Chapter 3

TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND PARLIAMENT

a)  The Perennial Problem

During this session of Parliament, both Sub-Committees have heard witnesses’ views about how the federal government deals with horizontal questions concerning children or disability.  The Sub-Committee on Persons with Disabilities has heard a number of witnesses express ongoing frustrations with the slow pace at which the government is proceeding with the disability agenda. The Sub-Committee on Children and Youth at Risk is concerned with, among other things, how the government intends to develop indicators to measure and monitor the Early Childhood Development Initiative (ECDI).  Both Sub-Committees have heard about the need for ongoing assurance of transparency in the federal/provincial/territorial agreements that have become important instruments for achieving positive outcomes for children and people with disabilities.

None of this is new.  During the last Parliament, both Sub-Committees tabled reports in the House of Commons that called for better horizontal management of horizontal issues, across the federal government.  They were motivated by frustration about the amount of work that had been done and the number of recommendations that had gone unanswered, let alone unimplemented.  These reports raised, directly or indirectly, a series of questions that remain unaddressed:

• Why do departments have difficulty collaborating with each other in developing effective policies and programs?
• Why is it so difficult for the current structures of government to deal with a horizontal issue like disability or children?[1]

In these reports, both Sub-Committees identified the need for an integrated public policy framework for horizontal issues.  The government responded positively to both reports and yet our hearings two years later revealed that this public policy framework has evolved differently in areas of concern to each Sub-Committee.  First Ministers signed the Early Childhood Development Initiative in September 2000, which provided the policy framework for federal, provincial and territorial investments for young children, as well as a commitment to develop, and report on, comparable indicators.  In the case of disabilities, the public policy framework has not resulted in integrated and comprehensive programming by federal departments and agencies.

b)  Finding the Framework

The Auditor General provided a clue as to why the situation has evolved differently for children and for persons with disabilities.  In his recent report, he stated that “in managing a horizontal issue for results, it is critical to have a co-ordinating function that is supported by senior management (particularly in a lead department) and that has enough resources to do the job.”[2]  Realistically, we know that because the commitment of funds for children has been greater than the commitment of funds for persons with disabilities, the coordinating function has assumed a higher priority and itself takes a higher profile and the issue has received support from the political level as well as by senior public servants.

The Sub-Committees believe that the issue of the federal government’s accountability for its actions (or lack of actions) for horizontal issues - in this case disability and children - needs to be dealt with on an urgent basis.  Two years ago, both Sub-Committees made some extensive observations and recommendations that seem not to have moved very far forward.  While the First Ministers have signed the Early Childhood Development Initiative, the funds allocated on the part of the federal government could arguably be described as a first step, albeit a significant achievement.  Moreover, the accountability for outcomes has yet to be clarified.  In looking at the whole question of accountability and reporting in his December 2000 report, the Auditor General asked whether one way to move beyond planning and toward action might be to introduce accountability legislation.  Recognizing that legislation alone will not ensure good reporting or managing for results, the Auditor General suggested that it could serve as a signal.[3]

The Auditor General’s report sets out certain conditions that need to be met  for success in dealing with horizontal initiatives.  The key elements of the report’s framework for managing horizontal issues are:

• Identifying an effective co-ordination structure;
• Agreeing on common objectives, results and strategies;
• Measuring results to track performance;
• Using information to improve performance;

Effectively reporting performance.[4]