As Canadians complete their tax returns this year, many are quietly - and sometimes loudly - cursing Ottawa. No responsible citizen can accept a government that abuses the public's trust and freely plunders the treasury. According to the Auditor-General, government officials failed to safeguard hundreds of millions of our tax dollars spent on advertising, sponsorships and fat commission fees. Canadians know that the accounting problems are more widespread than they first believed. Consider only the latest reports: the Department of National Defence improperly paid out $160-million in questionable contracts; and a public servant whistleblower revealed that rule-breaking began in 1994, not in 1997 when the Quebec sponsorship program was created.

In response to this waste and corruption, some taxpayers are calling for a "tax boycott" whereby unhappy Canadians can deposit their taxes into a trust fund, to be paid to Ottawa only after the sponsorship scandal has been properly cleaned up. Others want to organize a class action suit to re-coup wasted tax dollars.

But neither proposal would go very far. Putting pressure on politicians by temporarily placing taxes into a trust fund would be illegal, because the Income Tax Act - and other laws - require taxes to be paid to the government directly and immediately. This legal obligation does not depend on how well - or how poorly - our money is spent. A class-action lawsuit would also fail, because wasting tax dollars is not recognized as a cause of action by the courts. This is, in part, because Canada's constitution - unlike that of Communist China - does not recognize property rights. In response to a class action filed on behalf of taxpayers, a judge would say: "Elect different or better representatives for yourselves if you are unhappy with current government policy."

The powerlessness of Canadian taxpayers in the face of waste, arrogance and corruption point to the coercive and non-accountable character of government. Outside of government, in the real world of business, you don't get paid unless and until you have provided a valuable product or service. This basic principle of accountability applies to every employer and employee, to every consumer and company, and to every contract made by businesses large and small. Show up for work drunk a few times - or even once - and you will be suspended without pay, if not fired. Deliver less goods than promised - or goods of inferior quality - and you won't get paid the full amount. Charge customers high prices for lousy food and watch your restaurant go bankrupt. Outside of government's big ivory tower, the world of voluntary contracts has built-in accountability, all the time. But there is no legal requirement for a government to perform well, or at all.

Taxpayers can take advantage of legal credits and exemptions to minimize their taxes. But a refusal to pay taxes will ultimately result in government garnishing your wages, freezing your bank account, putting a lien on your house, and seizing your property.

This legal requirement to pay taxes, regardless of waste, corruption and poor performance, shows that government and accountability are natural opposites.

However, some accountability can be introduced into government through whistle-blower legislation, taxpayer protection legislation, and citizens' initiative legislation. But this won't happen until taxpayers elect people who are serious about reducing the sphere of government, and leaving more of life in the sphere of voluntary contracts, where continuous accountability reigns.