/Users/andrea/_magisterarbeit/korpus/clean/trainkorpus/34/file_170.html NN ----------------------------------------- : REMARKS NNS TO TO STANDING JJ COMMITTEE NN ON IN THE DT OMBUDSMAN NN November NP 27 CD , , 1996 CD Roberta NP Jamieson NP Check NP against IN delivery NN Ombudsman NN INTRODUCTION NN Good JJ morning NN and CC thank VV you PP for IN the DT opportunity NN to TO appear VV as IN your PP$ first JJ witness NN to TO these DT public JJ hearings NNS . SENT These DT hearings NNS have VHP been VBN called VVN to TO review VV the DT recommendations NNS of IN the DT 1993 CD Report NN of IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP on IN the DT Ombudsman NN along IN with IN the DT revisions NNS to TO these DT recommendations NNS contained VVN in IN the DT Working NP Paper NP recently RB issued VVD by IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP . SENT It PP is VBZ worth JJ noting VVG at IN the DT outset NN that IN a DT report NN prepared VVD three CD years NNS ago RB may MD not RB accurately RB reflect VV current JJ circumstances NNS . SENT This DT is VBZ evident JJ in IN those DT areas NNS where WRB practices NNS commented VVD on IN in IN the DT 1993 CD report NN have VHP changed VVN . SENT It PP may MD also RB be VB the DT case NN with IN respect NN to TO the DT changing VVG membership NN of IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP and CC the DT evolution NN during IN the DT intervening VVG period NN of IN the DT relationship NN between IN the DT Ombudsman NN and CC the DT Legislature NP . SENT In IN my PP$ presentation NN today NN I PP will MD identify VV the DT positive JJ aspects NNS of IN the DT 1993 CD report NN and CC address VV those DT areas NNS where WRB we PP can MD work VV together RB to TO strengthen VV the DT role NN of IN the DT Ombudsman NN . SENT But CC at IN the DT outset NN I PP would MD like VV to TO put VV on IN record NN my PP$ grave JJ concern NN with IN proposed VVN changes NNS to TO the DT existing JJ relationship NN between IN my PP$ office NN and CC the DT Legislature NP . SENT There EX are VBP several JJ recommendations NNS which WDT present VVP a DT direct JJ challenge NN to TO the DT independence NN and CC integrity NN of IN Ombudsman NN Ontario NP as IN an DT institution NN empowered VVN to TO protect VV the DT public's NNS right RB to TO fairness NN in IN the DT administration NN of IN public JJ services NNS . SENT Every DT day NN my PP$ office NN receives VVZ enquiries NNS and CC complaints NNS from IN people NNS who WP feel VVP they PP have VHP been VBN mistreated VVN by IN an DT agency NN of IN the DT provincial JJ government NN . SENT These DT are VBP people NNS from IN all DT walks NNS of IN life NN , , and CC many JJ of IN them PP are VBP among IN the DT most RBS vulnerable JJ in IN our PP$ society NN . SENT persons NNS with IN disabilities NNS , , senior JJ citizens NNS , , people NNS who WP are VBP economically RB disadvantaged JJ , , and CC others NNS who WP depend VVP on IN government NN services NNS . SENT When WRB these DT people NNS come VVP to TO my PP$ office NN with IN a DT complaint NN , , they PP are VBP seeking VVG a DT court NN of IN last JJ resort NN , , one CD which WDT they PP can MD trust VV to TO be VB impartial JJ , , fair JJ and CC completely RB independent JJ of IN any DT outside JJ influence NN . SENT The DT right NN of IN complaint NN to TO an DT independent JJ Officer NP of IN the DT Legislature NP provides VVZ a DT mechanism NN to TO hold VV government NN accountable JJ to TO the DT people NNS . SENT If IN the DT public NN is VBZ to TO perceive VV this DT right NN of IN complaint NN as IN a DT genuine JJ feature NN of IN our PP$ democracy NN , , it PP must MD be VB assured VVN that IN complaints NNS can MD be VB made VVN , , without IN fear NN of IN reprisal NN , , to TO an DT Ombudsman NN who WP is VBZ independent JJ , , not RB only RB from IN those DT agencies NNS being VBG complained VVN against IN , , but CC also RB from IN government NN and CC the DT political JJ influences NNS of IN the DT Legislature NP . SENT My PP$ ability NN to TO conduct VV investigations NNS thoroughly RB , , and CC to TO issue VV recommendations NNS that WDT provide VVP a DT remedy NN for IN unfairness NN , , are VBP the DT basic JJ tools NNS which WDT embody VVP the DT independence NN of IN my PP$ office NN and CC which WDT serve VVP to TO protect VV the DT credibility NN of IN the DT institution NN . SENT In IN my PP$ view NN the DT effect NN of IN a DT number NN of IN the DT Committee's NP recommendations NNS would MD be VB to TO dramatically RB alter VV the DT existing JJ arms NNS length NN relationship NN with IN the DT Legislature NP and CC to TO replace VV it PP with IN a DT regime NN that WDT establishes VVZ the DT Standing NP Committee NP as IN a DT Board NP of IN Directors NPS and CC the DT Ombudsman NN as IN an DT employee NN of IN this DT Board NP . SENT Given VVN the DT present JJ structure NN of IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP , , which WDT comprises VVZ a DT majority NN of IN government NN members NNS , , such PDT an DT arrangement NN would MD make VV it PP impossible JJ to TO avoid VV both CC the DT appearance NN and CC the DT reality NN of IN a DT fundamental JJ compromise NN to TO the DT Ombudsman's NP independence NN . SENT The DT door NN would MD be VB opened VVN for IN government NN , , through IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP , , to TO exercise VV direct JJ control NN over IN Ombudsman NN investigations NNS , , finances NNS and CC general JJ operations NNS . SENT In IN such JJ circumstances NNS the DT public NN would MD quite RB properly RB lose VV confidence NN in IN the DT credibility NN of IN the DT