Not since the days of Gerda Munsinger has the House of Commons experienced anything like it. Who? When Lucien Cardin first startled the House by blurting out the name in 1965, even he got it wrong, pronouncing it Monseignor. That is a tale that remains to be told in a future memoir by one who was there.

In the dying days of May 2002 the House suffered something of a reprise in claims and counter claims concerning corruption, real and perceived, moral and material.

In l'affaireMunsinger it was a question of morality, and national security. In 2002 it is a question of material perceptions. Two ministers have lost their jobs, one of them sacked from Cabinet, the other re-assigned.

In one case the minister involved had commissioned a former lady friend to prepare a report on morale in the Canadian military at a cost of $36,000. In the other case, l'affaire chalet, the minister and his family had enjoyed a weekend vacation at a cottage owned by a Quebec family whose firm enjoyed quite lucrative contracts from the department for which he was responsible. A cheque for $800 dollars to pay for the weekend bounced back and forth between various parties involved.

Way, way back in the 1960s, allegations of corruption were bounced back and forth between the two main political parties, the Liberals then, as now, in government, and the Conservatives then, as now, in opposition, but on this occasion in lesser numbers.

One thing both eras share in common was and is the public's understanding of the issues. In the present case the public can understand $800. The public can even understand $36,000. In the former case the public could understand a few items of furniture delivered but not paid for, and a paltry amount paid or gifted to a femme fatale, otherwise called a hooker.

However, when it comes to larger sums running into the millions of dollars, the public's understanding isn't so clear. Few have ever experienced the handling of millions of dollars. Most have handled $800, and many who buy homes, or cars, know what $36,000 is like.

There is a lesson here for the ethically challenged, summed up in the old adage, "It's better to be hung for a sheep than a lamb."

Frivolity aside, the decline in public standards, both real and perceived, is a matter that requires to be taken seriously.

It has led to the downfall of governments in Canada and elsewhere. Despite Harold MacMillan's assertion (during the Profumo-Keeler affair) that he wouldn't "be driven from office by a tart", that was the fate met by that British Prime Minister.

The Denham Report chronicled the matter in great detail. In fact it became a best seller.

Earlier in Ireland the Locke Distillery inquiry foretold the public's reaction to jiggery pokery, when they had a chance to vote in a subsequent general election.

A similar inquiry and report are now sought in Canada. Whether the government acquiesces to the call for such an inquiry has not been determined as of the date of this writing, May 31, 2002.

The longer it delays, the greater danger it runs of being regarded as a threat to transparency in its dealings with the very public who elected it.

Credit must go to the members of the Parliamentary Press Gallery who, for the first time in years, did their work diligently.

Readers who wish to make their views known to Members of Parliament may do so by visiting and using the revised and updated Members List.