Angry in the Great White North

When Percy Downe was appointed to the Senate in 2003 by Jean Chretien, I don't recall anyone pulling out the Constitution card:

Jean Chretien sent one of his closest aides to political "heaven" yesterday in what the opposition depicted as the start of a flood of patronage before the Prime Minister retires in February.

Mr. Chretien named his chief of staff, Percy Downe, whose entire professional life has been with the Liberal party, to the Senate.

Mr. Downe, who turns 49 next month, could earn $2.9-million in the Senate if he serves to the mandatory retirement age of 75. Senators earn $114,200 annually.

Now there was criticism regarding patronage:

"It certainly does look like [Mr. Chretien's] cronies are going to end up in patronage heaven," said Canadian Alliance MP Grant Hill, who reiterated Alliance demands for an elected Senate. "The Prime Minister, with his enormous power, should not be picking these individuals out of a hat, out of his friends."

Jack Layton, the leader of the NDP, whose party has long advocated abolition of the Senate, called the appointments part of a "year-long orgy" of patronage rewards that began with Mr. Chretien's retirement announcement last year.

"No wonder Canadians feel the Senate should be abolished; it's hard not to be cynical," Mr. Layton said.

Cynicism, but no one suggested that Downe's appointment was illegal.

This is interesting, because Downe didn't reestablish his residency in PEI until after his appointment:

He was appointed to the Senate as a senator for Prince Edward Island in June 2003 on Chretien's recommendation. After this he moved back to Prince Edward island where he currently lives with wife and two daughters.

Of course, as Chretien's chief of staff, Downe spent all his time in Ottawa.

And what did Percy Downe do to deserve his appointment?  I mean, was he working for the Liberal Party all his adult life.  In Ottawa.  Behind the scenes.  Anonymously.

Downe's appointment to the Senate wasn't deemed constitutionally illegal.  Unseemly perhaps.  But then that's pretty much par for the course.

So why is it that Mike Duffy is getting such a rough ride?

A law expert believes Mike Duffy's appointment to P.E.I.'s Senate seat is unconstitutional.

David Bulger has been teaching constitutional law at the University of Prince Edward Island for many years and has been called on by various governments many times for his expertise in understanding and interpreting government law.

After hearing about Duffy's appointment to the Senate on Monday, and knowing that Duffy only spends a limited time on the Island, Bulger went digging through his law books.

He found a stipulation in the Constitution Act that says senators must reside in the province for which they are appointed. But since a person's residence is not clearly defined, there is some ambiguity, Bulger said.

Gee, no one seemed to go through this much effort to spoil a Liberal appointment to the Senate.  But a Conservative appointment?  Time to dig through those constitutional law books.

I scanned the Internet, and I can't find any reference to David Bulger raising a constitutional fuss when Percy Downe was appointed to the Senate.

Eleanor Roosevelt said, "Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both."

The same goes for criticism.  Mike Duffy is a special guy, but that doesn't mean he deserves special criticism.

Until I get a sense that people like Bulger apply the same standards to Liberals as they do to Conservatives, I'll dismiss them as just partisan noise.  I encourage you to do the same.