institution NN . SENT Twenty CD one CD years NNS ago IN the DT Ombudsman NN was VBD established VVN by IN an DT Act NP of IN the DT Legislature NP which WDT created VVD a DT clearly RB defined VVN reporting VVG relationship NN to TO the DT Assembly NP . SENT The DT Act NP holds VVZ the DT Ombudsman NN accountable JJ through IN a DT requirement NN to TO report VV annually RB , , and CC by IN discretion NN to TO report VV on IN any DT investigation NN which WDT cannot NN be VB successfully RB resolved VVN through IN a DT government NN Minister NP or CC by IN the DT Premier NP . SENT This DT legislation NN has VHZ allowed VVN for IN a DT relationship NN to TO evolve VV between IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP and CC the DT Ombudsman NN which WDT has VHZ been VBN characterized VVN over IN time NN by IN a DT more JJR or CC less RBR creative JJ tension NN . SENT Each DT of IN my PP$ three CD predecessors NNS experienced VVN at IN one CD time NN or CC another DT a DT degree NN of IN conflict NN relating VVG to TO the DT respective JJ roles NNS of IN the DT Legislature NP and CC the DT Ombudsman NN , , and CC were VBD engaged VVN in IN ongoing JJ attempts NNS to TO reconcile VV the DT issues NNS of IN independence NN and CC accountability NN . SENT This DT review NN then RB is VBZ the DT latest JJS stage NN of IN a DT long JJ and CC continuing JJ effort NN to TO provide VV certainty NN and CC clarity NN to TO this DT relationship NN . SENT Perhaps RB we PP are VBP finally RB about RB to TO achieve VV a DT positive JJ resolution NN . SENT I PP would MD certainly RB like VV to TO express VV my PP$ sincere JJ commitment NN to TO do VV everything NN I PP can MD to TO promote VV a DT productive JJ and CC co NP operative JJ working VVG relationship NN between IN my PP$ office NN and CC the DT Standing NP Committee NP . SENT In IN particular JJ , , I PP would MD like VV to TO emphasize VV my PP$ desire NN to TO make VV this DT review NN process NN work NN . SENT I PP would MD hope VV we PP can MD agree VV as IN a DT basic JJ point NN of IN departure NN on IN a DT common JJ goal NN of IN strengthening VVG not RB only RB our PP$ relationship NN , , but CC also RB the DT basic JJ principles NNS and CC function NN of IN the DT Ombudsman NN as IN an DT independent JJ institution NN . SENT If IN together RB we PP are VBP successful JJ in IN meeting VVG this DT objective NN , , such PDT an DT outcome NN will MD ultimately RB serve VV to TO provide VV lasting JJ benefits NNS to TO the DT people NNS of IN Ontario NP . SENT RESPONSE NN TO TO RECOMMENDATIONS NNS In IN the DT interest NN of IN establishing VVG what WP I PP believe VVP are VBP the DT main JJ reference NN points NNS among IN the DT 44 CD Recommendations NNS , , I PP have VHP identified VVN eight CD themes NNS and CC organized VVN the DT Recommendations NNS into IN corresponding JJ categories NNS . SENT For IN this DT presentation NN I PP would MD like VV to TO submit VV my PP$ responses NNS to TO the DT Recommendations NNS in IN the DT following VVG order NN . SENT 1 LS . SENT Annual JJ Report NP and CC Ombudsplan NP 2 CD , , 4 CD , , 26 CD , , 31 CD , , 33 CD , , 35 CD , , 36 CD , , 37 CD 2 CD . SENT Public JJ Education NP 2 CD , , 3 CD a DT , , 3 CD b SYM , , 4 CD , , 5 CD 3 CD . SENT Changes NNS to TO the DT Act NP 6 CD , , 7 CD , , 8 CD , , 9 CD , , 10 CD , , 11 CD , , 12 CD , , 13 CD , , 15 CD , , 21 CD , , 22 CD , , 32 CD 4 CD . SENT Terms NNS of IN Reference NN and CC Role NN of IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP 18 CD 44 CD 5 CD . SENT a DT Rule NN Making VVG Process NN 27 CD , , 28 CD , , 34 CD b SYM Rule NN Making VVG Content NN 1 CD , , 14 CD , , 29 CD , , 30 CD , , 33 CD , , 35 CD , , 44 CD 6 CD . SENT Monitor NP and CC Review NP 16 CD , , 17 CD , , 25 CD , , 44 CD 7 CD . SENT Estimates NNS and CC Directives NNS 23 CD , , 24 CD , , 38 CD , , 39 CD , , 40 CD , , 41 CD , , 44 CD 8 CD . SENT Other JJ Issues NP 19 CD , , 20 CD , , 42 CD , , 43 CD 1 CD . SENT ANNUAL JJ REPORT NN AND CC OMBUDSPLAN NP The NP Annual NP Report NP is VBZ a DT key JJ focus NN point NN for IN the DT Ombudsman's NP activities NNS every DT year NN . SENT It PP is VBZ the DT main JJ vehicle NN through IN which WDT we PP provide VVP the DT Legislature NP and CC the DT public NN with IN basic JJ information NN about IN the DT fulfillment NN of IN the DT Ombudsman's NP mandate NN . SENT It PP is VBZ also RB an DT outlet NN for IN the DT Ombudsman NN to TO identify VV any DT trends NNS or CC concerns NNS arising VVG from IN complaints NNS received VVN during IN the DT course NN of IN the DT year NN . SENT The DT Annual NP Report NP also RB sets VVZ the DT direction NN and CC agenda NN for IN the DT year NN ahead RB and CC provides VVZ an DT opportunity NN to TO raise VV issues NNS for IN the DT attention NN of IN the DT Legislature NP and CC to TO make VV recommendations NNS . SENT The DT requirement NN to TO table NN a DT Report NP is VBZ an DT essential JJ accountability NN check NN for IN the DT Legislature NP and CC it PP is VBZ therefore RB crucial JJ that IN this DT Report NP be VB thorough JJ and CC informative JJ , , and CC accessible JJ as IN a DT document NN . SENT Recommendations NNS 4 CD , , 36 CD and CC 37 CD provide VVP suggestions NNS for IN information NN that WDT should MD be VB included VVN in IN the DT Annual NP Report NP . SENT Such JJ proposals NNS are VBP welcomed VVN and CC reflect VV the DT value NN of IN ongoing JJ dialogue NN and CC a DT positive JJ working VVG relationship NN between IN the DT Committee NP and CC my PP$ Office NN . SENT It PP should MD be VB noted VVN that IN much RB of IN the DT specific JJ information NN being VBG requested VVN is VBZ already RB provided