Fair
Government.
That's the promise
of the Ombudsman of British Columbia. A crucial check on abuse and
wrongdoing, the Ombudsman ensures integrity in government and the
rule of law by promoting
fairness betweengovernment and citizens. His mandate reminds us
that - in a democracy - citizens,
not governments, are sovereign.
As a legislative
committee considers the re-appointment of current Ombudsman Howard
Kushner,
British Columbians must ask whether the Ombudsman is effective.
The B.C. Civil Liberties
Association's view is that the promise of the Ombudsman's office
has fallen too short in recent years.
The Ombudsman
promotes fairness for British Columbians by investigating complaints
or his own
concerns about government decisions, policies and programs that
may be unfair.
His power is
limited to making recommendations. His authority thus depends in
large part upon his
ability to marshal public interest and scrutiny to pressure governments
to remedy their unfair action.
How can we measure
Kushner's effectiveness? What about looking to "objective"
statistics? For
example, the number of intakes to his office have declined since
the peak of 24,462 intakes in 1993
to 11,865
in 1999, the year Kushner became Ombudsman, to 8,563 in 2004. In
1999, his office
opened 8,297 jurisdictional files for investigation and 4,791 in
2004.
From 1999-2004,
Mr. Kushner produced five special reports and five public reports.
Dulcie McCallum,
Kushner's predecessor from 1992 to 1999, issued six special and
seven or eight public reports.
Stephen Owen, Ombudsman from 1986 to 1992, released no special reports
and 24 or 25 public
reports.
An imperfect
indicator, our search of the Canadian Newsstand Database reveals
that Kushner's name
appeared in 57 articles in the National Post, Vancouver Sun and
Victoria Times-Colonist since 1999
while Ms. McCallum's name appeared in 143 articles during her tenure.
Stephen Owen's name came
up 488 times in the Vancouver Sun alone before he left the Ombudsman's
job in July of 1992.
Of course, one
needs to be cautious about statistics. Mr. Kushner's Annual Reports
(www.ombud.gov.bc.ca) cite others in his favour including positive
performance numbers. Maybe
his style is to work diligently behind the scenes. And to be fair
to Kushner and his staff, they have
been hampered by severe budget cuts. Between 2002/03 and 2004/05,
his office's budget was cut
35 per cent by the government. These cuts have not yet been restored.
To cope with
these cuts, Kushner closed his Vancouver office and refused to accept
complaints
(with some exceptions) about local governments and professional
associations.
Whatever the
objective statistics, the Office of the Ombudsman no longer enjoys
the public profile
and status that it once enjoyed. This loss of profile and status
is bound to have negative consequences
for the effectiveness of the Ombudsman's office - whether that be
measured by the number of people
turning to him for help or governments looking or listening to him
for advice to get out of a jam.
Watchdogs must
be careful about barking too often and too loudly at the risk of
being ignored.
But bark forcefully and judiciously they must if they are to have
any bite at all.
On balance,
we believe that it is time for a new dog to nip at the heels of
government.
Jason Gratl
is the president of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association and Murray
Mollard is its
executive director.