Who Are Layton's Lawyers?

Andrew Coyne points to a piece in the Saturday Post which explains that Layton's budget deal is being implemented in the form of a slush fund that Cabinet can spend without Parliamentary approval on a vague list of areas (the "Layton List"). There are many questions I could raise about this, but let's just start with these three:

1. The last time we created such a barely-regulated slush fund, it was for sponsorship contracts to promote national unity. That fund was worth about $100 million a year. This will will be well over $2 billion a year. Knowing how well that previous slush fund was used, does Layton have any integrity on democratic accountability and good governance if he is helping to create a new barely-regulated slush fund charged to a government that seesm to abuse such funds? (Let's not even mention the propping up and preserving of a corrupt government in the process.)
2. Knowing how much this government likes to use every loophole in the book to justify its way of doing this (e.g. claiming that a resolution by Parliament calling the government to resign isn't techncally a non-confidence motion), did it ever occur to Layton that the government might just spend money on programs that technically fit (at least by the government's definition) the vague list of areas Layton has outlined, but don't actually address the problems Layton wishes to address?
3. Who are Layton's lawyers and why don't they point these sorts of things out to him?