VVN in IN our PP$ Annual JJ Reports NNS . SENT Recommendations NNS 31 CD , , 33 CD and CC 35 CD also RB address VV this DT topic NN but CC raise VV a DT number NN of IN issues NNS which WDT require VVP closer JJR examination NN . SENT In IN response NN , , I PP propose VVP that IN we PP establish VV a DT consultative JJ process NN whereby WRB the DT Committee NP shares NNS with IN me FW its PP$ feedback NN on IN each DT Annual JJ Report NN and CC raises VVZ any DT issues NNS it PP feels VVZ should MD be VB addressed VVN . SENT In IN turn NN , , I PP would MD have VH the DT opportunity NN to TO advise VV the DT Committee NP of IN any DT constraints NNS that WDT may MD apply VV in IN implementing VVG its PP$ suggestions NNS . SENT Recommendation NN 31 CD as IN revised VVN in IN the DT October NP 1996 CD Working NP Paper NP can MD serve VV as IN an DT example NN of IN how WRB this DT process NN might MD work VV . SENT It PP suggests VVZ that IN all DT tentative JJ and CC final JJ reports NNS be VB described VVN and CC included VVN in IN the DT Report NP . SENT Generally RB it PP would MD be VB a DT good JJ idea NN to TO report VV the DT outcome NN of IN such JJ cases NNS . SENT Much RB of IN the DT success NN of IN the DT Ombudsman NN results NNS from IN the DT cooperation NN of IN governmental JJ organizations NNS implementing VVG my PP$ findings NNS subsequent JJ to TO an DT investigation NN , , without IN the DT need NN to TO take VV the DT matter NN to TO the DT Premier NP or CC the DT Legislature NP . SENT However RB , , there EX may MD be VB circumstances NNS where WRB reporting NN is VBZ not RB advisable JJ for IN reasons NNS of IN confidentiality NN . SENT For IN example NN , , where WRB the DT facts NNS of IN a DT case NN are VBP widely RB known VVN to TO be VB associated VVN with IN a DT particular JJ individual NN , , it PP may MD be VB impossible JJ to TO report VV on IN this DT without IN identifying VVG the DT individual NN . SENT In IN addition NN , , it PP should MD be VB noted VVN that IN the DT Ombudsman NN Act NN does VVZ not RB allow VV me PP to TO publish VV the DT actual JJ tentative JJ report NN because IN by IN definition NN , , it PP represents VVZ an DT interim JJ step NN in IN the DT investigation NN process NN . SENT I PP can MD , , however RB , , report VV the DT substance NN of IN the DT complaint NN , , along RB with IN my PP$ findings NNS and CC any DT resolution NN , , all DT of IN which WDT would MD be VB of IN interest NN to TO the DT Standing NP Committee NP . SENT Numerical JJ summaries NNS of IN these DT cases NNS can MD also RB be VB reported VVN . SENT From IN my PP$ experience NN it PP is VBZ clear JJ that IN there EX are VBP good JJ reasons NNS why WRB the DT Ombudsman NN Act NP provides VVZ for IN the DT Ombudsman's NP discretion NN in IN deciding VVG what WP to TO publish VV in IN the DT Annual NP Report NP . SENT While IN I PP am VBP willing JJ to TO be VB as RB responsive JJ as RB possible JJ to TO the DT Committee's NP concerns NNS regarding VVG the DT information NN it PP would MD like VV to TO see VV , , I NN cannot NN concede VVP final JJ responsibility NN for IN deciding VVG what WP is VBZ contained VVN in IN my PP$ Annual JJ Report NP . SENT Recommendations NNS 2 CD and CC 26 CD refer VVP to TO an DT Ombudsplan NP . SENT The DT idea NN of IN sharing VVG my PP$ goals NNS and CC plans NNS for IN the DT year NN ahead RB with IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP is VBZ a DT good JJ one CD . SENT In IN fact NN , , my PP$ office NN already RB has VHZ a DT practice NN of IN developing VVG plans NNS against IN which WDT outcomes NNS are VBP measured VVN , , and CC using VVG the DT results NNS as IN part NN of IN the DT material NN for IN the DT Annual NP Report NP . SENT These DT plans NNS set VVD the DT operational JJ objectives NNS for IN the DT fiscal JJ year NN and CC I PP have VHP no DT difficulty NN in IN sharing VVG this DT information NN with IN the DT Committee NP . SENT Beyond IN this DT , , I PP need VVP to TO seek VV clarification NN of IN what WP is VBZ meant VVN by IN an DT Ombudsplan NP . SENT It PP would MD not RB be VB possible JJ to TO present VV a DT plan NN for IN investigations NNS , , if IN this DT is VBZ what WP is VBZ being VBG sought VVN , , because IN it PP would MD be VB inappropriate JJ for IN me PP to TO disclose VV in IN advance NN my PP$ investigative JJ priorities NNS . SENT I PP should MD add VV that IN any DT plans NNS that WDT are VBP presented VVN would MD not RB be VB offered VVN for IN approval NN , , but CC rather RB as IN an DT exchange NN of IN information NN . SENT To TO summarize VV on IN this DT topic NN , , I PP am VBP very RB open JJ to TO receiving VVG input NN from IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP about IN the DT activities NNS reported VVD annually RB , , and CC I PP agree VVP to TO share VV my PP$ plans NNS as IN part NN of IN an DT ongoing JJ working NN relationship NN . SENT Given VVN that IN I PP have VHP not RB received VVN an DT invitation NN to TO discuss VV the DT Annual JJ Report NN for IN a DT number NN of IN years NNS , , I PP would MD welcome VV the DT opportunity NN to TO increase VV the DT frequency NN of IN contact NN between IN us PP . SENT 2 LS . SENT PUBLIC JJ EDUCATION NN Getting VVG the DT message NN out RP to TO the DT Ontario NP public NN that IN the DT Ombudsman NN exists VVZ , , and CC promoting VVG increased JJ awareness NN of IN the DT public's JJ right NN of IN complaint NN , , along RB with IN information NN on IN how WRB and CC when WRB this DT right NN can MD be VB exercised VVN , , is VBZ a DT critical JJ part NN of IN the DT Ombudsman's NP job NN . SENT We PP do VVP our PP$ best JJS in IN