15 senators took a $118K trip to Alberta. Some colleagues question its relevance
are not directly related to their parliamentary work and therefore may not be a good use of taxpayer dollars. They worry that these trips could be seen as vacations rather than educational opportunities.
However, supporters of the initiative argue that it is important for senators to have a good understanding of the diverse regions of the country in order to make informed decisions. They believe that these familiarization tours can lead to better governance and policy-making.
Senator Scott Tannas, who organized the Alberta tour, defends the trip as a valuable opportunity for senators to learn about different parts of the country. He believes that the benefits of such tours outweigh the costs and that they are essential for ensuring equitable representation for all regions.
Other senators, like Daryl Fridhandler, who is organizing a similar tour in Alberta this summer, echo Tannas’ sentiments. They argue that the expense is justified by the knowledge and insights gained through these visits.
However, critics like NDP MP Alexandre Boulerice and political scientist Geneviève Tellier question the necessity of these trips. They argue that without a clear link to parliamentary work or a tangible outcome, such tours may not be the best use of public funds.
Ultimately, the debate over familiarization tours for senators raises important questions about accountability, transparency, and the responsible use of taxpayer dollars. It remains to be seen whether the Senate will tighten its rules around such trips in the future.
