Governments should do more to set targets and measure and report on their performance, and public accounts committees should do more to help governments improve their performance, according to the chair of the Ontario Legislature's Standing Committee on Public Accounts, Norman Sterling.

Mr. Sterling, who has chaired the Ontario committee since 2003, outlined his views in an interview with CCAF Executive Director Michael Eastman and senior associate Greg Gertz. His comments reflect his 29 consecutive years as a Member of the Ontario Parliament, including extensive experience as a Minister in the governments of Bill Davis and Mike Harris.

Norman Sterling is one of the longest-serving members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Currently representing the eastern-Ontario riding of Lanark-Carleton, he was first elected in 1977 and was re-elected in 1981, 1985, 1987, 1990, 1995, 1999 and 2003. He worked as a lawyer and engineer before entering public life.

Mr. Sterling has held numerous Cabinet posts, including Minister of the Environment, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Minister of Transportation and Attorney General. In addition to chairing the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, he is the Progressive Conservative Party's critic for Democratic Renewal and for Health Promotion.

PAC ROLE SHOULD GROW, ONTARIO CHAIR SAYS

CCAF: What is the main challenge that your public accounts committee faces?

Norman Sterling: We have an excellent public accounts committee in Ontario, but I think our function has to change.

What frustrates me is the seeming unwillingness of departments and agencies to collect and present meaningful information on the performance of their organizations. In case after case we find organizations that disregard performance targets, make decisions based on inadequate information, or continue practices that do not appear to make sense.

When our committee asks questions about these issues, the answers are generally not very satisfactory. For example, the default rate of our student loan program is around 17%, compared to 4.5% in the United States. Several years ago, Ontario set a target of 10%. When we recently asked the director of the program about the status of that target, he simply said the target no longer exists.

Another example: Ontario spends $450 million a year on children's mental health services. But when we asked for data on how the province's roughly 250 agencies spend this money, the Ministry told us they don't collect this information. As my colleague from another party, Shelley Martel, put it, how can you run a program without basic data?

There are other examples. A private sector company used to be responsible for parts of Ontario's air ambulance service. Now a government corporation has taken over the most difficult aspects of this job. As well, ambulance response times were not being adequately monitored, and what data were available indicated that the required response times were only being met about 50% of the time. Why did we do this?

CCAF: Are these the kinds of issues Ministers should be paying attention to?

Norman Sterling: Having been a Minister, I think it's fair to say this level of detail is too nitty-gritty for Ministers to address. But I do think that the public accounts committee, working closely with the Auditor General, could make a real difference in identifying problems in programs and helping devise ways to improve them. Our experience and outsider's perspective often let us see what needs to be done. In carrying out our oversight role, we could be a real benefit to Ministers and the government.

CCAF: What do you think the public accounts committee could do?

Reports available to CCAF members CCAF members can obtain copies of both CCAF research reports cited in this Update: Parliamentary Oversight – Committees and Relationships – A Guide to Strengthening Public Accounts Committees examines the relationships between public accounts committees, auditors and government managers. A product of our Accountability and Audit Research Program, it provides readers with unique tools for strengthening the powers and practices of legislative oversight committees. Toward Producing and Using Better Public Performance Reporting – Perspectives and Solutions is the latest output of our long-running and highly successful Public Performance Reporting Research Program. It looks at how legislators, the media and the general public use the public performance reports that governments produce. It suggests ways for governments to create more relevant public reports that resonate with users, and encourages users to make more and better use of this material. These groundbreaking reports are available exclusively from CCAF.

Norman Sterling: When the Auditor General finds a problem with a program, I would like the committee to direct the responsible department or agency to collect specific information related to the program. The committee should determine what information it needs to provide effective oversight of the program. This information could include performance relative to targets, comparisons to other jurisdictions, and so on. Then this information, once collected, should be released to the public, perhaps through a Web site that is not controlled by the government.

I think we could go even further. I could see bringing in a consultant who would examine a program in detail and then design measures to drive excellence. This would be someone who could go in deeper than the Auditor General and the public accounts committee, and recommend concrete ways to improve performance. For example, in the case of our student loans program, the consultant might say that the government should terminate loans to any institution with a loss rate greater than 10%.

Ministers aren't capable of looking at programs with this level of detail, and officials are often unwilling to take a tough line with their clients or partners. If a Ministry will not or cannot fix a program, then we could help.

CCAF: As you know, CCAF recently published the final research report for our project on Parliamentary Oversight. One of our observations is that to be effective, a public accounts committee should have a strong relationship with the Auditor General. Would you agree that this is important?

Norman Sterling: Absolutely. In Ontario, we work very closely with Auditor General Jim McCarter, and we often bring public attention to issues that he has identified. We make a good team, each with our distinct role.

In my opinion, an Auditor General needs to find practical solutions to real problems, even if the solutions aren't 100% perfect. This means acting as more than an accountant. Jim succeeds in doing this.

CCAF: Our report also encourages committees to establish follow-up processes and procedures.

Norman Sterling: This is important, and that's why I put so much emphasis on the development of concrete ideas for improving programs, linked to the collection of relevant information. It is much easier for us to follow-up on our recommendations if we can say, “Here are the data on how the program was performing, here is what the ministry has done to implement our recommendations, and here is how the program is performing now.”

A critical part of this is improved public performance reporting by governments. Our committee needs departments and agencies to provide us with useful information in a form that will allow us to draw conclusions about how well a program is performing. This is a point that I know CCAF has stressed in your report on Producing and Using Better Public Performance Reporting. Good performance reports are an important factor in the effectiveness of public accounts committees.

CCAF: How important is it for public accounts committees to be effective?

Sterling: Public accounts committees are the final link in the accountability process, and for that reason their effectiveness is very important.

These committees may not receive a lot of public attention – I know ours in Ontario doesn't. But if they are taken seriously by the public service, then they can have a positive impact. And if programs improve because of our recommendations, then we all benefit.

That is why I want to push Ontario's public accounts committee to go beyond what we are doing now. I know there is potential for us to do even more.

Ontario AG supports improved performance reporting

The agenda of Ontario's public accounts committee is largely driven by the value-for-money audits of the Office of the Auditor General.

Jim McCarter, Ontario's Auditor General, says that in the three Annual Reports he has issued, the need for more reliable and relevant information for decision-making has been a constant theme, especially in connection with his Office's value-for-money audit focus.

“When we report on performance, we also make recommendations for improving performance measures and reporting,” he says. “For example, we might identify the kinds of performance information that decision-makers and stakeholders should have available to support good decision-making and accountability.”

McCarter is pleased the Ontario Ministry of Finance will participate in CCAF's Sloan Program. The program is intended to increase the relevance and use of public performance reporting in jurisdictions across Canada. “The Ontario government is committed to publicly reporting program performance measures,” McCarter says. “However, improvements are still needed and I anticipate the work done by the CCAF and the Sloan Foundation will prove useful to Ontario in making these improvements.”

Copyright © 2006 CCAF-FCVI
Privacy Policy