this DT regard NN with IN limited JJ resources NNS . SENT Certainly RB the DT pressure NN has VHZ intensified VVN to TO find VV ways NNS of IN continuing VVG this DT function NN in IN the DT face NN of IN a DT 20 CD cut NN in IN the DT allocation NN to TO my PP$ office NN this DT year NN . SENT But CC in IN general NN I PP would MD always RB agree VV that DT more RBR can MD be VB done VVN . SENT For IN some DT time NN my PP$ office NN has VHZ focused VVN our PP$ public JJ education NN strategies NNS toward IN those DT people NNS who WP are VBP least RB likely JJ to TO know VV about IN the DT Ombudsman's NP services NNS and CC often RB the DT most RBS likely JJ to TO need VV them PP . SENT Recommendation NN 3 CD b SYM suggests VVZ using VVG the DT established VVN communications NN channels NNS of IN governmental JJ organizations NNS as IN an DT effective JJ way NN to TO reach VV users NNS of IN specific JJ government NN services NNS . SENT This DT approach NN has VHZ been VBN used VVN successfully RB in IN a DT number NN of IN settings NNS but CC can MD only RB work VV when WRB there EX is VBZ a DT clear JJ distinction NN between IN the DT Ombudsman NN and CC the DT government NN service NN . SENT In IN general JJ terms NNS , , and CC with IN the DT qualifications NNS I PP have VHP mentioned VVN , , I PP agree VVP with IN the DT intent NN of IN Recommendations NNS 2 CD , , 3 CD a DT and CC b LS , , 4 CD and CC 5 CD . SENT I PP should MD further RBR qualify VV the DT approach NN of IN Recommendation NN 5 CD in IN amending VVG the DT Act NP . SENT As RB with IN a DT number NN of IN other JJ topics NNS , , an DT amendment NN may MD be VB worth IN considering VVG if IN the DT Act NP is VBZ being VBG changed VVN for IN other JJ purposes NNS , , but CC an DT amendment NN is VBZ not RB necessary JJ to TO accomplish VV the DT stated JJ goal NN . SENT Public JJ education NN is VBZ by IN definition NN an DT integral JJ part NN of IN public JJ service NN . SENT If IN an DT amendment NN were VBD to TO be VB made VVN , , care NN would MD have VH to TO be VB taken VVN to TO ensure VV that IN the DT wording NN does VVZ not RB have VH a DT limiting VVG effect NN . SENT 3 LS . SENT CHANGES NNS TO TO THE DT ACT NN There EX is VBZ a DT significant JJ number NN of IN recommendations NNS which WDT call VVP for IN changes NNS to TO the DT Ombudsman NN Act NN . SENT I PP am VBP hopeful JJ that IN through IN discussion NN , , we PP may MD be VB able JJ to TO reach VV agreement NN on IN which WDT areas NNS should MD go VV forward RB in IN any DT amendment NN process NN . SENT It PP is VBZ of IN course NN not RB my PP$ place NN to TO speculate VV whether IN it PP is VBZ realistic JJ to TO expect VV that IN proposed VVN changes NNS would MD get VV on IN to TO the DT Legislative JJ agenda NN . SENT But CC because IN of IN the DT uncertainties NNS associated VVN with IN this DT process NN , , I PP suggest VVP we PP focus VV in IN this DT review NN first JJ on IN those DT changes NNS which WDT can MD be VB achieved VVN without IN legislative JJ amendment NN . SENT If IN , , however RB , , amendments NNS are VBP deemed VVN to TO be VB necessary JJ , , and CC the DT Assembly NP agrees VVZ to TO devote VV the DT time NN to TO their PP$ consideration NN , , there EX is VBZ a DT need NN for IN a DT process NN to TO ensure VV that IN the DT words NNS chosen VVN in IN proposed VVN statutory JJ language NN are VBP the DT right JJ ones NNS . SENT Some DT of IN the DT topics NNS may MD also RB require VV a DT clarification NN of IN intent NN . SENT As IN an DT example NN , , Recommendation NN 13 CD refers VVZ to TO a DT proposed VVN Schedule NN of IN governmental JJ organizations NNS within IN the DT Ombudsman's NP jurisdiction NN . SENT In IN my PP$ view NN , , the DT current JJ wording NN of IN the DT Act NP on IN this DT subject NN is VBZ sufficiently RB broad JJ for IN most JJS purposes NNS . SENT Nevertheless RB , , as IN I PP suggested VVD in IN my PP$ recent JJ letter NN to TO Minister NP Sampson NP concerning VVG privatization NN and CC preserving VVG the DT right NN of IN complaint NN , , copies NNS of IN which WDT were VBD sent VVN to TO members NNS of IN the DT Committee NP , , it PP might MD be VB useful JJ to TO add VV to TO the DT Ombudsman's NP jurisdiction NN any DT organizations NNS that WDT would MD otherwise RB not RB be VB covered VVN . SENT So RB , , with IN further JJR discussion NN , , it PP may MD be VB that IN a DT Schedule NN which WDT adds VVZ to TO , , but CC does VVZ not RB replace VV the DT Act's NP current JJ Section NP 1 CD definition NN , , could MD be VB useful JJ in IN this DT regard NN . SENT If IN the DT Act NP were VBD to TO be VB opened VVN for IN amendment NN , , I PP would MD also RB like VV the DT opportunity NN for IN input NN about IN changes NNS that IN I PP think VVP would MD streamline VV , , and CC otherwise RB make VV more RBR efficient JJ and CC accessible JJ , , the DT Ombudsman NN process NN . SENT I PP would MD be VB pleased VVN to TO bring VV forward RB a DT discussion NN paper NN with IN proposals NNS of IN this DT nature NN if IN the DT Legislature NP pursues VVZ the DT amendment NN route NN . SENT Again RB , , there EX exists VVZ a DT wide JJ area NN of IN potential JJ agreement NN for IN us PP with IN respect NN to TO possible JJ improvements NNS to TO the DT Act NN which WDT governs VVZ my PP$ work NN . SENT I PP would MD welcome VV the DT opportunity NN to TO examine VV such JJ changes NNS in IN detail NN . SENT 4 LS . SENT TERMS NNS OF IN REFERENCE NN AND CC ROLE NN OF IN THE DT STANDING JJ COMMITTEE NN While IN I PP am VBP satisfied VVN with IN the DT current JJ relationship NN between IN the DT Ombudsman NN and CC the DT Standing NP