;;

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

Integrity Commissioner- Value for Money?

While Hamilton deserves some credit for the installation on an Integrity Commissioner, it is undeniable that the it has been a rocky road in terms of the timing, quality and usefulness of the investigations conducted thus far, and the value that Hamiltonians are getting out of having the position of Integrity Commissioner.

We thus asked the city if there are any plans to do a value for money audit on the Integrity Commissioner position. The following is our Q/A:

Does the city have a plan to do a value for money audit for the position of the Integrity Commissioner? If so, when is this slotted for and if not, why is this not being considered?

The City’s Audit Services Division does not have a plan to conduct a value for money audit of the Integrity Commissioner. The Audit Services Division conducts audits of such things as City programs or services; the Integrity Commissioner does not fall into these categories. That office is responsible for the Code of Conduct for Members Council.

Can you provide Hamiltonians a copy of the plan for value for money audits that are in progress or scheduled to occur?

Council recently approved the work plan, for the next two years, of the Audit Services Division. I have attached the work plan to this email. The work plan begins on page 12. Please click here to see it. 

Your thoughts? Are you satisfied with the city's position on this matter? 

7 comments:

  1. The idea in principle was a good one. But it's execution was and is a disaster, in my view. Anyone looking at the last 5 reports of the I.C. can see that it has been a waste of time and money. At this point, I think it would be foolish to file a complaint with the I.C. I am also disappointed that a lawyer has taken on this role.

    The fact that there will be no value for money audit, makes no sense. The I.C. is a service or program like any other the city offers. It requires funds from the public purse, in exchange to a promised outcome that would add value to Hamilton and Hamiltonians. It should not be exempt from examination. It's a *&^% poor answer.
    Sorce

    ReplyDelete
  2. Marvin RyderMay 17, 2016

    Hard to argue with Sorce's comments but I wonder how many of the "last five reports" were by the old Integrity Commissioner? I'm actually unaware of many reports being issued by the new Integrity Commissioner. Perhaps the negativity is directed more at the person who held the job so with a change, maybe, better things may happen?

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousMay 17, 2016

    I don't think the new one has done any investigations. I could be wrong there, but that's what i heard. I agree with all the comments from Sorce and Marvin Ryder. I believe the last several reports of the previous IC were swept under the rug. if you read them, they are pretty interesting and name certain councillors who seem to have been given a pass. It is a complete waste of money. Don't waste your money on filing a complaint. in fact I think he mayor should pull the plug on this idea. It is nothing but a buffer for sitting politicians.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousMay 17, 2016

    Of course we should be doing a VFM/Performance Audit of this program! At the very least, we should know how much we've paid him each time he's said "I'm not investigating" - which I believe is over 5 dismissals in the last year. Other matters he's dealt with have been questions from Councillors. What has that cost us???

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousMay 18, 2016

    I don't know about this new guy, because I don't think he has ever investigated anyone during his term here so far. But with the other guy, it seemed that all these councillors were getting a pass. I recommend that people read the last 3 reports that he had done. Amazing what you will read.

    ReplyDelete
  6. EasternerMay 18, 2016

    Please include this in your workplan;

    To examine the outcomes related to the Integrity commissioner complaints and to determine whether there has been a cost benefit to Hamiltonians. To determine its real and perceived effectiveness.

    Then again, this would be reported up to council who are conflicted in this matter. The model will never work. People don't bite the hand that feeds them and if they try, they will go hungry. Best to scrap the whole thing. It's just an insurance policy for councilors.

    Laughable really

    ReplyDelete

Your comments are welcome. Please abide by the blog's policy on posting. This blog facilitates discussion from all sides of issues. Opposite viewpoints, spirited discussion and even pointed comments are welcome, provided they are respectful. Name calling is not allowed and any posts that violate the policy, will simply not be authorized to appear. This blog also reserves the right to exclude comments that are off topic or are otherwise unprofessional. This blog does not assume any liability whatsoever for comments posted. People posting comments or providing information on interviews, do so at their own risk.


Comments posted on this blog, may be used as excerpts in whole or in part, in other media sources .
This blog believes in freedom of speech and operates in the context of a democratic society, which many have fought and died for.

Views expressed by commentators or in articles that appear here, cannot be assumed to be espoused by The Hamiltonian staff or its publisher.