Upcycling Aristocratic Traditions
Everybody who knows me knows that there are things about Canada’s association with the British crown & British legal traditions that I enjoy about as much as bedbugs. For example, the Queen of Canada thing? No me gusta. Having a toothless Governor General as nominal “Head of State” while the PMO grows unchecked in power like Emperor Palpatine without the force lightning or charisma? Not a big fan. Our Senate? Oh Lord, lets not go there just yet.
But I digress, because this post isn’t about the beef I have with monarchy. This post is about a pretty interesting thing that the UK did and how we can actually learn from it. At work today, I was proofing a piece on the UK Social Value Act which referenced Lord Victor Adebowale. Now before I get to why he was in said document — he’s a badass by the way — let me begin with my reaction. I stopped dead in my tracks, re-read the line and then Googled him immediately to check and see if that was written in front of me was correct.
Why? Because his name is Nigerian and I wasn’t sure if it was spelled correctly? Yes. But mostly, I checked because his name is Victor Adebowale and my brain’s immediate reaction was that names like this are not preceded by “Lord” unless there are midichlorians in the mix. Yes, that was another Star Wars joke for all you non-nerds out there.
Turns out, Lord Adebowale is what folks in the UK like to refer to as a “People’s Peer”. In 2000, PM Tony Blair (I know, I know, but please stay with me) established the House of Lords Appointments Commission — a non-partisan, non-statuatory, independent body that would be part of a process of reforming the UK’s House of Lords (our Senate’s crusty old British papa). One of the things this Commission does is make recommendations for the appointment of non-partisan life peers. The criteria these new Ladies & Lords have to fulfill in order to be appointed are pretty warm and fuzzy, but the gist of it is that these peers are to be neither aristocratic nor members of the “political class”. Hence “People’s Peers”.
What does this mean (ideally)? You take a decrepit, monolithic, monochromatic institution and inject into it a class of national leaders and policy-makers that represent the UK’s diversity of thought and lived experiences without party alignment. Victor Adebowale — one of the country’s leading lights in the field of health, social care, and racial equality — gets to go beyond talking about how toothless laws like the new Social Value Act are. He gets to vote on it, and introduce superior legislation.
Of course, this example isn’t perfect. The House of Lords has 789 sitting peers at present (I know, way too many, right?!) and only 180 cross benchers (non-partisan members). There have only been 67 “People’s Peers” recommended for appointment, and the process has it flaws.
But imagine this. Imagine if in Canada, we took the British example and improved upon it in our efforts to reform our own ghastly Senate? What if we expanded this model to the whole Senate without exception? What if we went beyond just removing Senators from our caucus — a good first step to be sure — and upcycled a new institution from the rubble of the old?
Imagine a Senate that is actually a body of sober second thought. A Senate free from partisan drudgery, that harnesses brilliant people who have dedicated their lives to issues that matter in our communities? Imagine a Senate that wasn’t a constant embarrassment and a thorn in our side, but that was stocked with national leaders who kept our Parliament honest? Imagine a Senate with less partisan hacks like Duffy, less utter embarrassments like Brazeau and more Lord Adebowales shouting down lousy legislation.
That would be a British-inherited tradition I could get behind.
