Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Services

Appendix: <strong>Commission</strong> Recommendations
Recommendation 3-6: The length of time it will take to return to balance in a sustainable
fashion significantly changes the nature of the approach. Traditional “short-term fixes” will not
be adequate or even, in many cases, appropriate. Examples include asset sales solely for the
purpose of a one-time cash injection; freezes to wages or managers’ bonuses; and deferrals of
capital investments and other necessary spending. Kicking the can down the road is no
solution. Spending restraint must be thoroughly and consistently tied to permanent reforms in
how government operates so the results of the restraint exercise can be sustained over a
long period.
Recommendation 3-7: Once it has decided how to respond to this report, the government
should begin with a good road map –– a formal document of its vision and the path to the goal.
There are precedents for such a tool. In 1984, the Mulroney government published its Agenda
for Economic Renewal, an extensive paper that laid out in one place all the government’s
plans. The Chretien government did the same in 1994 with two documents recalled more for
their colour — the Purple Book and the Grey Book — than their titles. Each of these
documents not only informed the public about the changes that lay ahead, but also became a
script for all bureaucrats, who saw how their own programs and activities fit into the
broader picture.
Recommendation 3-8: Higher priority should be assigned to programs and activities that
invest in the future as opposed to those that serve the current status quo. This is never easy:
the status quo has plenty of advocates; the future does not. It is up to government to fill this
breach. As Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist Lester Thurow once suggested,
“The proper role of government in capitalist societies is to represent the future to the present.”
Recommendation 3-9: Policy development and the public service in general should be more
evidence-based. This requires setting clear objectives based on sound research and evidence.
The government should collect data and use it to evaluate whether objectives are being met
and how efficiently. Managers should be accountable for achieving these objectives. Where
objectives are not being met, programs and services should be adjusted. Reporting should be
transparent and audits conducted. The evidence-based model should be applied to the
success of individuals and departments in meeting objectives. At the same time, ministries,
as well as agencies and entities accountable to the government, should be given some latitude
to conduct their affairs in an efficient manner.
491