Committee NP which WDT is VBZ reflected VVN in IN the DT existing JJ terms NNS of IN reference NN , , I PP recognize VVP that IN the DT Committee NP sees VVZ a DT need NN for IN revision NN . SENT Recommendations NNS 44 CD and CC to TO a DT lesser JJR extent NN 18 RB summarize VV the DT changes NNS to TO the DT Standing NP Orders NNS which WDT would MD permit VV the DT Standing NP Committee NP to TO implement VV many JJ of IN the DT other JJ recommendations NNS . SENT Most JJS of IN my PP$ concerns NNS regarding VVG the DT specific JJ features NNS of IN Recommendation NN 44 CD are VBP addressed VVN under IN the DT category NN of IN Monitor NP and CC Review NP . SENT As IN a DT general JJ observation NN though RB , , I PP believe VVP it PP would MD be VB useful JJ for IN both CC the DT functioning NN of IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP , , and CC to TO the DT delivery NN of IN my PP$ mandate NN , , if IN we PP can MD work VV at IN establishing VVG agreement NN on IN our PP$ respective JJ roles NNS and CC in IN defining VVG the DT appropriate JJ basis NN for IN our PP$ relationship NN . SENT For IN my PP$ part NN , , I PP want VVP to TO state VV clearly RB that IN I PP see VVP no DT conflict NN between IN preserving VVG the DT independence NN of IN the DT institution NN and CC providing VVG for IN a DT measure NN of IN accountability NN to TO the DT Legislature NP . SENT The DT Ombudsman NN Act NN is VBZ very RB clear JJ in IN setting VVG out RP the DT framework NN within IN which WDT the DT relationship NN between IN the DT Ombudsman NN and CC the DT Legislature NP is VBZ defined VVN . SENT There EX are VBP two CD points NNS of IN contact NN , , and CC both DT of IN these DT involve VVP a DT reporting VVG procedure NN by IN the DT Ombudsman NN to TO the DT Legislature NP . SENT One PP is VBZ the DT Annual JJ Report NN , , and CC the DT other JJ allows VVZ for IN the DT Ombudsman NN to TO forward VV a DT report NN concerning VVG an DT investigation NN where WRB recommendations NNS for IN action NN have VHP been VBN denied VVN by IN the DT Minister NP responsible JJ and CC the DT Premier NP . SENT These DT case NN reports NNS place VVP the DT ultimate JJ authority NN for IN the DT disposition NN of IN unresolved JJ investigations NNS in IN the DT hands NNS of IN elected VVN representatives NNS . SENT In IN order NN to TO achieve VV clarity NN in IN our PP$ relationship NN , , I PP need VVP to TO understand VV your PP$ present JJ goals NNS and CC objectives NNS and CC you PP need VVP to TO understand VV the DT thinking NN behind IN my PP$ responses NNS to TO the DT proposed VVN Recommendations NNS . SENT If IN we PP can MD accomplish VV this DT , , I PP believe VVP we PP will MD have VH bolstered VVN the DT role NN of IN the DT Ombudsman NN in IN Ontario NP and CC created VVD a DT clear JJ basis NN for IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP to TO be VB an DT effective JJ liaison NN between IN the DT Ombudsman NN and CC the DT Legislative JJ Assembly NN . SENT 5 LS a DT . SENT RULE VV MAKING VVG PROCESS NN Rules NNS are VBP generally RB not RB helpful JJ because IN they PP tend VVP to TO limit VV the DT Ombudsman's NP role NN and CC diminish VV the DT degree NN of IN flexibility NN that WDT enables VVZ my PP$ office NN to TO address VV changing VVG issues NNS and CC circumstances NNS . SENT If IN , , for IN example NN , , the DT content NN of IN a DT proposed VVN rule NN directs VVZ the DT investigative JJ process NN , , then RB the DT public NN would MD be VB rightly RB concerned VVN to TO observe VV a DT Committee NP of IN the DT Legislature NP , , the DT majority NN of IN which WDT is VBZ government NN members NNS , , bringing VVG forward RB such JJ a DT proposal NN . SENT In IN such PDT a DT case NN it PP would MD be VB difficult JJ to TO defend VV the DT integrity NN and CC outcome NN of IN decisions NNS made VVN under IN the DT rule NN . SENT With IN this DT said VVD , , for IN the DT purposes NNS of IN the DT present JJ discussion NN , , I PP think VVP we PP should MD focus VV on IN a DT process NN for IN consultation NN should MD the DT Assembly NP consider VVP proposals NNS for IN rule NN setting NN . SENT I PP note VVP from IN the DT revision NN to TO Recommendation NN 27 CD made VVN in IN the DT Working NP Paper NP , , that IN the DT Committee NP is VBZ of IN the DT view NN that IN the DT Ombudsman NN should MD be VB consulted VVN . SENT This DT is VBZ a DT good JJ start NN . SENT But CC before IN examining VVG a DT need NN for IN any DT particular JJ rule NN or CC set VVN of IN rules NNS , , there EX should MD be VB a DT process NN and CC guidelines NNS for IN how WRB the DT need NN is VBZ identified VVN , , what WP information NN should MD be VB considered VVN and CC how WRB this DT information NN is VBZ obtained VVN . SENT Recommendation NN 34 CD offers NNS an DT example NN where WRB such JJ a DT process NN would MD be VB necessary JJ . SENT In IN my PP$ view NN , , we PP should MD also RB establish VV that DT rules NNS are VBP generally RB made VVN to TO assist VV the DT Ombudsman NN in IN effectively RB performing VVG the DT function NN of IN the DT office NN , , as RB opposed VVN to TO limiting VVG its PP$ role NN . SENT 5 CD b SYM . SENT RULE VV MAKING VVG CONTENT JJ Recommendations NNS 1 CD , , 14 CD , , 29 CD and CC 30 CD , , 33 CD , , 34 CD , , and CC 35 CD all DT address NN potential JJ rules NNS which WDT the DT Committee NP may MD recommend VV to TO the DT Legislative JJ Assembly NN . SENT I PP would MD like VV to TO review VV these DT briefly NN . SENT 1 CD How WRB the DT Ombudsman NN conducts VVZ investigations NNS of IN a DT systemic JJ nature NN . SENT Systemic JJ investigations NNS and CC