Solving the conundrum

So, are you going to go for it? “It” being an appointment to the Senate.

The Trudeau government announced a plan last week for new senators to be appointed on the advice of a committee. Anybody can apply to the committee for one of 17 positions that will be filled before the end of 2016.

To know whether you’re going to go for it, you have to know the basis upon which your application will be judged. Well, there are the existing constitutional limitations. You must be over 30 and under 75. You must have your residence in the province for which you are appointed. You must own property in the province worth $4,000 or more. However, that should only disqualify residents of Wolfe Island and any other place, such as the southern reaches of the County and Amherst Island, slated to be within shouting distance of a wind turbine.

New criteria include the overall need to achieve gender balance, indigenous representation and minority representation. That may determine the fate of your application, however solid your personal qualities.

Individually, bilingualism is an asset. You will have to work as a senator in an independent and non-partisan manner, although having voted or participated in politics previously will not disqualify you. You will need a solid knowledge of the constitution, of the legislative process and the role of the Senate. You will have to have ethics and integrity (I guess it’s better to spell that out in advance rather than have you be disappointed when you discover it’s a requirement). And finally, you will have to have experience in the legislative process and public service; a record of service to your community; or leadership and achievement in your field of expertise.

Well, that just about includes everyone I know. So how are you supposed to distinguish yourself in your application—to make it stand out from the rest of them? You could put it on scented stationery. You could have it delivered by a telegram singer. You could put a few crisp $100 bills inside the application. You could have a real estate agent from Toronto help you compose a heartwarming tale as to why you should be the one chosen to purchase the house at $100,000 over asking, or the Senate selection equivalent thereof. I suspect, however, that the committee will quickly tire of gimmicky come-ons and resort to looking for the honesty of expression.

You will probably have to write some essay on why you want to be a senator, and provide copious letters of reference attesting to your superhuman deeds and spotless character. Of course, lying at the heart of the quest for appointment is a conundrum. If you want to be a senator, doesn’t that very fact cast a pall over you? Why do you want to be a senator anyway? Is it because you want to prove you can survive on a diet of cold camembert and crackers? Is it because you want to show the world that someone knows how to fill out an expense form properly? Or is it because you need an outlet appropriate for your level of selfesteem? Or that you could use the salary and expense account when you get right down to it? The best applications, it seems, are the ones that will reek of reluctance to serve but indicate a preparedness to serve, if serve one must; that will, in other words, solve the conundrum.

Speaking of reeking, how would you like to be one of the members of the five-person committee in charge of vetting applications and recommending short lists to the Prime Minister? Members will have to wear full body bullfeather detection gear, and will undoubtedly get an earful from all and sundry if one of their recommendations turns out to be a dud.

Perhaps it would be better, and cheaper, to have the rights to a Senate appointment sold off to a commercial entity, which could then distribute them randomly. For instance, don’t you think that Tim Hortons would leap at the chance to offer grand prizes of 17 Senate appointments in its annual ‘Roll up the Rim’ contest? Or that Kellogg’s wouldn’t give its eyeteeth to include a voucher good for a Senate job in ‘specially marked boxes of new Fibreboard Crispies with added bran for that extra boost of flavour.’ The process would be cheaper, fairer and would probably yield just about as good a result as the committee method.

I suppose by suggesting this technique, I have demonstrated a lack of the very integrity that is required to show my suitability for a Senate appointment. Well, I probably wouldn’t have been appointed anyway. Something about those crisp $100 bills.

dsimmonds@wellingtontimes.ca