IF you really wanted to, you could probably get through the next four weeks without having to pay for a single meal.

Well, not directly, anyway.

With the election campaign in full swing our political aspirants are out in force, taking to the streets almost every day with their “free” community barbecues and “free” pizza in the park.

And while those yet to be elected will be paying — either with their own money or that of their party — for those already lucky enough to be a member of the Legislative Assembly, the person coughing up for these free feeds is you.

That’s right, you, the taxpayer.

Most people who attend these events probably leave with the impression their kind-hearted local member has put on these events out of the goodness of their heart and with their own money.

But that “free” bit of pizza has been paid for with a generous taxpayer-funded allowance some politicians have openly admitted is little more than a re-election slush fund.

MORE MATT CUNNINGHAM OPINION

There is no place for politics in the middle of a pandemic

Time for our politicians to get on with governing instead of chasing power for power’s sake

NT election shaping up to be a three-horse race

You can’t cancel a hero

In his recent report into the conduct of (now former) speaker Kezia Purick, Independent Commission Against Corruption Commissioner Ken Fleming had some interesting things to say about these electoral allowances.

Under the heading “Misuse of Resources”, he wrote:

“The public has little oversight of the use of members’ resources, including allowances and information communication technology.

“The current electoral allowance for members ranges from $60,500 to $118,500 per electorate. (No, that’s not a typo. Each member gets more than $1000 a week — and more than $2000 a week in remote electorates — on top of their already generous pay.)

“Expenditure is incurred at the sole discretion of members in servicing their electorate. (Free pizza to buy a few votes, or should we all just go to the pub?)

“Expenditure of this allowance is far from transparent, making it difficult to determine whether or not the behaviour of members is in line with community expectations. (Even if we spend it all at the pub, we don’t have to provide documentation, so no one will ever know!)

“A lack of oversight also increases the risk that members will misuse government resources.”

MORE MATT CUNNINGHAM OPINION

Cancelling costly, politically driven Arafura Games a good call

Palmerston will be crucial in deciding this year’s Territory election result

Labor’s election hopes made brighter by opposition division

We can’t delay long overdue public service cuts any longer

Of course, not all politicians are spending all of this allowance at the pub.

I know of several who use it for constituents in genuine need: food vouchers for casual workers who’ve lost their jobs due to coronavirus or sporting goods for kids whose parents can’t afford to buy them.

But in large part, it is used to campaign.

Not just free feeds but gifts for community members and other perks, all given under the impression the generous local member has paid for them themselves, before the photos are uploaded to social media.

Given the serious view the ICAC Commissioner has taken about this allowance and the lack of transparency surrounding it, you might have expected a government that came to power on a promise of being “open and transparent” would suggest some kind of reform.

Instead, we’ve heard the sound of crickets chirping.

But solving this problem might not be that difficult.

MORE MATT CUNNINGHAM OPINION

NT Govt’s refusal to open its books goes against its own promise

Gunner Government’s suddenly new ‘how can we help you?’ attitude needs to be a permanent change

Unprecedented crisis could also bring opportunity to a struggling Northern Territory

Now, this is a ‘real’ crisis and it’s time the whinging stopped, writes Matt Cunningham

What if, every time a politician used this allowance they had to reveal they were spending your money?

“Come down to my free pizza in the park event tonight, paid for with your money.”

Doesn’t quite have the same ring to it does it?

“Look at these beautiful cakes I dropped off to the hardworking teachers at my local school, paid for with your money.”

This humbling admission would probably be enough to stop this sort of nonsense filling up those community newsletters — complete with pretty pictures — that are printed with your money and dropped in your letterbox with a frequency that increases the closer we get to an election.

It could be extended to every government announcement.

“The government is spending $10m of your money to bail out a failing water-bottling business.”

“The administrator has spent almost $100,000 of your money on lovely trips to London and Hawaii.”

Those three simple words — “of your money” — might lead to a tad more restraint with how this money is spent. And a bit more humility from those given the privilege of spending it.

LIMITED TIME: New NT News subscription offer: $1 a week for the first 12 weeks

I have to admit, however, that this genius idea is not mine.

It was suggested by Professor Grahame Webb, the owner of Crocodylus Park.

Every year the NT government spends $5m “of your money” on a wildlife park that operates in direct competition to his private business.

That’s a longer story for another day.

In the meantime, head down to your local park, find a politician and enjoy a free feed.

Just remember who’s really paying.