system NN wide JJ investigations NNS are VBP a DT crucial JJ part NN of IN our PP$ present JJ operations NNS for IN several JJ reasons NNS . SENT they PP prevent VVP complaints NNS of IN a DT similar JJ nature NN arising VVG in IN the DT future NN they PP make VVP optimum JJ use NN of IN financial JJ and CC human JJ resources NNS they PP address VVP policies NNS and CC practices NNS that WDT , , while IN neutral JJ on IN the DT surface NN , , have VHP a DT negative JJ impact NN on IN particular JJ groups NNS of IN people NNS There EX appears VVZ to TO be VB no DT disagreement NN these DT investigations NNS are VBP necessary JJ . SENT The DT relevant JJ question NN here RB is VBZ what WP will MD a DT rule NN do VVP that DT is VBZ not RB already RB being VBG accomplished VVN . SENT In IN the DT past NN , , it PP has VHZ been VBN argued VVN that IN systemic JJ investigations NNS are VBP conducted VVN to TO the DT detriment NN of IN pursuing VVG individual JJ complaints NNS . SENT This DT is VBZ simply RB not RB the DT case NN . SENT Most RBS systemic JJ and CC system NN wide JJ issues NNS arise VVP out RP of IN individual JJ cases NNS . SENT Where WRB I PP exercise VVP my PP$ Own JJ Motion NP initiative NN , , systemic JJ investigations NNS have VHP the DT effect NN of IN avoiding VVG future JJ individual JJ cases NNS . SENT To TO be VB clear JJ , , my PP$ concern NN about IN creating VVG an DT unnecessary JJ rule NN is VBZ with IN the DT possibility NN of IN a DT failure NN in IN the DT drafting VVG to TO anticipate VV a DT future JJ set NN of IN circumstances NNS and CC thereby RB to TO have VH limited VVN the DT scope NN of IN the DT Ombudsman NN response NN . SENT This DT is VBZ not RB to TO say VV that IN I PP don't VVD welcome VV any DT opportunity NN to TO discuss VV with IN the DT Committee NP how WRB we PP conduct VVP systemic JJ and CC system NN wide JJ investigations NNS . SENT 14 CD How WRB the DT Ombudsman NN conducts VVZ investigations NNS of IN tribunal NN decisions NNS . SENT We PP have VHP a DT well RB established VVN approach NN to TO dealing VVG with IN complaints NNS about IN tribunal NN decisions NNS , , both CC decisions NNS that WDT are VBP final JJ and CC those DT for IN which WDT there EX is VBZ the DT possibility NN for IN rehearing NN . SENT I PP do VVP not RB see VV my PP$ role NN as IN one CD that WDT would MD substitute VV my PP$ opinion NN for IN that DT of IN the DT decision NN makers NNS , , as RB if IN my PP$ office NN were VBD a DT court NN of IN appeal NN . SENT Rather RB , , we PP investigate VV to TO examine VV whether IN the DT procedures NNS followed VVN by IN the DT tribunal NN meet VV the DT test NN of IN administrative JJ fairness NN . SENT When WRB a DT person NN brings VVZ forward RB a DT complaint NN relating VVG to TO a DT decision NN of IN an DT administrative JJ tribunal NN , , we PP must MD first RB determine VV whether IN the DT tribunal NN has VHZ the DT statutory JJ authority NN to TO rehear VV , , or CC rules NNS permitting VVG a DT review NN . SENT If IN the DT tribunal NN does VVZ not RB have VH such JJ authority NN , , the DT decision NN and CC nature NN of IN the DT complaint NN will MD be VB considered VVN . SENT We PP will MD generally RB only RB investigate VV if IN it PP appears VVZ that IN the DT circumstances NNS raise VVP an DT issue NN which WDT might MD lead VV to TO the DT decision NN having VHG no DT force NN or CC effect NN . SENT In IN that DT case NN we PP can MD ask VV the DT tribunal NN to TO rehear VV the DT matter NN . SENT I PP have VHP also RB made VVN recommendations NNS in IN cases NNS where WRB it PP appears VVZ there EX might MD be VB a DT broader JJR issue NN involving VVG a DT need NN for IN improvement NN to TO the DT tribunal's JJ policies NNS and CC practices NNS . SENT Again RB , , there EX is VBZ no DT need NN for IN a DT rule NN to TO set VV this DT out RP . SENT It PP is VBZ working VVG well RB without IN one CD . SENT 29 CD 30 CD The DT role NN of IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP when WRB a DT section NN 21 CD 4 CD Case NP Report NP istabled VVD with IN the DT Assembly NP . SENT These DT Recommendations NNS point VVP to TO the DT a DT need NN for IN a DT thorough JJ discussion NN of IN our PP$ respective JJ roles NNS in IN the DT instance NN of IN my PP$ forwarding NN a DT Section NN 21 CD 4 CD Case NP Report NP . SENT Under IN the DT Act NP , , I PP have VHP exhausted VVN my PP$ role NN once IN I PP place VVP a DT Report NN before IN the DT Legislature NP . SENT I PP will MD have VH raised VVN the DT matter NN with IN the DT Head NP of IN the DT agency NN concerned VVN , , the DT Minister NP and CC the DT Premier NP . SENT By IN tabling VVG a DT report NN with IN the DT Speaker NP , , I PP am VBP then RB seeking VVG the DT support NN of IN the DT Legislature NP to TO call VV the DT governmental JJ organization NN to TO account VV for IN its PP$ rejection NN of IN my PP$ recommendations NNS . SENT From IN that DT point NN forward RB , , it PP is VBZ up RB to TO the DT Legislature NP , , assisted VVN by IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP , , to TO take VV whatever WDT further JJR action NN it PP deems VVZ appropriate JJ . SENT In IN this DT way NN , , the DT influence NN of IN the DT Legislature NP is VBZ brought VVN to TO bear VV , , attended VVN by IN the DT public JJ scrutiny NN this DT implies VVZ , , before IN a DT governmental JJ organization NN is VBZ compelled VVN to TO act VV on IN my PP$ findings NNS and CC recommendations NNS . SENT Quite RB rightly RB , , the DT Ombudsman NN has VHZ not RB been VBN given VVN powers NNS to TO compel VV , , only RB to TO recommend VV . SENT As IN experience NN under IN the DT Act NP