“I don’t think the status quo is something the Canadian public supports. I think the old-line parties recognized that when they adopted the motion [in June], of the course the problem is they seem to have turned their backs on Canadians when it actually came to producing the recommendations that Parliament was looking for,” said Mr. Julian (Burnaby-New Westminster, B.C.), who sat on the Procedure and House Affairs Committee for the duration of its review on the Commons Board of Internal Economy.
The Board of Internal Economy (BOIE) is an all-party board that meets entirely in camera and is responsible for approving all budgets related to House of Commons spending, sets the rules around an MP’s use of Parliamentary resources, and also determines whether MPs have followed rules or, in the case of an appeal, whether an MP can be granted an exception. The BOIE is chaired by the House Speaker and reflects the party standings in the House of Commons, with only officially recognized parties (that is 12 MPs or more) being given a seat at the table. The Clerk of the House of Commons serves as secretary to the board.
Last June, the House of Commons unanimously passed an NDP motion calling on the Procedure and House Affairs Committee to review the Board of Internal Economy “with a view to” replacing it with an independent oversight body.
On Dec. 2, the Procedure and House Affairs Committee tabled a main committee report, which included four official recommendations, but a minority report from the NDP was also tabled, as was a supplementary opinion from the Liberal Party, as well as a dissident report from Independent MPs who also took part in the BOIE review meetings.
The official committee report recommends the BOIE “further consider” how Members’ Expenditure Reports can be enhanced by providing more information, that the Auditor General be invited by the BOIE to conduct audits “with greater frequency,” that the BOIE consult the AG to develop “publicly-available guidelines” for auditing House of Commons’ spending, and that the BOIE “continue” posting meeting minutes “in a timely manner.” No changes to the actual meetings of the BOIE were recommended.
With these recommendations, the question of whether and when the AG will specifically audit MP expenses in a similar manner to what is currently being done with Senate expenses is now before the BOIE.
The NDP minority report laments that the “committee report does not reflect the full nature of the discussion in relation to the order of reference,” and states the NDP opposes “the conclusion that the status quo is adequate.” The report indicates the NDP thinks an independent body similar to Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority in the U.K. should be created, that the AG should be given a “clear legislative mandate” to audit the House of Commons, and that the House of Commons should be subject to the Access to Information Act.
The Liberal supplementary opinion indicates the party believes an independent commissioner, similar to that in Manitoba, should be established to oversee MP salaries, allowances and benefits, and that the BOIE should meet in public with in camera subcommittees created to deal with certain sensitive topics.
Mr. Julian said in effect the committee’s report is “meaningless.”
Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski (Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre, Sask.) said he thinks the study “was a good one,” however, and that the several witnesses told the committee the current structure of the board is appropriate.
“There have been improvements made to the BOIE over the years and they will continue to be made in terms of increased transparency,” said Mr. Lukiwski. “We think that the current system where the AG has been invited has worked well and will continue to work well in the future.”
Mr. Julian said the AG needs to have the legislative mandate to audit the House of Commons at the offices’ own discretion, and said both Auditor General Michael Ferguson and Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault were clear that independent oversight over MP expenses is needed.
Mr. Lukiwski said the question of amending the Access to Information Act in order to make the various Parliamentary institutions, including the House of Commons, be subject to the regime was “really beyond the mandate” of the committee.
But Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Man.) said the committee “lost out” on two opportunities by not recognizing in its report that closed-door meetings are bad and not picking up a suggestion made by former House law clerk Rob Walsh that in camera subcommittees be created to deal with sensitive information in order for the main BOIE meetings to be held in public.
He also said an independent commissioner should be made responsible for dealing with MP appeals over use of Parliamentary resources.
The committee held a total of seven meetings on its study to review the BOIE. Mr. Lamoureux said while there are “shortcomings” to the official report, he sees “some room to be optimistic.”
“Having more regular timely audits being done by the Auditor General of Canada is a positive thing, the reaffirmation of ‘proactive disclosure is a positive thing’—so the whole discussion that surrounded the making of the report was good, so in that sense I think the taxpayer has benefited,” said Mr. Lamoureux.
Mr. Julian said the committee’s recommendations would “not at all” satisfy a skeptical person that transparency and accountability has been improved.
“I find it very difficult for the old parties, the Conservatives and the Liberals, the parties of the sponsorship scandals and the Senate scandals, to try to defend the status quo when Canadians are obviously looking for something better,” he said.
Mr. Julian said the decision to maintain the status quo with the BOIE is “disrespectful” and said the NDP is “not giving up the fight” to bring an end to self-policing.
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: LAURA RYCKEWAERT
No comments:
Post a Comment