An edited version of the following article appeared in the Winter 2009 edition of The Taxpayer. Since this article's publishing, Parliament has taken steps to limit the practice of "10 percenters."

What is another word for ‘free money’ on Parliament Hill?  ‘Taxpayer money’, ‘your money’, ‘not my money’ are all fair synonyms.  It’s therefore not surprising when MPs vote themselves all sorts of perks, but many are little understood or even known about by the public.

One perk that has become somewhat more public as of late are “10 percenters.”  In addition to the “right” to free postage that MPs enjoy, these are essentially literature pieces meant to “keep constituents informed on parliamentary issues.”  They are called “10 percenters” because each flyer can only be sent to 10 percent of an MP’s riding, be it theirs or someone else’s.  There is nearly no limit on how many can be sent in total in practical terms.

For example: if an MP wishes to send one of these to every household in a given riding, all he or she must do is have their staff create 10, slightly different pieces of text with different pictures.  Often, these are even centrally coordinated by each party’s respective bureaus and distributed into ridings that they do not hold, obviously to win votes there.  Other times, MPs just blanket their own ridings with smiling pictures of themselves cutting ribbons, kissing babies and milking cows.  Almost as often, these flyers have pictures of other party leaders looking chummy with George W. Bush, kicking puppies, or not holding the door for elderly ladies (maybe I’m exaggerating about Bush).

Those who might think that fighting this practice is not worth the bother and simply wish to unsubscribe from (un)parliamentary junk-mail are unfortunately out of luck, as these flyers are unaddressed mail that blanket entire postal codes.  Unimpressed yet?  It’s worth noting that when MPs of all parties suspect an election will be called, they have these little bundles of joy mailed right before the writ is dropped so that they land on your doorstep as close as possible to election day.

As Rick Mercer said on ‘10 percenters’ this November, “they [MPs] would rather die than waste our money or disrespect their office, or is it the other way around?”

Not surprisingly, this privilege is terribly abused.  And why not?  Its “free” to MPs and can be used to tout their own party line, or to attack their opponents.  Giving politicians a perk like this and expecting them not to take advantage of it is akin to leaving a prime steak in front of a dog and going to work.

That is not to say that there is anything wrong with promoting one’s own party or even attacking opponents (so long as it is honest and genuine), but doing so on the public dime should not be tolerated.

Last year, MPs wasted $10-million of taxpayers’ money on these perks, of which $6-million was from the Conservatives.  In reality, the Conservatives spent more money on these because as most people inside the Queensway know, they are simply better organized.  That however is cold comfort to taxpayers on the hook for these petty perks.

The offensive nature of some recent ‘10 percenters’ has prompted several opposition MPs to call for limits on what can be published in these mail-outs, but such calls completely miss the mark.  Allowing bureaucrats to sift through the thousands of proposed pieces would inevitably require editorial decisions to be made that no free country should allow.  In short, the only way to make sure taxpayers are not paying for material that they may find offensive is to cancel it.

If parties or MPs wish to send out a partisan or attack message – offensive or not – the only fair way to do so is to pay for it with funds donated to them by their supporters, not taxpayers.  Unfortunately, this is only 10 percent of the problem, as the Conservatives, Liberals, Bloc, NDP and Greens all received subsidies from taxpayers in the form of political welfare, costing many more millions every year than ‘10 percenters’.

The Tories have promised to end these welfare subsidies if they win a majority in the next election.  This is an excellent start to be sure, but they can set a clear example right now and end these undeserved perks for all parties.

By: Derek Fildebrandt
Posted: July 20, 2010
Topic: Federal

Join Us   |   Donate