Watchdog slams Liberals' $7B budget funding

up to $7 billion are listed in a one-page annex to the budget document. A spokesman for Treasury Board president Scott Brison said “this level of transparency is simply unprecedented,” and confirmed that an online spending tracker will be updated monthly.

It is rare for the government to lump so much spending into one vote but there is one memorable example. In 2009, the Conservative government announced a $3-billion “emergency fund” in response to the financial crisis, which the opposition worried was just a “slush fund.” It ultimately helped fund a notorious gazebo in then-Treasury Board president Tony Clement’s riding.

While acknowledging that the government said its intention is to “provide more coherent information to Parliamentarians,” the Parliamentary Budget Office report painted a bleaker picture of what it called a “novel” approach that ultimately removes power from the elected House.

Until now, Parliament would approve spending only after funding had been scrutinized and approved in the Treasury Board’s submission process. Not so with “Vote 40,” which would approve Parliamentary Budget Officer Jean-Denis Fréchette released a report Tuesday that questions parliamentarians’ oversight of a $7 billion discretionary fund to be voted on as part of this year’s main estimates. the $7 billion prior to such scrutiny and lessen Parliament’s legal controls over where money is spent, indicating to the PBO that “due diligence will no longer be performed on new budget spending measures before the government asks for Parliament’s assent.”

The report noted that there are often “significant differences” between money announced in the budget versus what the Treasury Board eventually presents to Parliament. For example, according to the office’s analysis, 31 per cent of the measures announced in the 2016 budget had “variation” compared to amounts initially outlined in the budget document.

“Ultimately, parliamen- tarians will need to judge whether the government’s most recent efforts to align the budget and the estimates results in an improvement in their oversight role, and if they are willing to accept incomplete information and weaker spending controls to help the government to expedite the implementation of budget measures,” it read.

Poilièvre had wondered whether the government’s promise only to spend the money on specific budget initiatives was legally binding.

The PBO report has reflected that worry.

“It is unclear that the proposed vote wording would restrict the government to funding each Budget 2018 measure in the amount set out ... rather than changing the allocations across any initiative mentioned in Budget 2018.”

Meanwhile, NDP Treasury Board critic Daniel Blaikie was raising concerns that the Liberals were continuing a pattern of trying to suppress Parliament. “Despite all the talk, the Liberals see Parliament as a real nuisance,” he had told the Post. “There have been several motions designed to circumvent Parliament and this is another instance of that.”

The report ultimately mirrored that concern, too. It suggested that the government could streamline its own internal processes to make spending more efficient “without the need for Parliament to cede information and control” — and characterized Vote 40 as an “important” turning point. While there has been a longterm trend toward greater parliamentary scrutiny, this move would yank back some control from elected officials.

Parliament is voting on $112.9 billion out of the year’s total $276 billion in expenditures, according to the PBO — the remaining $163.1 billion covers statutory spending already approved through other legislation, such as elderly benefits and health transfers to provinces.

Brison is scheduled to appear in committee on Thursday, where he is expected to face heavy questioning about his government’s decision.