has VHZ shown VVN , , the DT model NN works VVZ well RB and CC this DT power NN is VBZ usually RB all DT that WDT is VBZ necessary JJ to TO achieve VV a DT remedy NN , , save VV for IN the DT exceptional JJ cases NNS that IN I PP bring VVP forward RB on IN occasion NN to TO the DT Legislature NP . SENT 33 CD Procedure NN to TO address VV complaints NNS from IN the DT public NN about IN the DT service NN provided VVN by IN the DT Ombudsman NN . SENT The DT Committee NP has VHZ recommended VVN in IN number NN 32 CD that IN it PP no DT longer JJR review NN complaints NNS from IN the DT public NN about IN the DT outcome NN of IN investigations NNS . SENT I PP welcome VVP the DT Committee's NP support NN for IN the DT Ombudsman NN as IN a DT place NN of IN last JJ resort NN . SENT We PP have VHP instituted VVN a DT policy NN for IN handling VVG complaints NNS against IN our PP$ office NN which WDT appears VVZ to TO be VB working VVG well RB . SENT While IN I PP would MD be VB happy JJ to TO share VV the DT details NNS of IN this DT process NN with IN the DT Committee NP and CC to TO report VV on IN this DT subject NN in IN my PP$ Annual JJ Report NN , , I PP do VVP not RB see VV that IN there EX is VBZ anything NN accomplished VVN by IN making VVG the DT process NN into IN a DT rule NN . SENT 35 CD The DT information NN to TO be VB provided VVN in IN the DT Ombudsman's NP Annual NP Reports NPS . SENT I PP have VHP earlier RB referred VVN to TO a DT process NN of IN discussion NN with IN the DT Committee NP about IN the DT contents NNS of IN the DT Annual NP Report NP . SENT Making VVG a DT rule NN of IN this DT kind NN would MD limit VV my PP$ discretion NN to TO determine VV what WP should MD properly RB be VB reported VVN and CC would MD make VV it PP difficult JJ to TO adjust VV the DT nature NN of IN the DT report NN to TO accommodate VV a DT development NN that WDT was VBD not RB anticipated VVN in IN the DT drafting VVG of IN the DT rule NN . SENT 6 CD . SENT MONITOR VV AND NP REVIEW NP I PP have VHP titled VVN this DT category NN Monitor NP and CC Review NP as IN this DT is VBZ the DT operative JJ phrase NN in IN recommendations NNS 16 CD , , 17 CD , , 25 CD and CC 44 CD . SENT This DT phrase NN represents VVZ what WP I PP believe VVP is VBZ a DT direct JJ challenge NN to TO the DT independence NN of IN the DT Ombudsman NN institution NN and CC is VBZ one CD of IN two CD themes NNS where WRB I PP have VHP fundamental JJ disagreement NN with IN the DT approach NN of IN the DT Standing NP Committee NP recommendations NNS . SENT The DT phrase NN provides VVZ an DT open JJ ended VVN mandate NN which WDT may MD be VB interpreted VVN to TO include VV wide JJ ranging VVG powers NNS of IN control NN . SENT The DT proposed VVN changes NNS to TO the DT Committee's NP Standing NP Orders NNS would MD provide VV enabling VVG authority NN for IN direct JJ and CC continuous JJ interference NN in IN the DT Ombudsman's NP operations NNS . SENT This DT cannot NN be VB acceptable JJ if IN we PP are VBP to TO preserve VV the DT credibility NN of IN the DT institution NN . SENT I PP will MD not RB re IN state NN the DT concerns NNS I PP outlined VVD in IN my PP$ introductory JJ remarks NNS , , except IN to TO say VV that DT independence NN from IN the DT political JJ influence NN of IN the DT Legislature NP and CC from IN governmental JJ organizations NNS that WDT may MD be VB the DT subject NN of IN investigations NNS is VBZ really RB the DT raison NN d'etre NN of IN an DT Ombudsman NN . SENT As IN my PP$ colleague NN Sir NP John NP Robertson NP , , former JJ New NP Zealand NP Ombudsman NN and CC past JJ President NN of IN the DT International NP Ombudsman NN Institute NP has VHZ said VVD . SENT The DT real JJ test NN in IN the DT end NN is VBZ how WRB independent JJ the DT Ombudsman NN is VBZ to TO criticize VV executive JJ government NN processes NNS , , to TO hold VV government NN accountable JJ for IN its PP$ mistakes NNS and CC to TO achieve VV credibility NN and CC trust NN with IN both CC the DT government NN and CC the DT governed VVN . SENT Suffice VV to TO say VV , , I PP have VHP no DT choice NN but CC to TO interpret VV my PP$ mandate NN as IN calling VVG on IN me PP to TO resist VV any DT measures NNS that IN in IN my PP$ view NN may MD have VH the DT effect NN , , unintended JJ or CC otherwise RB , , of IN violating VVG the DT first JJ principle NN of IN Ombudsmanship NP , , namely RB protecting VVG the DT independence NN of IN the DT institution NN . SENT I PP have VHP included VVN Recommendation NN 17 CD that IN the DT Ombudsman NN will MD attend VV the DT Committee NP at IN its PP$ request NN in IN this DT category NN as IN well RB , , since IN it PP refers VVZ to TO the DT issue NN of IN control NN . SENT As IN I PP have VHP mentioned VVN with IN respect NN to TO other JJ topics NNS , , I PP welcome VVP the DT chance NN to TO meet VV with IN the DT Committee NP and CC discuss VV matters NNS of IN mutual JJ concern NN and CC importance NN . SENT It PP would MD only RB be VB in IN the DT most RBS extraordinary JJ of IN circumstances NNS that IN I PP would MD be VB unwilling JJ to TO meet VV and CC so RB it PP is VBZ difficult JJ to TO see VV the DT value NN of IN a DT rule NN to TO cover VV such PDT a DT circumstance NN . SENT 7 CD . SENT Estimates NNS and CC Directives NNS The DT second JJ category NN in IN which WDT there EX is VBZ a DT basic JJ disagreement NN is VBZ set VVN out RP in IN Recommendations NNS 23 CD and CC 24 CD , , which WDT propose VVP that IN the DT Ombudsman NN Estimates NNS be VB brought VVN forward RB to TO this DT Committee NP . SENT The DT separation NN of IN the DT Ombudsman's NP funding NN from IN the DT Standing NP Committee's