The Supreme Arrogance of Entitlement

The rather scandalous sense of entitlement that has been practised among some honourable members of the Senate of Canada and which has been elaborated upon in excruciating detail by recent news stories causing no end of consternation among those Senators who take their privileged positions within the Senate seriously, and who would never dream of abusing that trust, just has no intention of going quietly into the night of serene settlement.

There are indeed those Senators whose excesses have been named causing them no little discomfiture who have every intention of 'making good' to the taxpayer of those sums which they have rather 'erroneously' claimed. Although doing so at this juncture, after having pulled too vigorously at the teat of entitlement over the years will do them little good since they have been revealed in all their greedy malfeasance to have indulged in unethical claims, they haven't bothered denying they are morally obligated to return those ill-gotten gains.

Two Senators, however, give every indication that they believe themselves to have been wronged, that they themselves did nothing at all untoward in falsely claiming housing allowances and fattening their bank accounts on the backs of the taxpayers. Senator Patrick Brazeau has given word that he will contest the Senate committee on internal economy that has judged his principal residence to be within the 100 km boundary, disentitling him to the claims he has made; a relatively modest sum in comparison to that of his extra-billing peers.

But it is Senator Mac Harb who is prepared to argue in an Ontario court to having been unjustly ordered to repay living expenses by the Senate committee. That committee originally ruled he owed $51,000 in expenses. Senator Harb has two residences that he has long owned in Ottawa; one of which he uses as his official address on legal documents, the other where he has lived for decades in the city, long before having been invited to sit in the Senate. The thought of owning a cottage an hour and a half drive from Ottawa which he could claim as his primary residence and thus be eligible under the Senate rules as he quaintly interpreted the, to living expenses, appeared to appeal to his instinctual cupidity.

A Deloitte audit deemed that Mr. Harb spent roughly 21% of his time at his Westmeath cottage, despite neighbours claiming never to have seen him in the neighbourhood, or on very rare occasions. Which didn't stop him from collecting living expenses for time he spent in Ottawa, under his interpretation of the rules. Even while he lived for the most part, at his Ottawa residences whose ownership long preceded that of the Westmeath cottage ownership.

That original $51,000 which the Senate committee on internal economy cited as owing back to them has been expanded, however. While Senator Harb balked at the $51,000 figure, it has now ballooned exponentially to five times that amount. To include not only housing allowance, but travel expenses to and from his cottage, as well as interest for the amounts claimed and in his possession. 

In an official letter forwarded to Senator Harb by the Senate he was advised that he was expected to pay back a whopping total of $231,000 for residency expenses dating back to 2005, and that refund to the Senate was expected to be handed over within 30 days of receipt of that letter. Mr. Harb has accused the Prime Minister's Office of interference in the matter. In response to that charge the PMO stated: "The Senate Committee made its own decisions."

The Senator plans to ask the Ontario court for a judicial review of the Senate committee's findings. A discreditable piece of work altogether. He obviously feels no shame at having misled the Senate and taken funding he had no legal and moral right to avail himself of. But he is righteously offended at the purportedly high-handed treatment he is being exposed to. Refusing to accept the obvious; that he is himself responsible for the public scorn that now redounds upon him and blemishes his reputation.

He is guilty, among other issues, of chutzpah in the first degree.