Many people can recall a time when they were talked about behind their back. It never feels good and often results in suspicion and hard feelings. Nobody enjoys being treated like this.
Ontario Ombudsman André Marin feels the same way. He doesn’t like it when municipalities hold secret meetings and discussions to talk about our cities, our homes and our economic futures behind our backs.
In his recent report on government secrecy he used very strong language to indicate that taxpayers don’t like being treated like mushrooms – you know, kept in the dark and fed nothing but…compost. It isn’t supposed to be that way.
Municipal Act amendments in 2008, the so-called Sunshine Law, enforced the requirement for holding all meetings in public with very few, specific exceptions. It was explained that the local level of government is closest to all Canadians and citizens should not be shut out of the democratic process.
Until the changes were made, all complaints had to be filed through the courts. Now public complaints are handled by the Ombudsman’s office or a designated investigator. There is no fee for filing and the identity of the complainant is not released.
While completing this report the Ombudsman reviewed more than 500 complaints representing 191 Ontario municipalities. In the past year 45 violations were found. Although many cities are open and honest, some are “shockingly secretive” and others are openly defiant when faced with public complaints, petitions and difficult questions.
The findings indicate confusion among many municipal councillors who don’t understand what is required of them or what secrets they are allowed to keep. Some don’t realize that informal meetings over coffee or lunch are also included. Nothing is off the record.
It makes you wonder how many important municipal decisions are made off-site over double-doubles and crullers, out of sight of the public eye. That’s why the Ombudsman often has to rely on skimpy note-taking or the shaky recollection of somebody who attended the meeting at the donut shop.
One of the reasons municipalities play so free and loose with secrecy issues is because, other than a finger-wagging by the investigators there are no penalties for non-compliance. This may change. Some observers consider secrecy violations serious enough to warrant fines or jail time.
Although specific examples have surfaced to illustrate the abuse of secret meetings and negotiations, most municipalities are off the hook for now, at least until somebody decides to launch a complaint.
Thunder Bay was not mentioned by name and I am not aware of any on-going local investigations.
Still, City Clerk John Hannam was reported to be dismayed by the tone of the Ombudsman’s report and proactively denied the non-allegations about local municipal government. I don’t know if that puts us in the clear or not.
Personally, I was shocked and dismayed by a recent council debate regarding the Centennial Conservatory.
It appeared that council was unprepared, uninformed and somewhat disinterested. It was disappointing, especially considering how important the issue was to many local residents.
If city council is prepared to behave this way in a televised meeting with everybody watching, we can only speculate how they make decisions and protect the public interest in secret meetings when nobody is held accountable.
The intention of the Ombudsman was to increase public awareness of a situation that is becoming more widespread, based on the complaints received by his office.
I agree with his notion that democracy does not work effectively behind closed doors.
I find the whole situation a little troubling. When there is no accountability and no consequences, any decisions made will always be questionable.
