Accountability is fading in politics

System’s checks and balances undermined

I can’t decide whether recent events at Queen’s Park remind me more of childhood trips to the circus or that feeling I get watching the babysitter investigate a noise in the basement in one of those teenage horror flicks.

Whether you want to laugh or turn away in fear, there is no question that it’s crazy town at the Ontario Legislature, and we should all be concerned.

And it’s not simply Doug Ford’s nowabandoned attempt to use the notwithstanding clause. The premier’s actions appear to be a symptom of a larger problem — the erosion of political accountability at both the provincial and federal levels.

Remember accountability? It’s how even those at the top are answerable for their actions. It serves to check excesses, prevent the consolidation of power in the hands of a few and ensure that opposing views are heard.

It’s really important in politics. As someone who has been part of a number of governments, I have seen how those with corner offices can become very comfortable, very quickly. Not only do they start to feel the rules don’t apply to them, but they also start to believe in the superiority of their own wisdom and insight.

To curb this tendency, our system contains numerous checks and balances. Lately, however, they seem to be increasingly undermined.

Premiers and prime ministers, for example, assume power because their party holds the most seats in the legislature or the House of Commons. Shouldn’t that mean that the party caucus should be able to hold them to account?

Not so fast. The power to elect leaders resides with the political party, not the caucus.

An MPP or MP could challenge their leader directly but it would be a one-way ticket to the farthest reaches of the backbench. The result is that everyone has to toe the line.

And what of cabinet? In fairness, Ford apparently did consult his cabinet on using the notwithstanding clause. Considering his enthusiasm for the move, however, it is hard to imagine ministers being little more than a combination focus group and rubber stamp — terms used with increasing frequency to describe the role of cabinet at both the provincial and federal levels.

So who is left? The auditor general? Although the Ford government, unlike the previous Liberals, have accepted her ruling on some of the government’s accounting practices, they snubbed her in hiring outside consultants to review the province’s finances.

Even opposition parties are having a hard time. Successive governments in both Ottawa and Queen’s Park have worked hard to limit the opposition’s ability to criticize. Not to be outdone, the Ford government has introduced its own set of tighter rules to give the government more power in the Legislature.

Aren’t voters the ultimate boss? Although I am no fan of changing our electoral system, it is hard to ignore the fact that roughly 60 per cent of voters didn’t vote for either our provincial or federal governments.

One remaining holdout is the courts. Not a problem, says our premier, if you don’t like a judge’s ruling, use the notwithstanding clause. And despite the withdrawal of the recent threat, he has made it clear that he is willing to use the clause in the future.

There is no question we need a strong leader in the current political climate, but there has to be a balance. Restoring accountability in government requires all of us to speak out and demand significant change.

John Milloy is a former MPP and Ontario Liberal cabinet minister currently serving as the director of the Centre for Public Ethics and assistant professor of public ethics at Martin Luther University College, and the inaugural practitioner in residence in Wilfrid Laurier University’s Political Science department. He is also a lecturer in the University of Waterloo. Email: jmilloy@luther.wlu.ca. Twitter @John_Milloy. A version of this column originally appeared at http://www.qpbriefing.com/