Modeling Journey

Congratulations to Doug Ward of the Vancouver Sun for digging into the way in which our MPs are compensated for serving as such and for expenses. In the UK the flagrant abuse of the right to have expenses reimbursed has rocked the parliamentary foundations, caused the Labour government's popularity to plunge even further, and lead to many MPs deciding to step down or not run again.

UK MPs were ridiculed for their sense of entitlement; enraged citizens were treated to an exquisite dance of the seven veils by The Telegraph, which revealed on a daily basis the expense claims of presumptuous MPs from all parties.

Meanwhile, in Canada, there was darkness upon the land of disclosure, with Doug Ward being the first to my knowledge to examine our situation in some detail. And he has raised a few interesting matters. Our MPs get paid more than the UK ones do (C$175,000 base salary compared to the UK MPs' $100,000). The living costs of the two sets of MPs are very different. In the UK, many of the abuses arose from the expenses allowed for "second homes". In Canada the system is less generous, as our 308 MPs don't get an equivalent $40,000 allowance; we give our MPs $25,000 to cover their living expenses. And, of course, our MPs get an annual amount for their office budgets, based on their riding's size and population (this can amount to $255,000); they also get 64 free return airline tickets to and from Ottawa.

So we seem far better situated.

However, we are still being given the mushroom treatment as citizens, because we are not allowed to visit a website and see the individual expense claims of our MPs. And the MPs seem determined to cut back on the rights to audit such expenses:

"The House of Commons and the Senate have resisted requests from Canadian auditor-general Sheila Fraser to audit expense claims.
Fraser has been in negotiations with the Board of Internal Economy over a potential audit. But its unclear whether such a review would involve looking at MP’s expense claims or whether it would be a “performance audit” to determine whether taxpayers are receiving value for their money.

Gaudet said that Ottawa’s rules are tighter than those in Britain but that there is still room for abuse. “MPs in Canada can’t pay for house upgrades, for example. But they do get a housing allowance and how they spend it is up to them.”
Gaudet, who previously worked in an MP’s office, said that “transparency breeds accountability.”

“Who knows if MPs are expensing espresso machines in their offices. We can’t know because it isn’t public.”

Gaudet’s comment was in reference to media reports about how Toronto councillor Adam Vaughn used $281 of his $53,100 office expenses allowance to buy an espresso machine.

“Do I think there could be abuses? Possibly,” said Gaudet about Canadian MPs expense claims.

“Do I think they could be as bad as in Britain, probably not. But that would be setting the bar pretty low.”

Come on, MPs and Senators: show some respect for your masters, the citizens of Canada, and set up a website to reveal expenses of individual MPs and Senators, as well as allow proper auditing.

We deserve no less.