EDITORIAL PAGE — Constitution proposal recognizes resources

We owe a large debt of gratitude to Alberta. Through the persistence of Premier Don Getty, the role of natural resources in the nation’s affairs may soon be permanently inscribed in our Constitution.

At the insistence of Alberta, the power of a new Senate in the latest constitutional proposal would include an absolute veto, with a simple majority, over legislation involving taxation of natural resources. That is a very specific exception to the rule of a 70% majority required to delay legislation when it comes to money bills or to trigger a joint session of both houses of Parliament regarding other types of legislation. It sets natural resources apart from other sectors of the economy and, in doing so, it acknowledges the special circumstances of regions that rely on resource development — mining, oil and gas and forestry.

That recognition of regions’ legitimate aspirations is the unstated basis for the new senate. The equal representation of provinces is a step toward ending the chauvinistic dominance of central Canada over the rest of the country. The Maritimes and the West will each have as many Senate seats as Central Canada. When it comes to resource taxation, any two of those regions could overpower the third to exercise the Senate veto.

But to be able to truly reflect the concerns of regions — and to adhere to the principle of regional representation implied in the proposal — there should be fair distribution of Senate seats within each province’s regions. The Senate’s unique responsibilities are particularly geared to natural resource taxation, so a significant proportion of Senators should represent resource-based regions. Otherwise, natural resource legislation would be handled largely by Senators from Toronto, Victoria and Quebec City with no direct interest in the North. Resource-oriented Senators from Alberta may be overwhelmed.

Direct election of Senators from the north in Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia would be the most effective way of ensuring that the northern electorate is heard. But even the Quebec model could work, where Senators would be appointed by a legislature elected on the basis of representation by population. Quebec might simply require that the legislative appointments represent areas of the province in the same way Canada’s appointed Supreme Court justices now represent regions of the country.

Adoption of the First Ministers’ latest constitutional proposal is far from certain. As the Meech Lake agreement showed, constitutional changes can come tantalizingly close to fruition only to be killed by the slightest adversity. Each province must first ratify this proposal. That could require referenda throughout the country. And even if it does make its way into law, the true political power conferred on the Senate may be quite small.

But even as the proposal stands, this Senate could prevent another disaster like the National Energy Program from being put into effect. It may have had little direct impact on the flow-through debate because regulations concerning flow-through shares come under a non-resource piece of legislation, the Income Tax Act, but it may have exerted considerable pressure on members of Parliament to consider the needs of resource-based regions.

The proposal as it now stands already means a great deal for mining and other resource industries, but for even greater effectiveness, voters in resource-based regions should press their provincial governments to have some guarantee that their concerns will also be heard.