Really not *that* big a deal and it was only $1756 total but how do you mess that up 4 separate times? She’s been in office since 2021 it’s not like she’s brand new. I think this is probably a case of saying it was an accident only after getting caught
Also Barrett does bring up a decent point, she listed them as “gifts given as matter of protocol” and it does bring in to question if it had any affect on her winning her seat, a seat she only won by 41 votes.
Though on a more funny note it’s pretty hilarious that she then goes on to join the liberals, a party that recently has been well known for it’s ethics violations and stealing tax payer money
cptstubing16 on
I don’t care if it was an accident, and I don’t care what party does this. When it happens it should be reimbursed and then a fine equal to the amount of the error. This way elected officials are more careful. Too easy to just say “oops” and pay it back. Introduce fines.
toilet_for_shrek on
>The total value of the purchases was $1,756. Two $150 purchases were made in January 2025, a $76 purchase was made on June 25 and a $1,380.00 purchase was made on Aug. 27. All were listed as “gifts given as a matter of protocol.”
Yeah something tells me this wasn’t an “error”. Seems like she was deliberately sticking her hand in the cookie jar. It’s a rather low amount compared to *some* examples of politicians helping themselves to taxpayer dough, but she should still be hd accountableÂ
Knight_Machiavelli on
>”Ms. Idlout has — now that she’s been caught — admitted to doing what every member of Parliament knows or ought to know they can’t do,” said Michael Barrett, the Conservative ethics critic.
>”This speaks to very poor judgment.”
Barrett is 100% right about this, especially due to the timing and nature of the purchases. I do find it suspicious that this comes out right after she crosses the floor though. How did this come to light? The timing makes me wonder if the NDP knew about this all along and now is using it against her.
OneLessFool on
It’s such a small amount that I wonder why she would even bother?
But the “funny” side of me says she knew that she’d be switching to the Liberals and wanted to do a Liberal corruption beforehand because the Liberals would let it slide since she just switched parties for them.
Edit: a little corruption*
Fifty-Mission-Cap_ on
It feels like getting caught in an ethical lapse is a rite of passage for Liberal MPs over the past few years (Mary Ng, Ahmed Hussen, Evan Solomon pre-MP, Greg Fergus, Randy Boissonnault, Trudeau, etc.)
I frankly don’t buy the idea that Idlout did this as an oversight or submitted the expenses in error. Expenses typically need to be filed with receipts and be approved, which would have been caught while preparing them – she also did this on 3 separate occasions!
[deleted] on
[removed]
Hot-Percentage4836 on
I’m disappointed. I expected better from a NDP MP (well, now she is a Liberal). She’s been caught.
It’s a refresher that unclean behaviours have no party or color.
EugeneMachines on
My judgment of how severe this is requires a few more details and I’m not so quick to think “corruption” instead of “ignorant oops”.
a) Was this four separate expense attempts where she was told each time that was unacceptable but kept trying it? If yes, that would be bad. But having worked with bureaucracies and expense reimbursement… the rules are not always universally noticed and applied. So it seems reasonable that she might have done it a few times and was reimbursed by some finance admin who didn’t realize it was her company and never told her this wasn’t allowed. But on the fourth time it was flagged and she became aware, and stopped doing this.
b) When did she reimburse? Like yesterday after the story broke and she realized she was in trouble? If yes, again that would be worse. But if the story was more like: I needed four indigenous gifts. I bought them from my store not realizing that was a conflict. I did it four times, but it was only flagged after the last one. I immediately reimbursed the expenses. Now, months later, the news broke. If that sequence all took place months ago, way before the story surfaced, I would chalk it up to innocuous mistake.
darth_henning on
On one hand, we need more severe fines or other punishments for MPs breaking ethical rules.
On the other, if she’d bought these same gifts from “Joe’s Inuit Art” rather than her store, the expenses would have been approved and it would be a non-issue so I’m not exactly significantly concerned.
I’d be interested to know
a) if she just paid the artists what the pieces were worth or if she paid “sticker” to her own store and got a profit, and
b) when she repaid the funds, since if it was done some time ago when she was told she couldn’t then fine, but if it’s when the story hit the news it’s more questionable.
Snurgisdr on
Every MP should be forbidden from owning businesses, stocks, etc., and forbidden from doing business with the government for a decade after leaving office.
angelbelle on
This is just straight up corruption. Quite frankly, the most embarrassing thing about this article is how small the dollar value is too.
