Auditor-General Sheila Fraser tables her 2009 fall report in Ottawa on Tuesday, November 3, 2009.Sean Kilpatrick
Members of Parliament and senators should of course be permitted to pick up the occasional lunch, but this in no way undermines the necessity for their $544-million-a-year work-related expenses to be transparent.
Last week, MPs officially rejected Auditor-General Sheila Fraser's suggestion that her office could help Parliament save money through an expenses audit. The Board of Internal Economy, which is responsible for all House of Commons spending, claimed such an audit would go beyond the scope of the Auditor-General's mandate, "which allows her to audit government departments and various Crown agencies... but does not include the legislative branch."
In fact, this is not true. MPs have the authority to invite Ms. Fraser to audit these expenses - but have chosen not to.
Why? They claim external audits are already in place, and that MPs' office budgets with a general breakdown are posted online.
However, this is not enough. The Auditor-General Act allows the office to probe how all taxpayer money is spent. Why should parliamentarians be exempt from having individual receipts for items such as clothing repair and media and foreign-language training scrutinized, to make sure the spending isn't inappropriate or excessive? While it is unlikely that such scrutiny would result in the kind of embarrassment and scandal that followed the recent disclosure of MPs' expenses in Britain and Nova Scotia, it is still important to ensure the proper checks and balances are in place.
In the U.K., elected officials from all parties were found to have grossly abused public money, charging for everything from putting in a duck pond and cleaning a moat (to the tune of $4,000), to tree removal and fertilizer bills. This February, a member of the legislature in Nova Scotia had to resign his seat after it was revealed he submitted receipts for a $2,500, 40-inch television set, and a $8,000 generator he had installed in his garage.
With this kind of abuse, it's no wonder the public's trust in politicians is plummeting. A recent survey showed 88 per cent of Canadians believe detailed expense accounts of MPs and senators should be made public.
Two previous audits of Parliament in 1980 and 1991 uncovered opportunities for savings. The second of these auditor-general's reports called for greater transparency on MPs' expenses. It found examples of nepotism among senators who hired relatives as secretaries, and offered family members free Senate flights that had nothing to do with official business.
MPs and senators must open their books without further delay, and reassure Canadians they have nothing to hide, and that their spending is reasonable and responsible.