Skip to main content

Auditor-General Sheila Fraser speaks at a news conference in Ottawa on March 31, 2009.

Blair Gable

Today, we may find out whether MPs have agreed on a procedure to deal with Afghan detainee documents, or whether we're headed to Court, or to an election, on the question of their privileges.



Speaking of which, MPs on the House of Commons Board of Internal Economy, representing the four political parties, have put the kibosh on a request by Auditor-General Sheila Fraser to audit their expenses. If you think that's outrageous, some of their British counterparts caught up in an expenses scandal claim that they are immune from judicial prosecution.



Meanwhile, an overwhelming majority of Canadians - 88 per cent, according to a Leger poll in today's Toronto Sun - "think detailed expense accounts of politicians should be open for deeper scrutiny."

Story continues below advertisement



Years ago in Ottawa, MPs claimed not to be bound by non-smoking rules on Parliament Hill; they also took the position that they were not bound by the requirements of human rights legislation in hiring office staff. Today, they would be wise to re-consider their position on Ms. Fraser's proposal to audit their expenses.

Report an error
As of December 20, 2017, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this resolved by the end of January 2018. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.