MP's office buget increase

[Kim473]

OTTAWA - The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is criticizing the federal government for quietly approving a hefty increase to MPs' office budgets.

Spokesman Aaron Wudrick said it is questionable whether MPs should get $25 million more to spend on expenses when the government is facing a large deficit.

"I think that given the environment we are in fiscally, it will leave a bad taste in the mouth of a lot of Canadians that MPs are voting for a 20 per cent hike in their office budgets at a time that we're going to be running possibly a $30 billion deficit," he said.

The parliamentary committee that makes administrative and financial decisions for the House of Commons approved a 20 per cent increase to the office budgets on Dec. 10, pointing out they have been frozen since 2010.

In a memo released Friday, the committee also announced a five per cent increase to the travel expense account.

Wudrick said the decision should have been announced at the time it was taken.

"It's about transparency," he said. "If MPs had a genuine argument as to why they needed this money they should have made this public and tried to justify it," he said.

Each member's office budget, currently set at $288,450, will increase by just under $58,000 after the changes take effect in April.

House officers and presiding officers will also see their budgets rise by 20 per cent.

The total cost of the increase is just under $25.4 million.

According to the government's website, the office budget pays for employee salaries, service contracts, wireless devices, some operating and travel costs, and other expenses.

Wudrick said the onus should be on the federal government to justify the spending increase.

"Were Canadians being so terribly underserved up until this point that this money was needed? I think that's what they need to explain," he said.

Dan Albas, a Conservative MP from British Columbia, said he shares Wudrick's concerns over transparency.

"I think the taxpayers' federation raises a legitimate point that these kinds of decisions should be made out in the open," he said.

He called for the decision-making committee's meetings to be made public when fiscal matters are being discussed.

"Having more openness on matters of fiscal spending would be a good thing for the public to build faith," he said.

Albas said that by staying frugal, he has always managed to stay within current MP budget and expense limits.

"From my own experience as a member of Parliament, especially flying from British Columbia, I always found we had the money to do what we needed to do," he said.


This is BS. When the rest of the country has layoffs and or no wage increases. A 20% increase ??? It's nowonder we are one of the highest taxed country's in the world, to pay for these guy's expense accounts and offices. 58 grand each increase for there offices. WOW !

[Sakotackdriver]

Good luck in getting the perch my friend! Just be careful soon they will be taxing us for every fish we catch!

[PGH]

For MP's in urban centres, its actually quite expensive to run a constituency office. They have to find a central location that is accessible to all members of the public and keep it staffed. Things like parking and cleaning add up. The good news is letter mail is free for MP's...

Commercial leases aren't cheap and people don't work for free. Keep in mind that constituency offices are non-partisan, so its not just Liberal MP's who get an increase - Cons and NDP get it too.

Constituency offices handle a lot of case work, especially immigration files and refugee settlements. They often need staff who speak multiple languages to handle the variety of constituents (anyone who lives in the riding), regardless of their citizenship.

I agree it is expensive...and perhaps this calls for constituency offices to be regulated, but that could be just as costly to enforce.

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by PGH

Constituency offices handle a lot of case work, especially They often need staff who speak multiple languages to handle the variety of constituents (anyone who lives in the riding), regardless of their citizenship.

I'll agree with your points except for this. Immigrants should be served in either official language or not served at all or they can supply their own interpreters. If they truly need the help they'll pick up the language on their own instead of adding yet another expense for us to bear while they suckle at our collective teat.

As for the budget increase, it pretty easy for all parties to come together so they can now get the fancy coffee services and some fancy furnishings in their offices. If you ask me their offices should be furnished from the government surplus auction stores, they can select out needed items before the auction. Seriously, if it's already in inventory, frigging use it.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by PGH

For MP's in urban centres, its actually quite expensive to run a constituency office. They have to find a central location that is accessible to all members of the public and keep it staffed. Things like parking and cleaning add up. The good news is letter mail is free for MP's...

Commercial leases aren't cheap and people don't work for free. Keep in mind that constituency offices are non-partisan, so its not just Liberal MP's who get an increase - Cons and NDP get it too.

Constituency offices handle a lot of case work, especially immigration files and refugee settlements. They often need staff who speak multiple languages to handle the variety of constituents (anyone who lives in the riding), regardless of their citizenship.

I agree it is expensive...and perhaps this calls for constituency offices to be regulated, but that could be just as costly to enforce.

The point made in the article is that there has been no public discussion of these points. In fact to discussion at all leading up to this. Just an announcement of increased spending from a government that has shown zero concern about reigning in spending.

[PGH]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

I'll agree with your points except for this. Immigrants should be served in either official language or not served at all or they can supply their own interpreters. If they truly need the help they'll pick up the language on their own instead of adding yet another expense for us to bear while they suckle at our collective teat.

As for the budget increase, it pretty easy for all parties to come together so they can now get the fancy coffee services and some fancy furnishings in their offices. If you ask me their offices should be furnished from the government surplus auction stores, they can select out needed items before the auction. Seriously, if it's already in inventory, frigging use it.

While you're point on official languages is a strong one, sometimes it just makes life easier if they can find a staffer who speaks the dominant language of the constituency. You need to be able to understand them first before you can get any work done. Yes, immigrants have a responsibility to respect our official languages and should learn them, but this is easier said than done. Anyways, hiring multiple language staff is more of a want than a need. Sometimes they are lucky just to find staff who speak English well enough. It's a tough line to draw in urban areas at least.

As for furniture, they try to re-use furniture as much as possible from previous constituency offices because its owned by the house of commons. Everything purchased by the constituency office technically belongs to the fed government, and they try to keep the stuff that's worthwhile to re-use. I know of a constituency office that uses furniture provided by Ottawa that's at least from the 70's. But they also needed to buy a bar fridge for the coffee creamer...so somethings need to still be purchased. Many things made these days do not last like they used to, but that's another topic all together...

Also, keep in mind it that the recent election involved 338 constituencies, which is 30 more than the previous election. This means 30 new offices that wouldn't have pre-existing offices where furniture could be reused. Even if we do some quick math at the old $288k per year budget, 30 new constituencies means an additional $8.64 million would be needed to run them.

FYI - It was the Conservative government who tabled Bill C-20 in Oct.2013 to expand the House of Commons from 308 to 338 seats (15 for Ontario alone!).

[Okotokian]

Given there has been no increase in 6 years it's probably warranted.