As is often the case with socialism in practice, taking care of the poor ends up turning into taking care of poor me.
From here:
[I]f the attitude of NDP power couple Jack Layton and Olivia Chow is any indication, many MPs still haven’t learned the most important lesson of last spring’s expense controversy: You are not entitled to this money, no questions asked, just because you are an MP.
Last year, Chow claimed $530,000 in expenses, Layton claimed $629,000. Both are above average and a little surprising given that both represent Toronto ridings. Last time I looked, T.O. was not that far from Ottawa. One might be forgiven for thinking it would cost less to ferry Toronto MPs back home as opposed to say, Yellowknife MPs or ones from Labrador. But maybe the short distance prompts them to take more trips back to their constituencies, racking up more expenses.
Chow’s sensitive, caring-for-the-average-working-stiff response when asked about her above-average expenses? “It’s within the law,” she told the Toronto Star curtly.
[T]he Layton-Chows act more like the Duke and Duchess of Downtown Toronto. They live more lavishly than the average Conservative or Liberal, then insist we peasants have no right to know more because they are acting “within the law.”
You left this out:
That’s travel and the cost of maintaining their constituency offices,including paying rent in Toronto, hiring staff, etc etc.
I don’t know about politicians in Canada (maybe they do need expenses to hire office staff, etc., like Kate says), but here in Britain, they just spend their extravagant expenses on personal luxuries and second homes, and I wouldn’t be surprised if politicians in other countries were just as greedy and motivated by pocket-lining as ours. Who pays ordinary workers expenses for travelling etc.? No one. It all has to come out of your basic pay. It should be the same for MPs. Abolish expenses entirely, I say.
John, do you have any idea just how big Canada is? The entire island of Britain could fit in the province of Ontario. Ordinary workers don’t have to buy their own plane tickets when they are traveling for business. If the MPs in Nunavut had to pay their own travel expenses, it would eat up their salaries pretty quickly.
Kate, actually, about four Great Britains could fit into Ontario – almost five if you include inland water.
The problem with the Layton-Chows is the fact that the distances they have to travel are less than many others, yet they spent more. And they don’t seem to think anyone should question that, judging by the retort to the Star reporter.
They also have to support constituency offices in Toronto, where the rents are very high; and the report just says that they are “above average”, without defining exactly what that means. Who do they spend more than? What are the office rents in the constituencies of the people they spend more than? If what they are doing is within the rules then they really don’t have to justify it to random reporters.
Kate – I was referring just to the situation in Britain; I’d already said Canada was most likely different.But then again – in Britain they started off in the long-ago past with MPs being peoples’ representatives because it took everyone a week or so to get to Westminster, to vote, etc. Today, we can all vote for ourselves, instantly, via email (or phone – and that’s been arond for a while). So why, with modern communications, do I need a person to represent me, and do the voting on my behalf? (Actually, these arguments apply equally to Canada, for all its size, that you refer to). Has anyone asked if we really really need politicians?
John, I don’t know of anyone who is seriously questioning the need for politicians, but I think many Canadians are questioning the need for a monarch – especially after QE2 is no longer on the throne. 😉
The amounts seem large – potentially excessive – but I probably cost the Cdn taxpayer more than $20K in travel in the past year; and I know lots of people who traveled much more than me. This is not discretionary travel in the sense that the individual has little say in whether or not he/she travels. Accordingly, I won’t point fingers without a lot more information.
I bet you, unlike politicians, had to submit receipts.
This is true. And the booking of flts and rental cars (if required) is done through AMEX who has a contract with DND and is supposed to find the lowest cost option. I regularly seem to get aircraft seats in the last row – the ones that are against the bulkhead and thus can’t recline.
Warren, If no one is really seriously questioning the need for politicans, then let’s do it – now! Administrators – yes, they will always be needed, always be there … but people who posture and promise until they get our votes, and then do exactly what their party’s ideology always planned …? People who seem to be driven by little other than the desire to gain and then retain power/wealth …? People who may originally have had some kind of idealism, but soon become cynical and self-serving? (We know politicans lived by high ideals and beliefs, integrity and probity – once …. but that was a long time ago). Recently, in Britain, we’ve had the Liberal Democrats joining a “coalition” power-sharing arrangement, which has required their MPs to go back totally on the things that got them voted in in the first place … (those who voted Lib Dem are a bit miffed …).
John, you’ve got some interesting ideas – and I’m also cynical regarding the “about faces” that often seem to happen when politicians are elected – but how do you propose the “administrator” be selected? And what if the “administrators” are clearly acting contrary to the will of the majority of the population?
My home province, British Columbia, adopted recall legislation in the 90s. I haven’t lived in BC for quite some time and am not familiar with how it has worked out, but I don’t think it is nearly as effective or practical as the original advocate hoped it would be.