Oversight

As some of the anecdotal stories emerge surrounding the Joint Laundry closing, I began to wonder where the oversight was during the whole process. The term ‘oversight’ is quite common in American politics as they have oversight committees looking at almost every facet of government services. In our system, we appoint a Senate Committee or a Royal Commission or assign a parliamentary committee to handle similar work. These committee investigations or inquiries look at everything from how contracts are let to whether undue influence was present in the decision-making process.

In many of our government organizations and NGOs, we set up committees to handle specific chores. Depending on the scope of the committee’s work, there may be oversight from the Board or government by having a Board member or elected official sit on the committee. The ultimate oversight is held by the shareholders or electors, although any remedial action is often so long after the fact that little can be done except to take notes so the problem does not recur.

The mess at the RCMP with their pension monies is a good example of there not being any oversight, or if there was supposed to be some, it was incompetent. For the former head of the Mounties to say that there was never a serious enough problem (just a few million dollars gone astray) to reprimand anyone drew laughs of derision from the whistleblowers in the audience. He further blackened the reputation of the Scarlet Uniforms in many people’s minds when he said that there was no point in assigning blame now because too much time has passed. Did he never hear of Cold Cases? Is there a different Statute of Limitations for Mounties than the rest of us? Of course, we must remember that this is the same former Commissioner Zaccardelli who had to resign because of faulty memory when testifying before parliament about the Maher Arar case. In this instance, the ultimate oversight was by the Auditor General, but long after the fact.

The problem with our own North Bay Mattawa Conservation Authority might also be attributed to a lack of oversight. In this example, we had elected members of councils sitting on the Board, but they saw nothing going wrong as the Authority slipped further and further from its mandate and into financial trouble. If these elected people did not have the skills to perform their oversight function, then we have little redress except to rebuff them at the polls, but in the case of paid employees, like Zaccardelli, we ought to have more recourse. The Mounties have repaid some of the mismanaged funds and the CA will likely sell some land to cover their debt, but earlier oversight might have avoided the problems.

In the case of the Joint Laundry, the oversight was supposedly from the representatives of the various members who used the laundry service. If that Board has made some bad decisions on equipment or indeed, if they have made decisions that cannot stand the scrutiny of good business practice, then there ought to be some redress. If the ultimate oversight was by an elected body, we can boot them out of their position at the first opportunity, and if they are paid employees, then someone should be looking at their performance reviews.

But what if the people who ought to be giving oversight are not elected or paid? What if they are volunteers and cannot be held accountable? The past problems with the Heritage Festival springs to mind. If the oversight was by members of council who sat on the Committee, why were they not held accountable? When public money is at risk or being used, where public safety is an issue, and when people’s jobs are at stake, there has to be some oversight, either by paid employees or by elected officials, both of whom are accountable to the electorate.

Employees can be dismissed and politicians booted, but what can you do to a volunteer except thank them for their efforts and not appoint them again? People who volunteer their time and skills in the community are to be commended but there still has to be oversight in the work they perform for the community. Committees and Boards need a large degree of autonomy but there must be guidelines, and there must be oversight. And those giving the oversight must be accountable.