Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Services

Chapter 3: Our Mandate and Approach
� Consider mental health. The problems are mounting and the system is not responding.
The result: many people with mental health problems end up in prison, which — aside from
the fact that it is expensive — does them and society no good. We are going at things from
the wrong end; we should conduct research and design programs to get at the roots of
the issues.
� Who should conduct such research? A common response is to bring in academics and
consultants whose expertise and other studies have already amassed the intellectual
capital needed to assess these issues. The problem is that the expertise then rests with
the external researcher, not with the government and its employees. And typically, projects
go nowhere in government unless there is an internal champion and people who
understand the research. This means the government must strengthen its own internal
policy research capacity. One reason we heard for the government’s research weakness is
that ministries are hitting their limits for full-time employees, even when they have funds in
their budgets that could finance such work. This surely points to the folly of targeting the
number of full-time employees as a restraint mechanism.
The best public service would focus on outcomes, not inputs. Is a program delivering the
objective? Is it doing so efficiently? How much is it costing? A top public service would not set
multiple objectives that mix outcomes and inputs, like restricting the number of full-time
employees. It would give managers the flexibility to do the job best within their budget.
The best public service would approach risk from a scientific basis. We do not want to
waste taxpayers’ money; this is an understandable and noble goal. But (and this is a decidedly
unscientific approach) hundreds of millions of dollars can be wasted in the interest of
preventing a few dollars from being used inappropriately. The pendulum in Ontario has swung
too far towards devoting massive resources to micro-manage processes such as procurement
and expenses. By all means, establish rules and regulations aimed at preventing waste. Then
let managers and employees do their job as efficiently as possible. Set up monitoring and
audit systems to catch problems, but do not waste everyone’s time by drawing them away
from important policy and service delivery objectives to attend to minute details of reporting
and compliance.
The task ahead need not be dreary. Many will scoff that the business of eliminating a fiscal
deficit is simply a mundane exercise of restraint, that the very idea of creating an organization
that delivers the world’s best public services is hopelessly naive, and that we should not even
think — let alone speak — of such lofty goals. But our reach should always exceed our grasp.
High ambition should never be sneered at. Such an objective could instil in our politicians, our
public servants and all Ontarians a sense of purpose that would help see us through this
monumental mission.
Why not?
133