Replacing Junkets with Junkets?

In yesterday’s post I berated the Globe and Mail for slamming MPs over increasing their international travel budgets. I thought it would end there. But then yesterday’s Globe and Mail published this editorial arguing that MPs should retire their junkets.

Now in the editorial the “junkets” the G&M refers to are international trips paid for by third parties. The Globe argues that “If a trip is important, the Commons has a budget allocations for such ventures… senators and MPS recently added another $1.2 -million a year to their $3-million annual federal allotment.”

Interesting. So to prevent undue influence peddling the government should cover the costs of relevant and important trips. That sounds like a sensible solution.

However, last Thursday, when the $1.2-million increase was announced to enable MPs to attend interparliamentary association meetings, the Globe described this solutions as a “secretly approved… extra $1.2-million a year for junkets and other perks that come with their global network of interparliamentary committees.”

Yesterday’s scandal is today’s editorial solution. I love the consistency.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.