Senator David Tkachuk

Province: Saskatchewan

Appointment date: 8 June 1993

Findings—travel

We found several instances of travel expenses claimed by the Senator that were not for parliamentary business.

1. On 8 November 2011, the Senator flew from Saskatoon to Ottawa to attend a private corporation’s board meeting and other non-Senate meetings in the afternoon and the following morning. He flew back to Saskatoon early in the afternoon of 9 November 2011. On the basis of the information available, we determined that the trip was for private business activities. The cost of the trip was $3,800.

2. In November 2011, after Senate business in Ottawa, the Senator flew to Vancouver to attend the 50th wedding anniversary of another Senator. His spouse flew in from Saskatoon on the same day to join him. They spent the night in Vancouver and returned to Saskatoon the next day. The incremental cost for the Senator’s travel was $858, and the cost for his spouse’s attendance was $1,076. These costs included airfare, per diems, car rental, accommodations, and taxis. We determined that these expenses were primarily for personal activities.

3. On seven occasions, the Senator extended his stay in Ottawa or stopped in Toronto while travelling to Ottawa or elsewhere. While parliamentary business took place in Ottawa on each of these trips, the extended stays or stopovers were for private business activities or personal interests. The incremental cost of these stopovers or extended stays, including accommodations, per diems, and taxis, was $1,657.

The Senator’s comments

ITEM 1

• After reviewing the issue with the OAG, I agree this travel claim should have been shared, since it combined private and public business, and I will reimburse $1,900. It was an administrative error for which I take responsibility.

ITEM 2

• Like funerals, anniversaries are personal for family and often political for politicians. Attendance at this event is permitted under the rules that allow attendance at funerals of parliamentary colleagues and participation in party activities and community events. Senator St. Germain, who lives in my region, was not only a parliamentary colleague of mine, but a political VIP.

ITEM 3

• The OAG concluded that on two of my trips to Ottawa I should not have stayed overnight after a day of conducting Senate business; expecting me, instead, to fly back to Saskatoon the same day as I flew into Ottawa. The Senate rules are clear that staying overnight and flying out the next day is allowed.
• Contrary to a Senator who rents or owns a place in Ottawa, and is compensated for every day of the year, I am compensated only for the time I spend in Ottawa. We are governed by an annual limit on meals and accommodation expenses.
• The 64-point system is designed so that Senators living at distance from Ottawa are not inordinately disadvantaged compared to those Senators who live in close proximity to the Senate and have access to their office every day of the year.
• Stopovers in Toronto on the way to Ottawa from Saskatoon and back are an unavoidable aspect of Canadian air travel. I organize my travel as efficiently as possible.
• All my tickets were seamless and in one case under question I spent extra time at the airport between flights so I could take advantage of a sale ticket ($868.33 return). On two occasions, I left Saskatoon late on Sunday night, rather than early Sunday morning, and stopped over in Toronto.
• The last stopover in question was cleared by Senate finance before the travel began.
• On both issues (extended stay in Ottawa and stopovers), the determination of the OAG will put an undue strain on those Senators who have to travel great distances to be in Ottawa.
• The OAG and I are in dispute about two travel points out of the 57 I used over two fiscal years. While my record of attendance in the Senate is excellent, I used less than half of the 64 travel points allotted to me for each of the years under audit.

The OAG raised important issues on participation by Parliamentarians in events organized for other Parliamentarians and on how we arrange our travel. I understand that the issues in dispute will be submitted to the Internal Economy Committee. If they conclude that an error was made in interpreting the rules, I will reimburse any amount owed. I think all these issues merit careful review, however, so that Senators’ ability to do their jobs is appropriately balanced against their obligation to taxpayers.

Subsequent event

On 7 May 2015, the Senate received a payment in the amount of $1,900.22 to the Receiver General for Canada.