Roundup: The AG’s unchecked power

Posted on by

As we continue to sort through the aftermath of the Senate audit, one of the more distasteful things that I’ve come across is this sneering narrative that senators are insufficiently grateful to the Auditor General for the work. I’m not sure why they should be, considering that in many of the responses posted by those who are sending their questioned expenses to arbitration is that the auditors in question ignored their evidence or arguments and made value judgements with no real understanding of parliamentary business. Add to that the leaks to the media and their being painted with the brush of criminality, it’s no wonder that they don’t feel like showering the praise. More disconcertingly, however, is the narrative that the Auditor General can do no wrong. We’ve heard this not only from the pundit class, but also the NDP in their sanctimonious mischaracterizations of the results of the audit results, and the general excuses that “who are the public going to believe – the auditors or the senators?” In other words, rather than owing any deference to our parliamentarians, as was once the case, we now give it to an unelected and unaccountable officer of parliament, who wields an increasing amount of political influence whether he seeks it or not. This should be disconcerting to people, because nobody is infallible, and yet we treat the AG as though he were. His report on the Senate audit says point blank that these are not just cold hard facts – they had to exercise their professional judgement, and that is putting them at odds with some of those senators. That it doesn’t seem to enter into the conceptions of people that he could be wrong, that his professional judgement may have been on the wrong track when it comes to what could constitute parliamentary business for a senator – whose role in the community is different from that of an MP – is a problem. This much unchecked and unquestioned power is a fairly dangerous political power, and we should be asking more questions. As it stands, We The Media are the only ones who can hold the AG in check, and we shouldn’t give him a free pass, no matter how much the office has attained folk hero status. (Incidentally, one former AG says the price tag for auditing MPs would be so high as to be a waste of money, so there you go).

Good reads:

  • In the Duffy trial, a Senate clerk directly contradicted testimony from one of Duffy’s aides and showed the scrutiny given to claims.
  • While the Senate may still kill Bill C-377, which Thomas Mulcair opposes, he still thinks they have no legitimacy to kill it (false), setting him at odds with union allies.
  • It’s Magna Carta-palooza with Tyler Dawson, Carissima Mathen, Carolyn Harris, Brian Lee Crowley, and a long read by Robert Sibley.
  • Here’s a look at the new voter identification app that Conservatives will be using in the upcoming election.
  • The arrest of the Somali national in the Lindhout kidnapping raises questions about Canada’s extraterritorial investigative powers.
  • Susan Delacourt reminds us that Stephen Harper is one of the reasons we don’t have a reformed Senate after he prodded the Reform Party to defeat the Charlottetown Accords.
  • Over in the National Post, I call out the toxic parts of the Reform Act, as well as Michael Chong’s characterisation of the Senate.

Odds and ends:

House of Commons employees were warned of a cyber-attack on their systems.

Bono is in town on Monday, and will meet with Harper, Mulcair and Trudeau.

Chris Alexander picked a fight with Paul Wells, and got his ass handed to him.