Good governance is a cornerstone of organizational excellence. It builds public confidence and trust by maximizing effectiveness and mitigating risks. Public sector entities often face increased scrutiny and political pressures while contending with heightened expectations for transparency and higher standards of performance. To respond, it is important for public sector entities to develop the tools needed to practise good governance.
On October 10, 2018, public sector lawyers and other attendees gathered to discuss the unique needs and considerations of corporate governance for public sector entities. The program’s three panelists were Karl Salgo, executive director, Institute on Governance (IOG); Grace Knakowski, secretary to the commission, Ontario Securities Commission (OSC); and Janice Vauthier, chair, Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB), Health Services Appeal and Review Board (HSARB) and Hepatitis C Assistance Plan Review Committee.
Each of the speakers provided valuable insights into various public sector governance structures, requirements and best practices, and explored how public sector governance differs from private sector corporate governance.
Karl Salgo discussed how to effectively establish a public agency governance framework. Mr. Salgo reviewed five principles for good governance, which are based upon the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Principles. These UNDP-based principles claim universal recognition:
- Legitimacy and voice
- Direction and purpose
- Effective performance
- Accountability and transparency
- Fairness and ethical behaviour
The focus of Mr. Salgo’s presentation was the idea that public sector governance exists on a continuum, with varying degrees of autonomy and control. Public sector bodies have complex accountability and governance structures that impact the degree of autonomy available. Mr. Salgo discussed some of the IOG’s analytic tools; the Autonomy Index, the Governance Continuum, and the Governance Scorecard, developed by the IOG as a result of their governance trends-related research. These tools are used to assess public bodies and provide advisory services to address the practical challenges that public sector organizations face.
Grace Knakowski explored the difference between public and private sector governance. Ms. Knakowski discussed the important distinctions between the two, despite their similarities. The mandate of public sector entities is in the broader public interest, while in private sector entities there is a commercial mandate which focuses on making a profit. Ms. Knakowski also mentioned that in the private sector, corporations are accountable to their shareholders, whereas public sector entities are directly accountable to the government through the responsible Minister.
Ms. Knakowski explained that decisions rendered by public agencies affect individual lives, often on a very personal level, and so it is in the public’s interest that these agencies are accountable to the government. As such, having a strong and successful public governance framework becomes a high priority. Ms. Knakowski argued that the public interest is best served when there are elements of a strong governance framework put in place. In her view, there are six elements for a successful public governance framework:
- Define public agency
- Set clear roles
- Create a mandate and processes
- Report accountabilities
- Foster corporate culture
- Engage with stakeholders
Janice Vauthier was the final speaker of the afternoon. Ms. Vauthier discussed how to effectively manage oversight of adjudicative processes and procedures. Ms. Vauthier introduced the key features of the Accountability, Governance and Appointments Act, 2009 (ATAGAA). The purpose of ATAGAA is to ensure that adjudicative tribunals are accountable, transparent and efficient in their operations while remaining independent in their decision-making.
One of the key governance and accountability features of ATAGAA is the appointment of members through a competitive, merit-based process. ATAGAA requires that every adjudicative tribunal make its public accountability documents available to the public. To achieve compliance with the legislative requirements of ATAGAA, adjudicative tribunals must create the following eight governance documents: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), business plan, annual report, mandate and mission statement, consultation policy, service standard policy, ethics plan, and member accountability framework.
The program concluded with a brief question and answer period which touched on the importance of training new member appointees, how to develop and implement guidelines for governance, and how to establish quality control measures without fettering the discretion of decision-makers.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Suman Furmah is a recent graduate of the University of Windsor’s Faculty of Law and is currently articling with the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).
Any article or other information or content expressed or made available in this Section is that of the respective author and not of the OBA.