WILL COMMONS FOOT THE BILL FOR ELECTIONEERING STAFFERS?

Within hours of Sunday’s election announcement, the New Democratic Party put out a press release castigating the Conservatives for the early call.

Characterizing the move as “another hypocritical attempt … to try and gain a financial advantage — and foot taxpayers with the bill,” they calculated that the cost of the extended exercise in democracy “could now reach as high as $1,000,000,000.”

What’s not clear, however, is if that total includes the thousands of dollars that could flow from House of Commons’ coffers to the bank accounts of Parliament Hill staffers who choose to spend their paid vacation on the campaign trail.

As reported last month, unlike ministerial aides, who are obliged to take unpaid leaves of absence or resign their posts if they want to hit the hustings full-time, Hill staff — including those in MPs’ and party leaders’ offices, as well as caucus research units — are explicitly permitted to electioneer while on paid leave.

Depending on how much vacation time those staffers have managed to squirrel away before the writ drops, the House of Commons could end up picking up the tab for thousands of dollars in labour costs that might otherwise be added to the party payroll.

After all, even the most loyal partisan foot soldiers may require at least a small stipend to cover living expenses over the course of the campaign.

Despite the obvious boost that such a subsidy could give to campaigns now scrambling to stretch their budget to cover an 11-week campaign, two parties — the Conservatives and the Liberals — have been trying to close that loophole behind the doors of the Board of Internal Economy, the all-party panel that oversees MP and House spending.

According to a report tabled in the House last week, “the current policy of allowing annual and compensatory leave to be taken by Members’ employees during a period of dissolution” came up for discussion during a closeddoor session on June 18. But as there was “no consensus” on changing the policy, “the status quo was maintained.”

Five members of the committee registered their “disagreement” on the lack of a policy change: Conservative House Leader Peter Van Loan; Conservative Whip John Duncan; Conservative MP Stella Ambler; and Liberal House Leader Dominic LeBlanc.

The names of the two NDP MPs present for the discussion — House Leader Peter Julian and Philip Toone — were conspicuously missing from that list.

Then again, perhaps that shouldn’t come as a surprise.

It was, after all, the revelation that several NDP staffers were on paid leave while working on the 2013 byelections that led to the ill-fated push to change the rules.

The party won’t say whether it plans on taking advantage of the same provision this fall.

“All staffers working on the campaign are on leave from their regular workplaces and are following all rules and regulations currently in place according to their own particular situation,” party spokesman Karl Bélanger told the Ottawa Citizen.

The Conservatives were similarly reluctant to respond to the query, but it seems distinctly unlikely that they would do so.

Not only did they register their “disagreement” with the practice at the June 18 meeting, but Saskatchewan Tory MP Randy Hoback spoke out publicly against the practice earlier this year.

“We think it’s an improper use of taxpayers’ resources for partisan purposes that shouldn’t be allowed,” he told Huffington Post reporter Althia Raj.

Meanwhile, Liberal spokeswoman Kate Purchase was quick to confirm that her party’s campaign headquarters will not be a vacation destination for Hill staffers.

“No (House) staff working on the national campaign will be using that provision,” she confirmed via email. “We feel it is only appropriate to have everyone on an unpaid leave of absence.”

Ditto, it seems, for the Greens. According to spokesman Julian Morelli, the national party will be picking up the tab for any Hill staff who end up working on the campaign.

He also took a shot at what he deemed a “lack of leadership” within the Board itself. “This lack of accountability and transparency is astounding,” he said. He also called for any money paid out under the provision to be returned “immediately.”

As noted, at press time, the New Democrats had not provided any additional information on whether any campaign staff are on paid leave from the Hill, and the House rule book makes it clear the practice is entirely within the rules.

But after kicking off the campaign by accusing the governing party of plotting to campaign on the public dime — especially after going to court to block a demand that they pay back $3 million in House money spent on satellite offices and mass mailings — they may find themselves fielding questions on when it’s OK to use taxpayer money to defray election costs.