A lot of people have been trying to make sense of the bipartisan decision by MPs to block their expenses from becoming public. By my own polling, at least 92% of respondents believe that MP expenses should be made public, but as Paul Szabo says "if they were opened to the auditor general and open to the public, all of a sudden people would jump to conclusions without having all the facts." Which is exactly what happened in the "Guergis Affair", when opposition members began making wild accusations on the floor of Parliament such as the former Minister possibly being a drug dealer. The Liberals jumped to all these ridiculous conclusions before they had all the facts. I suppose then that Liberals need to be protected from themselves.
I seem to recall Mike Ignatieff demanding that the PM release all the Guergis information to the public (before an investigation was complete), and blamed his not doing so for their childish behavior in Question Period. Szabo says that you can't make information on MP legal matters public because people will jump to conclusions before all the facts are known; and yet the Liberals boldly demanded Guergis allegations be made fully public before all the facts were known or could be known. The moral of the story is that Liberals wanted all facts about the junior cabinet Minister made public immediately, but when the shoes are reversed Liberals don't want the allegations made public because people might jump to conclusions. Well done! Their hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me.