12 Comments
Really not *that* big a deal and it was only $1756 total but how do you mess that up 4 separate times? She’s been in office since 2021 it’s not like she’s brand new. I think this is probably a case of saying it was an accident only after getting caught
Also Barrett does bring up a decent point, she listed them as “gifts given as matter of protocol” and it does bring in to question if it had any affect on her winning her seat, a seat she only won by 41 votes.
Though on a more funny note it’s pretty hilarious that she then goes on to join the liberals, a party that recently has been well known for it’s ethics violations and stealing tax payer money
I don’t care if it was an accident, and I don’t care what party does this. When it happens it should be reimbursed and then a fine equal to the amount of the error. This way elected officials are more careful. Too easy to just say “oops” and pay it back. Introduce fines.
>The total value of the purchases was $1,756. Two $150 purchases were made in January 2025, a $76 purchase was made on June 25 and a $1,380.00 purchase was made on Aug. 27. All were listed as “gifts given as a matter of protocol.”
Yeah something tells me this wasn’t an “error”. Seems like she was deliberately sticking her hand in the cookie jar. It’s a rather low amount compared to *some* examples of politicians helping themselves to taxpayer dough, but she should still be hd accountableÂ
>”Ms. Idlout has — now that she’s been caught — admitted to doing what every member of Parliament knows or ought to know they can’t do,” said Michael Barrett, the Conservative ethics critic.
>”This speaks to very poor judgment.”
Barrett is 100% right about this, especially due to the timing and nature of the purchases. I do find it suspicious that this comes out right after she crosses the floor though. How did this come to light? The timing makes me wonder if the NDP knew about this all along and now is using it against her.
It’s such a small amount that I wonder why she would even bother?
But the “funny” side of me says she knew that she’d be switching to the Liberals and wanted to do a Liberal corruption beforehand because the Liberals would let it slide since she just switched parties for them.
Edit: a little corruption*
It feels like getting caught in an ethical lapse is a rite of passage for Liberal MPs over the past few years (Mary Ng, Ahmed Hussen, Evan Solomon pre-MP, Greg Fergus, Randy Boissonnault, Trudeau, etc.)
I frankly don’t buy the idea that Idlout did this as an oversight or submitted the expenses in error. Expenses typically need to be filed with receipts and be approved, which would have been caught while preparing them – she also did this on 3 separate occasions!
[removed]
I’m disappointed. I expected better from a NDP MP (well, now she is a Liberal). She’s been caught.
It’s a refresher that unclean behaviours have no party or color.
My judgment of how severe this is requires a few more details and I’m not so quick to think “corruption” instead of “ignorant oops”.
a) Was this four separate expense attempts where she was told each time that was unacceptable but kept trying it? If yes, that would be bad. But having worked with bureaucracies and expense reimbursement… the rules are not always universally noticed and applied. So it seems reasonable that she might have done it a few times and was reimbursed by some finance admin who didn’t realize it was her company and never told her this wasn’t allowed. But on the fourth time it was flagged and she became aware, and stopped doing this.
b) When did she reimburse? Like yesterday after the story broke and she realized she was in trouble? If yes, again that would be worse. But if the story was more like: I needed four indigenous gifts. I bought them from my store not realizing that was a conflict. I did it four times, but it was only flagged after the last one. I immediately reimbursed the expenses. Now, months later, the news broke. If that sequence all took place months ago, way before the story surfaced, I would chalk it up to innocuous mistake.
On one hand, we need more severe fines or other punishments for MPs breaking ethical rules.
On the other, if she’d bought these same gifts from “Joe’s Inuit Art” rather than her store, the expenses would have been approved and it would be a non-issue so I’m not exactly significantly concerned.
I’d be interested to know
a) if she just paid the artists what the pieces were worth or if she paid “sticker” to her own store and got a profit, and
b) when she repaid the funds, since if it was done some time ago when she was told she couldn’t then fine, but if it’s when the story hit the news it’s more questionable.
Every MP should be forbidden from owning businesses, stocks, etc., and forbidden from doing business with the government for a decade after leaving office.
This is just straight up corruption. Quite frankly, the most embarrassing thing about this article is how small the dollar value is too.