Mike Duffy unfairly hurt by Senate housing rules

Spare a thought for Mike Duffy. The Prince Edward Island senator has got dragged down by an undertow of controversy engulfing a second, far more problematic colleague.

First, let’s agree, the Senate is a barnacle on the government’s backside, a $92.2-million-a-year relic of Confederation that deserves to die.

Let’s also agree that Senator Patrick Brazeau further discredited the red chamber last Thursday, getting arrested at his home in Gatineau, Que., then booted by Prime Minister Stephen Harper from the Conservative caucus. Then Friday, Brazeau was charged with assault and sexual assault, and on Tuesday, put on a leave of absence to protect “the dignity” of the upper chamber.

Now, let’s turn to the Charlottetown-born Duffy, a successful former broadcast journalist appointed to the Senate five years ago by Harper.

The rotund parliamentarian is being splattered, unfairly, by all the tomatoes now being tossed at the Senate.

Duffy is being pilloried for claiming, since 2010, housing costs of $33,000 for his residence in Ot- tawa. Duffy also owns a home in Cavendish, in accordance with Senate rules stating he must own at least $4,000 worth of property in the province he represents.

His expense claim is causing a fuss because the housing allowance is targeted to senators who have primary residences 100 kilometres or more outside Ottawa. It’s meant to help with secondary housing costs in Ottawa incurred as a result of attendance requirements in the upper house.

In Duffy’s case, critics argue his red-brick home in suburban Ottawa is his primary residence, and has been for years. Thus, he shouldn’t be claiming the allowance. For his part, Duffy asserts his compact clapboard bungalow in P.E.I., which he has owned since 1998, is his primary residence.

But surely the significant point here is that Duffy is obliged to maintain two residences because of his Senate job. Who cares which one is primary and which is secondary? A second home is a costly undertaking for anyone, even a senator with a $130,000-a-year income. (At least Duffy lives in Canada; remember senator Andy Thompson, expelled in 1997 for poor attendance because he was living in Mexico?)

It’s reasonable for taxpayers to kick in toward senators’ Ottawa housing costs — except, obviously, those representing areas around Ottawa who have their properties in the Ottawa-Gatineau region.

In any event, the housing expense regulations need updating. They should stipulate that senators can be eligible for reimbursement of Ottawa housing costs when they also keep a home — as they must — more than 100 kilometres away in the province they represent.

The Senate Standing Committee on Internal Economy announced Friday it has commissioned an independent audit to scrutinize housing expenses and residency claims of not just Duffy, but also senators Brazeau and Mac Harb.

Brazeau and Harb’s claims are more questionable given they are Ontario senators. Indeed, Brazeau has cited his father’s residence near Ottawa as one of his properties.

All that said, any absolution of Duffy in no way should make Canadians feel better about the Senate. It’s a patronage repository, absurdly offering appointees jobs for life to age 75, courtesy of the PM. It is also egregiously unbalanced in terms of provincial representation.

For some reason, more senators have got in trouble with the law over the years than MPs, reflecting negatively on the chamber.

All of which might be tolerable if the institution did compelling work.