Ottawa’s former integrity commissioner and other experts are urging the province to reform its integrity watchdog system for municipalities — what they describe as a “cash cow” in the “Wild West” as some lawyers and firms hold monopolies of contracts.
Integrity commissioners who CBC spoke to agree the system is imperfect and change is welcome.
“We actually need a watchdog of the watchdogs,” said Dax D’Orazio, a political scientist who’s been monitoring integrity commissioner matters across the province.
In an effort to hold elected officials accountable for bad behaviours, the province mandated all 444 municipalities in 2019 to hire their own integrity commissioner. The watchdog is supposed to be independent, and among other roles, is tasked with investigating conduct and conflict of interest complaints against local politicians and boards.
Experts like D’Orazio say in theory, the government ethics policy is good and should help build public trust.
But in practice, due to a lack of provincial oversight and standardized processes, taxpayers can be footing “excessive billing” and conflict of interest issues are popping up in some communities. Some say the system is “broken,” questionable appointments are happening, and say major players are taking on dozens of contracts at a time.
D’Orazio, a post-doctoral fellow at the University of Guelph, says he’s seeing an “oligopoly” of integrity commissioners serving large regions.
“That’s not necessarily a problem in and of itself,” he explained, but symptomatic of a “relatively unregulated space.”
D’Orazio said the system is in “some serious need of reform” and the Ontario government should check in with municipalities for feedback, and place stricter guardrails — like on who should be appointed and better reporting mechanisms.
Former City of Ottawa integrity commissioner Robert Marleau says the system has no oversight and is costly. Marleau estimates one integrity complaint on a common misbehaviour allegation can easily cost taxpayers a minimum of $30,000.
For example, back in 2022, taxpayers in Elliot Lake, Ont., footed about $858,000 in bills for integrity commissioner reports during a four-year span.
Marleau says for some law firms who are specialized in this realm, “it’s a very legitimate activity.”
“But for many of them, it’s become a cash cow,” he said, suggesting the Law Society of Ontario also step in and regulate the legal practice in this field. The law society told CBC it’s not currently looking at further regulating lawyers as integrity commissioners.
Integrity watchdogs weigh in
Meanwhile, some integrity commissioners say there’s nothing wrong with bidding on open contracts, and say they’re best qualified for the job.
“So should I be criticized for — all of a sudden the province says, ‘hey, we need everybody to have an integrity commissioner’ — I’m going to apply for those jobs,” said lawyer John Mascarin with Aird & Berlis LLP, who oversees about 75 integrity commissioner contracts.
“I don’t see anything wrong with it.”
Somebody at the provincial level has to take the bull by the reins and say, you know what, enough with the Wild West.– Robert Shepherd, professor at Carleton University
Mascarin agrees the system “isn’t perfect” and it could use a new framework.
He says it’s currently a “toothless system” regarding penalties, because councillors need to vote on commissioners’ findings.
“What they’re really missing is councils to stand behind the code of conduct and actually seek to uphold it and not enable it to be contravened — and that’s the big failure of the system,” Mascarin said.
Guy Giorno, a partner with Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, says he decided to serve as integrity commissioner on top of his lawyer duties “to contribute to our democratic system.”
“I don’t do it for the money. I do it to give back to communities, to stay connected with this area of law,” Giorno said.
Giorno, watchdog for 20 municipalities, said he won’t “endorse or refute” the specific criticisms but agrees “the system needs to be improved.”
But he noted the current appointing mechanism is flawed, and said companies and firms “should not be in the business of this.”
“We pick integrity commissioners the way we buy road salt,” he said. “The province should step in and stop that, but it hasn’t, because it doesn’t care.”
Government ethics expert Robert Shepherd explained when the appointments became mandatory, many municipalities “begrudgingly” had to “plug a hole” with whoever they could find, usually through word of mouth.
“This is how you get a Fleming, right?” said Shepherd, referring to integrity commissioner Tony Fleming who oversees around 80 municipalities.
Last week, CBC reported Fleming came under scrutiny by some residents for conflicts of interest concerns for his dual role, also acting as the township lawyer. He did not respond to CBCs request for comment for this story.
Shepherd, a Carleton University professor, says only a handful of cities are doing it right — Ottawa, Toronto, Vaughan and Barrie — who have “well established” measures and vetting in place.
“The other municipalities in Ontario are at the mercy really of whoever they appoint,” said Shepherd.
“So do I go so far as to say the system is broken? No, because we haven’t built it yet.”
Province silent on timelines for solutions
Both Shepherd and Marleau say a centralized system might work better.
They say it’s time for the Ontario government — either through its ombudsman’s office or the provincial integrity commissioner’s office — to possibly expand mandates to cover municipal integrity commissioners or become an appeals body for challenges to decisions.
“I think the centralization would resolve this perception of bias,” explained Marleau, referring to conflicts of interest concerns that could arise in the current system.
And to offset the costs, Marleau suggests the province charge back municipalities for some costs as complaints arise from their jurisdiction.
“Somebody at the provincial level has to take the bull by the reins and say, you know what, enough with the Wild West,” said Shepherd.
The province’s Municipal Affairs Ministry declined an interview when asked about the criticisms of the current system.
Ontario integrity commissioner J. David Wake — whose office only deals with provincial matters and MPPs — sent the province a list of recommendations on Sept. 30 on how to improve the system.
In an email, the ministry said it’s reviewing the recommendations submitted but gave no timeline when CBC asked multiple times for an answer.
Wake recommends the province:
- Create a single, standardized code of conduct for all municipalities.
- Training should be required for integrity commissioners, councillors and municipal staff.
- Require each municipality to provide accessible information that identifies its integrity commissioner, the scope of jurisdiction, and contact information.
- Maintain a registry of all municipal integrity commissioners.
- Integrity commissioners should have access to a central database of all completed inquiries.
- Establish a standard process for integrity commissioner investigations.
- Consider a centralized or regional system to assist smaller municipalities manage costs.
- Require integrity commissioners to submit a public annual report.
- Establish a requirement for proactive financial disclosure.