Compromise often greases the wheels in politics — without it, some things would take forever to accomplish.
But not all issues should be resolved through compromise.
Case in point: auditing of spending by members of Parliament.
Yes, there was a compromised agreement. Auditor General Sheila Fraser will be allowed to audit some of the expenses of some of the MPs. And if she finds irregularities, she won't be allowed to name names.
It's better than the flat out "no" we originally got from MPs.
Yes, a little of this is pure nosiness — we want to know where they are spending "our" money. But then again, it is our money we're talking about here. When MPs are wining and dining on our tab, we want to know if they are having the $80 bottle of wine or the $30 bottle of wine. After all, few of us will ever be in a position to have $80 wine with our meals.
While we have no reason to suspect MP Ray Boughen of any outrageous or unscrupulous spending, we might not feel quite so comfortable about others.
Our elected officials need to remember who they represent in government. They don't just represent the "Fortune 500" taxpayers. They also represent the welfare constituents, the people who are drawing unemployment and those who don't qualify for it. They represent the single-income families and the two-income families struggling to put children through university. They represent the pensioners who can't afford to live in their own homes any longer.
Our elected officials get a very fair wage compared to most constituents. And they get lots of perks. We aren't saying they don't work hard for the money — but no harder than the average cop walking a beat, the stressed out teacher taking orders from every direction, the store clerk who has to work two jobs just to make ends meet and everyone else who also works hard for their money and pays taxes.
Compromise is good, but it's not always good enough.
All Times-Herald editorials are written by the editorial staff.