NP consideration NN of IN cases NNS is VBZ critical JJ to TO the DT independent JJ operation NN of IN my PP$ office NN . SENT Indeed RB , , to TO quote VV the DT Honourable JJ Donald NP Morand NP , , a DT former JJ Ontario NP Ombudsman NN , , from IN hearings NNS conducted VVN in IN August NP , , 1992 CD . SENT This DT Committee NP , , if IN it PP has VHZ the DT power NN to TO control VV the DT expenses NNS of IN the DT Ombudsman NN , , has VHZ the DT power NN to TO call VV the DT tune NN of IN the DT Ombudsman NN . SENT That's NP directly RB contrary JJ to TO what WP was VBD intended VVN when WRB the DT Legislation NN was VBD passed VVN . SENT The DT importance NN of IN preserving VVG independence NN has VHZ I PP think VVP been VBN clearly RB stated VVN . SENT I PP would MD like VV to TO note VV from IN my PP$ experience NN as IN the DT North JJ American JJ vice NN president NN of IN the DT International NP Ombudsman NN Institute NP , , that IN the DT basic JJ tenet NN of IN independence NN in IN appointment NN , , funding NN , , operation NN and CC accountability NN is VBZ a DT common JJ one NN throughout IN the DT Ombudsman NN world NN . SENT Indeed RB , , in IN those DT countries NNS which WDT are VBP creating VVG new JJ offices NNS , , particularly RB at IN the DT national JJ level NN , , it PP is VBZ becoming VVG common JJ practice NN to TO enshrine VV this DT independence NN through IN constitutional JJ protection NN . SENT Section NN 10 CD of IN the DT Ombudsman NN Act NP requires VVZ an DT annual JJ audit NN by IN the DT Provincial JJ Auditor NN , , one CD which WDT we PP publish VV in IN the DT Annual NP Report NP . SENT It PP is VBZ entirely RB appropriate JJ that IN the DT Ombudsman NN be VB held VVN accountable JJ for IN funds NNS received VVD . SENT But CC it PP is VBZ also RB necessary JJ to TO structure VV this DT accountability NN in IN a DT way NN that WDT demonstrates VVZ the DT Ombudsman NN is VBZ not RB a DT civil JJ servant NN and CC is VBZ not RB a DT part NN of IN the DT government NN bureaucracy NN that IN reports NNS to TO Cabinet NP . SENT The DT relationship NN which WDT my PP$ office NN has VHZ with IN the DT Legislature's NP Board NP of IN Internal NP Economy NP achieves VVZ this DT , , and CC treats VVZ the DT Ombudsman NN in IN the DT same JJ way NN and CC for IN the DT same JJ reasons NNS , , as IN the DT other JJ Officers NNS of IN the DT Legislature NP . SENT Similarly RB , , Recommendation NN 40 CD , , that IN the DT Ombudsman NN adhere VV to TO Management NP Board NP of IN Cabinet's NP Directives NNS and CC Guidelines NNS , , would MD create VV the DT impression NN that IN the DT Ombudsman NN is VBZ subject JJ to TO government NN control NN . SENT This DT is VBZ compounded VVN by IN the DT fact NN that IN we PP are VBP regularly RB called VVN upon RP to TO investigate VV the DT application NN of IN these DT Directives NNS and CC Guidelines NNS . SENT To TO require VV their PP$ adoption NN by IN the DT Ombudsman NN may MD create VV a DT perception NN of IN bias NN if IN they PP are VBP the DT subject NN of IN an DT investigation NN . SENT This DT does VVZ not RB mean VV that IN I PP disagree VVP with IN the DT need NN for IN policies NNS governing VVG the DT administration NN of IN my PP$ office NN . SENT Indeed RB , , I PP am VBP proud JJ of IN our PP$ management NN policies NNS and CC procedures NNS , , which WDT have VHP been VBN shaped VVN to TO reflect VV what WP I PP think VVP are VBP very RB progressive JJ models NNS designed VVN to TO accommodate VV the DT day NN to TO day NN work NN of IN a DT staff NN group NN of IN eighty CD four CD people NNS . SENT We PP also RB , , as IN you PP know VVP , , operate VVP with IN a DT collective JJ agreement NN . SENT With IN respect NN to TO the DT Provincial JJ Auditor NN conducting VVG value NN for IN money NN audits NN Recommendations NNS 38 CD , , 39 CD and CC 41 CD , , it PP should MD be VB noted VVN that IN I PP invited VVD the DT Auditor NN to TO conduct VV such PDT an DT audit NN and CC this DT was VBD done VVN in IN 1993 CD . SENT In IN keeping VVG with IN my PP$ other JJ comments NNS in IN this DT category NN , , it PP is VBZ my PP$ view NN that IN the DT existing JJ provisions NNS of IN the DT Ombudsman NN Act NN provide VVP sufficient JJ checks NNS and CC balances NNS for IN financial JJ accountability NN to TO the DT Board NP of IN Internal NP Economy NP . SENT 8 CD . SENT OTHER JJ ISSUES NNS A DT number NN of IN Recommendations NNS address VVP other JJ issues NNS raised VVN by IN the DT Committee NP . SENT These DT include VVP . SENT Recommendations NNS 19 CD amendment NN power NN , , 20 CD appointment NN of IN Ombudsman NN , , 42 CD Standing NP Committee NP membership NN , , and CC 43 CD automatic JJ adoption NN of IN Committee NP reports NNS . SENT Based VVN on IN my PP$ experience NN I PP have VHP some DT views NNS on IN these DT Recommendations NNS which WDT I PP would MD be VB pleased VVN to TO share VV with IN you PP . SENT For IN example NN , , in IN changing VVG the DT Ombudsman's NP appointment NN process NN , , it PP would MD be VB important JJ to TO reinforce VV the DT concept NN of IN independence NN by IN ensuring VVG that IN the DT process NN for IN appointment NN was VBD not RB conducted VVN in IN a DT forum NN subject NN to TO government NN majority NN . SENT My PP$ response NN to TO the DT rest NN of IN these DT Recommendations NNS , , along RB with IN a DT written VVN response NN to TO all PDT the DT Recommendations NNS in IN numerical JJ order NN , , is VBZ contained VVN in IN a DT separate JJ document NN which WDT I PP would MD like VV to TO table NN with IN the DT Committee NP . SENT Thank VV you PP for IN your PP$ co NP operation NN . SENT