party caucus, although the senators define themselves as independent-liberals.

But, how will these measures be compatible with the Constitution after the Supreme Court Reference? What will be the role of the new independent senators in the Upper House under Trudeau’s administration? Will the provinces’ influence in the House be expanded?

The purpose of this paper will be to analyze the impact that Trudeau’s reforms will have in the Dominion-Provincial relations, paying special attention to the case of Quebec and its role within the federation.


Canada Federalism Quebec Senate reform Cooperation Intergovernmental relations 


  1. Ajzenstat J et al (eds) (2003) Canada’s founding debates. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp 77–102Google Scholar
  2. Bill C-7 - An Act respecting the selection of senators and amending the Constitution Act, 1867 in respect of Senate term limits (2011). 1st Reading, June 21, 2011. 1st Session, 41st ParliamentGoogle Scholar
  3. Grammond S (2014) Qui peut réformer le sénat canadien? In: Revista catalana de dret public, no. 48, Barcelona, p 62Google Scholar
  4. Grenier É (2017) Why the Senate is unpredictable — and its independents not so independent. CBC News – 19 June 2017. Published online at
  5. Heard A (2009) Constitutional doubts about Bill C-20 and senatorial elections. In: Smith J (ed) The Democratic Dilemma. MGQUP, Kingston, pp 81–96Google Scholar
  6. House of Commons Debates (1874): 1st Session, 3rd Parliament, 13 April 1874, pp 85–90Google Scholar
  7. Laforest G (2010) The meaning of Canadian federalism in Quebec: critical reflections. Revista d'estudis autonòmics i federals 11:46ppGoogle Scholar
  8. LEAF (2015) Campaign for an Equal Senate for Canada. Published online at
  9. Lecours A (2015) Justin Trudeau and Canadian Federalism. Centre on Constitutional Change Blog. Published online at:
  10. Liberal Party of Canada (2015) A new plan for a strong middle class, p 29. Available online at
  11. Lusztig M (1995) Federalism and institutional design: the perils and politics of a Triple-E senate in Canada. Publius J Federalism 25(1):39–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Minister of Democratic Institutions (2016) Minister of Democratic Institutions Announces Establishment of the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments. Available at
  13. Prime Minister Office (2015) Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on the appointment of the Speaker of the Senate. Available at:
  14. Romero Caro FJ (2016) Senado y Sistema Federal en Canadá, ¿imposibilidad de una reforma deseable. Revista de Estudios Políticos 172:167–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Romero Caro FJ (2018) Canadá. La reforma del Senado como vía de mejora de la calidad democrática y la representación territorial in Tudela, José, Kölling, Mario y Reviriego, Fernando (coords.), Marcial Pons, Madrid, pp 243–260Google Scholar
  16. Smith DE (2003) The Canadian senate in bicameral. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp 117–120Google Scholar
  17. Stein MB (1997) Improving the process of constitutional reform in Canada: lessons from the Meech Lake and Charlottetown constitutional rounds. Can J Polit Sci 30:329–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Webber J (2015) The constitution of Canada. Hart, Oxford, pp 86–87Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Constitutional Law and History of Political ThoughtUniversity of the Basque CountryBilbaoSpain

Personalised recommendations