Perspective is all

This morning, over my usual breakfast of brown rice, as is my habit, I perused various news headlines on my tablet. On the CBC site I noted that one of the news points reported on was that the House of Commons had, during question period, raised the issue of how much Canadian taxpayers paid to have a technician travel with Trudeau during his Christmas holiday.  It appears as if we had to pay $1,694 for his accommodation.  The math is beyond me but $1,604 must be less than .00001 percent of the total Canadian budget. I understand that the opposition is concerned about whether or not Trudeau will be unduly influenced by the holiday - but really are there not more important things to worry about? If the honourable members of the Opposition are running out of ideas - I think I, along with thousands of other Canadians, probably have a few suggestions. Resolving the housing crisis in Northern Canada, the lack of jobs for young people, the cost of post-secondary education, and creating a Canada wide response to climate change are a few suggestions.

The next item on CBC's list of newsworthy items was the fact that at least twelve Ontario police officers who have been suspended because they have been charged with a criminal offense remain on the payroll of their police force and made over $100,000.00 dollars last year. Ontario is the only province that  has a policy that states that unless an office serves jail time - they must be kept on the force's payroll. While those in charge of administrating the police must dislike this law - I am sure that police unions will fight to keep it.

 I appreciate the fact that we are all innocent until the judge says we are guilty and that it perhaps is wrong to fire someone before their guilt has been proven. I do question why taxpayers have to pay someone's salary for a period on months if not years when they are not doing anything. Is there no work that those officers could be doing? Surely there is some filing or toilet cleaning that needs to be done. I am willing to bet that those officers who are found guilty don't ever have to pay back the money. 

This is not a slam against the vast majority of police officers who are hard working, honest and who have a vested interest in creating communities that are safe. But I am damned if I can understand why a police officer who is charged with a crime (and maybe even convicted) gets treated differently (better) than do other workers. If for example, a part time worker at a fast food restaurant or at a dollar store is caught stealing - they get fired. There is no year long process where they get paid to not work while the courts process the charge.

 There are times when various union contracts/influences have lead the way to improved labour conditions - this is not one of them.  

In terms of the juxtaposition of these two articles one could wonder if the House of Commons, as the members think about how to reform it, should have a limit on questions that deal with minuscule amounts of money and be forced to deal with real issues of social inequity.