A question many were asking on election night had nothing to with the results. Rather, it was why anyone would step down from what many Canadians perceive to be a pretty cushy job as a senator?
That’s what André Pratte did. In an exclusive interview at his St-Lambert home, the former La Presse editor-in-chief pointed to partisanship within the Senate ranks as the principal cause of his resignation. Although he was appointed among the first wave of independent senators by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau more than three years ago, it appears “independent” was meant in name only.
Pratte felt constrained and disappointed by what he viewed as a lack of co-operation, with senators — independent or otherwise — appointed by Conservative and Liberal governments essentially toeing respective party lines.
“The Senate today, even with the appointment of independent senators, remains a very partisan place and to function in such a chamber, you need some skills,” Pratte noted. “I am someone for whom independence and non-partisanship are at the top of my values. I have a very hard time negotiating with people for whom their first value is party interests.”
In quitting the Senate, Pratte, 62, gave up an annual salary of $142,400, which he could have collected until he was 75. Plus, among other perks, an allowance of $150,000 for research and office expenses; free Via Rail travel for the whole family; up to four trips a year to Washington, D.C., or New York City as well as voyages to other international destinations for business reasons with prior approval; and up to $22,000 a year in living expenses in Ottawa for those living 100 kilometres or more away.
And because he hadn’t served the mandatory six years, Pratte, who was named to the Senate in March 2016, also left a generous pension on the table.
No matter. Pratte has no misgivings about giving up the job. There are certainly some senators who view the gig as something akin to having won the lottery. But Pratte’s principles trump perks, even though he isn’t comfortable talking about principles.
“It’s because if you put it like that, it’s like saying other senators don’t have any principles,” Pratte said. “Many do.”
On election night, Pratte tweeted this letter of resignation to Governor General Julie Payette: “In any professional journey, there can come a time when we realize we simply do not have the skills and motivation required to accomplish the task we have been entrusted with.”
Pratte had actually composed this missive on Oct. 10, but didn’t want it to become public until the night of the election to avoid becoming a distraction.
That “skills and motivation” explanation made little sense to many who knew Pratte.
“I was floored when I read that,” independent Senator Marc Gold said. “André was remarkable yet so humble. He was always so well-prepared and hard-working. His speeches were magnificent. He was truly a great senator.”
Gold, named to the Senate in November 2016, had worked closely with Pratte and didn’t see his departure coming.
“He was a role model to me, so highly principled, always taking the higher ground,” said Gold, a former Montreal law professor and Constitutional law expert. “This is a huge loss for the Senate and the country. He was firmly committed to helping build a Senate that was more independent. Money would never have been the motivation for him.”
It was Pratte’s unexpected, sudden early departure that surprised many.
“If you want things to move forward in the Senate, you need some support from partisan senators and the government, even though there are only three government representatives in the Senate,” Pratte said. “The government is still very powerful, and power in Ottawa is in the PMO (prime minister’s office).”
Pratte cites the example of the Premier Doug Ford-led Ontario government trying to cut back on services for francophones in the province. The House of Commons had adopted a motion to support the rights of Ontario francos.
“Senators tried to do the same thing, but some Conservative senators disagreed and tried to block that,” Pratte said. “We tried different compromises and listened to what they had to say, but they had nothing to say. They were concerned such a motion would look bad for the (Ontario) Conservatives.
“So even if the Conservatives in the House of Commons had agreed to such a motion, in the Senate they rejected it. And the motion died on the order paper.”
Pratte also pointed out issues dealing with Bill C48, relating to the banning of tankers from the northern shore of British Columbia, which would prevent any pipeline from moving forward in that region and thus from reaching Asian markets.
“Needless to say, reaction to that in Western Canada was very negative, and the bill would have been defeated in the Senate because of so much opposition from Conservatives as well as independent senators from Alberta and Saskatchewan. Its defeat in the Senate would have been a major embarrassment for the government.”
Pratte and a few senators worked on a compromise to get the support of other western senators to pass the bill.
“We succeeded in coming up with a compromise with the support of the government. At least, that’s what we thought. We passed an amended bill, and the ban would have remained in place. We sent it back to the government who said this was a really good compromise, worked out in good faith, but they don’t want anything to do with it.
My conclusion was there was no room for the type of work that I want to achieve in the Senate.”
“So when that happens a few times after so much effort, my conclusion was there was no room for the type of work that I want to achieve in the Senate. All that counts is the opposition trying to block anything that comes from the government, and the government reacting in trying to pass anything they want to pass, ideally in a non-modified fashion. So it becomes very frustrating, and I know I’m not alone to be frustrated. I’m just probably alone to decide to go, because that’s who I am. I just can’t function in such an environment.”
Nor did Pratte endear himself to the government when he pushed for a Senate investigation into the SNC-Lavalin affair after the then-Liberal majority shut down such an investigation in the House of Commons.
“You had the opposition trying to score points against the government, and the government trying to defend itself,” Pratte noted. “My view was that there should have been an investigation in the public interest and to make it as objective and rigorous as possible. Myself and a few senators worked on an alternative motion, an independent Senate investigation. The opposition ridiculed that, saying we were trying to protect the government, and the government said they were against it, that we were trying to help the opposition.”
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t?
“Exactly. In the Senate, these partisan games have no place. The Senate is not a confidence chamber. It’s supposed to be the chamber of sober second thought. I have no agenda to promote. My cause is public interest, independence and objectivity. And if I can’t do that, it’s not worth it.”
Pratte has some plans for the future. But in spite of the fact his acoustic guitar sits prominently in front of a music stand in his study, he isn’t entertaining thoughts of resuming his pop career — something he had pursued as a teen.
Nor is he interested in a media return.
“I did that for 40 years, and I think it would be repetitive. I’ve said what I had to say,” said Pratte, married for 39 years to Anne-Marie Laurin, an investigator for the Quebec Human Rights Board, and father of two grown sons, a lawyer and a musician.
Pratte could certainly land work as a consultant or political analyst, which he would consider.
“There’s one thing I want to do and I’m already moving the pieces. I’m going back to school in January to get my MBA (master of business administration), which I’ve wanted to do for a long time and while I’m still young enough,” Pratte said with a broad smile.
But Pratte is hopeful change will come to the Senate.
“The new batch of independent senators are a different breed, working hard to make it less partisan and more effective. They have a plan. Changes will happen. It will be a fight. It was just a question of whether I was ready to have the energy for that fight. But I felt the way I like to work was just not possible in the Senate right now.”
