Cost-conscious senator knows what makes the economy tick
‘I remind myself this is not my money’
Liberal Sen. Paul Massicotte could have operated three of his modest offices over the past year if he’d spent as much as Sen. Pamela Wallin.
He could have billed taxpayers an additional $150,000 for travel and an extra $6,000 for Ottawa accommodations and still not have claimed as much as the high-spending Saskatchewan senator.
At a time when the RCMP is reviewing the expense claims of four senators — including Wallin — and the federal auditor general is preparing to review all senators’ expenses, the spending of those in the Red Chamber has come under the microscope.
But while some senators will be defending hundreds of thousands of dollars in claims, Massicotte will be on the hook for much less.
As the lowest-spending senator from June 2012 to May 2013, Massicotte claimed only $66,166.62 for travel, office costs, hospitality expenses and housing in the national capital region.
By comparison, Wallin spent $340,427.32 during the same time period.
Senators Nick Sibbeston from the Northwest Territories and Charlie Watt from northern Quebec also claimed more than $300,000 over those 12 months.
“I remind myself all the time: this is not my money,” said the wealthy businessman who once controlled Quebec’s four horse racing tracks. “If it’s your money, you can do what you want with it … but it’s taxpayers’ money, so don’t be frivolous.”
Massicotte, who used to sit on the Bank of Canada and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce boards of directors, said his low spending is easily explained.
He lives in Montreal and “predominantly” takes the train to Ottawa, which is free for senators. Unlike so-called “activist” senators, he rarely travels on Senate business and has only one staff member, who does everything — “she has to wash dishes but at the same time provide research.”
The prominent businessman said he knows a thing or two about money, and as member of the Senate’s banking, trade and commerce committee, he’s able to put his business expertise to good use.
“Given I run companies, I think I have a pretty good handle of what I think is right relative to policies,” he said. “I have a pretty good understanding of what’s good for the economy, how it ticks, what works, what doesn’t work, what makes sense.”
One of his proudest moments in the Senate was working with the banking committee in 2009 on a report that examined the lack of credit-card transparency and clarity in Canada.
The report pushed the federal government to create a voluntary code of conduct for credit card companies that Massicotte said is helping protect credit card users from unexpected costs.
Massicotte, who admits to being “highly critical” of the Red Chamber, said he makes his contribution through committee work and rarely speaks during Senate sittings because it is “too partisan.”
“Why make a speech when everybody’s decision’s been made based on some political affiliation?” he asks.
But Massicotte made an exception this spring when he rose to voice his concerns about the controversial union disclosure bill, which the government wanted passed. This would have forced unions to disclose all payments made to outside groups or individuals worth $5,000 or more, making them accountable to a different standard than private companies, which don’t have similar strict reporting requirements.
“As a business person, frankly, if I had a prejudice, I might be antiunion,” Massicotte said. “But I knew what public companies must report on, I knew what private companies must report on, so it allowed me to come very quickly and say, ‘Well, that’s not very fair.’ ”
The union disclosure bill was amended by the Senate before summer recess and will return to the House of Commons in the fall for further debate.
Massicotte sees the vote to amend the bill as a victory for the Senate and said he would like to see more senators prepared to vote against government wishes and party lines during his next 13 years as a senator.
“Let’s hope it’s the beginning of a larger trend,” he said.