In Canada’s parliamentary system, ruling government officials are expected to take swipes at opposition politicians. But it’s much less common for the government to take aim directly at non-political government watchdogs, like Mr. Page.
Never mind that Mr. Harper’s government created Mr. Page’s post and approved his appointment in the first place back in 2008. The new post was designed to make government more accountable for its financial projections.
As his five-year mandate draws to a close in March, Mr. Page sat down with Canada Real Time to discuss his tumultuous relationship with the government. He said things started to sour after his office tried and failed to get information about big government policy decisions–from the proposed purchase of F-35 fighters to the cost of crime-fighting legislation.
“We ran into big transparency issues. We never expected that,” Mr. Page said. “The government made big decisions, multi-billion-dollar decisions that impacted long-term finances, and they provided no analysis to Parliament. Nothing.”
A spokesman for Tony Clement, a government minister and president of the federal Treasury Board, declined to address Mr. Page’s criticisms. But the government hasn’t been shy about expressing its own frustration with Mr. Page in the past. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty called his work “unreliable and unbelievable” last year after Mr. Page questioned the government’s funding estimates for the country’s old-age benefits system.
When the budget watchdog suggested the government may have overestimated the revenue hit Ottawa would sustain from a slowing economy in November, the finance minister’s spokesman shot back that Mr. Page seemed to “enjoy the attention he generates based on whatever numbers he pulls out of the air.”
Senior Conservative officials have also accused Mr. Page of overstepping his mandate by seeking details on how and where the Canadian government would cut spending, up to 5.2 billion Canadian dollars ($5.19 billion) a year, as part of its deficit-reduction plan.
Mr. Page has taken the unusual step of going to the Federal Court of Canada in an effort to clarify what legal authority the watchdog possesses. In the interview, he said he found the government’s opacity “completely bizarre.”
Mr. Page ended up winning one high-profile battle. He concluded in 2011 that the acquisition of 65 F-35 fighter jets would cost the Canadian government $29.3 billion, versus the Defense Department’s original estimate of $17.6 billion. Canada’s spending watchdog, the Auditor General, later came to a similar conclusion as Mr. Page. Amid a backlash over the projected costs, the Tory government eventually chose to re-launch its search for new fighter jets.
“If you don’t give Parliament this sort of information, you completely undermine Parliament,” Mr. Page said. “Parliament can’t hold the government to account.”
Mr. Page said he’s worried the government may opt to neuter or weaken the watchdog’s reach after he leaves office on March 25. Mr. Flaherty told Canada’s Global TV recently that the government was considering changes to the watchdog’s mandate, adding he believed the budget officer should be more of a “sounding board” for policymakers.
“If the finance minister wants a sounding board, he should use the people he meets at pre-budget consultations,” Mr. Page said. “A legislative budget officer is very different.”
The spokesman for the government’s Mr. Clement said the government was committed to continuing the budget watchdog’s role once Mr. Page departs, and would ensure parliament had time to consider a “credible replacement.”
Original Article
Source: blogs.wsj.com
Author: Paul Vieira
No comments:
Post a Comment