MPs in the dark over government spending: parliamentary report
OTTAWA — Members of Parliament aren't able to properly scrutinize the government's spending plans and are effectively rubber-stamping billions of dollars in proposed spending without due diligence, a new report says.
The issue, the all-party parliamentary report explains, is MPs are expected to perform detailed scrutiny of the government's spending plans, or "estimates," but the committees receive little opportunity to review them and are only giving them "perfunctory attention" at best.
The report, released quietly last month by the all-party standing committee of government operations and estimates, makes 16 recommendations to help MPs hold the government to account effectively, including an argument for the federal budget to be tabled no later than Feb. 1 each year.
It's been a gradual erosion over many years and over many governments that led to less and less attention being dedicated to the review of estimates — one of the most fundamental underpinnings of parliamentary democracy, said New Democratic Party MP Pat Martin, the chair of the committee, on Sunday.
And now there's a rare consensus among the parties that something is wrong and something has to change, he said.
"We're falling down on our job to hold government to account, and we're giving them a blank cheque to go ahead and spend whatever they want," Martin said. "What could we possibly be doing that's more important than watching the public purse strings?"
The committee began a study on the process for considering the estimates and supply in January this year. It based its report on testimony heard over several months from former MPs, department officials, academics, international experts, the Auditor General of Canada, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, a former clerk of the House of Commons, and other witnesses.
The main theme of the report is that MPs need more time to study the estimates properly, Martin said, so the recommendations include tabling the estimates earlier in the fiscal year, tying them to the budget, and that the Parliamentary Budget Officer should be given the powers and resources to help MPs do this job effectively.
The report also argues the government should present the federal budget in the House of Commons no later than February 1 each year.
The members of the committee are concerned new spending initiatives announced in the budget are not included in the main estimates since those are prepared prior to the budget, the report said.
"The main estimates do not provide a complete picture of the spending plan and are not connected with the budget," Auditor General Michael Ferguson said in the report.
The committee intends to follow up on the report and its recommendations.
The recommendations are completely feasible, Martin said, noting that the committee "watered down the wine" to give them some hope of implementation. This report wasn't an academic exercise, Martin said - the committee really does want to implement these changes.
"We're not doing our job as MPs if we don't make the government defend their proposed spending, and make ministers come before committees and defend why they intend to spend money," Martin said.
OTTAWA — Members of Parliament aren't able to properly scrutinize the government's spending plans and are effectively rubber-stamping billions of dollars in proposed spending without due diligence, a new report says.
The issue, the all-party parliamentary report explains, is MPs are expected to perform detailed scrutiny of the government's spending plans, or "estimates," but the committees receive little opportunity to review them and are only giving them "perfunctory attention" at best.
The report, released quietly last month by the all-party standing committee of government operations and estimates, makes 16 recommendations to help MPs hold the government to account effectively, including an argument for the federal budget to be tabled no later than Feb. 1 each year.
It's been a gradual erosion over many years and over many governments that led to less and less attention being dedicated to the review of estimates — one of the most fundamental underpinnings of parliamentary democracy, said New Democratic Party MP Pat Martin, the chair of the committee, on Sunday.
And now there's a rare consensus among the parties that something is wrong and something has to change, he said.
"We're falling down on our job to hold government to account, and we're giving them a blank cheque to go ahead and spend whatever they want," Martin said. "What could we possibly be doing that's more important than watching the public purse strings?"
The committee began a study on the process for considering the estimates and supply in January this year. It based its report on testimony heard over several months from former MPs, department officials, academics, international experts, the Auditor General of Canada, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, a former clerk of the House of Commons, and other witnesses.
The main theme of the report is that MPs need more time to study the estimates properly, Martin said, so the recommendations include tabling the estimates earlier in the fiscal year, tying them to the budget, and that the Parliamentary Budget Officer should be given the powers and resources to help MPs do this job effectively.
The report also argues the government should present the federal budget in the House of Commons no later than February 1 each year.
The members of the committee are concerned new spending initiatives announced in the budget are not included in the main estimates since those are prepared prior to the budget, the report said.
"The main estimates do not provide a complete picture of the spending plan and are not connected with the budget," Auditor General Michael Ferguson said in the report.
The committee intends to follow up on the report and its recommendations.
The recommendations are completely feasible, Martin said, noting that the committee "watered down the wine" to give them some hope of implementation. This report wasn't an academic exercise, Martin said - the committee really does want to implement these changes.
"We're not doing our job as MPs if we don't make the government defend their proposed spending, and make ministers come before committees and defend why they intend to spend money," Martin said.