The Speaker of the House of Assembly approved $12,000 plus HST for office accommodations for cabinet minister Tom Rideout in his constituency of Baie Verte-Springdale.
There is no explanation why in the simple briefing note the Speaker tabled with the legislature's management commission, even though the Regulations to the House accountability act clearly state there must be an explanation (S. 18(4)):
Where the speaker makes a decision under subsection (3) to authorize an increased allowance, he or she shall, in writing, report that decision to the next meeting of the commission together with the reasons for that decision and that information shall be recorded in the minutes of the commission meeting. [Italics added]
The Speaker's report on the issue actually misrepresents the requirements under the House accountability act when he states that a member may make application to exceed the approved sum. They can, but they can only be approved where the Speaker is satisfied that suitable accommodation cannot be obtained within the regulations.
But here's the thing: under s. 20 (8) b, the idea is pretty clear:
Where choosing office accommodation in a member’s constituency under paragraph (5)(a), a member shall...where accommodation, suitable in size, quality and location to the member, can be obtained in a Crown-owned building in the constituency, choose that space;
So is there no publicly-owned building in Mr. Rideout's constituency that can give him an office out of which he can operate?
What did his predecessor - also a cabinet minister - do for an office?
-srbp-