On sponsorships

Advertising and sponsorship, when properly managed and made fully transparent, are legitimate activities of government. Yet, since the sponsorship scandal, the word "sponsorship" has all but disappeared from the government's vocabulary.

The relative absence of the federal government from the sponsorship area has been deplored by many grassroots organizations as negatively affecting their events.

Partisanship and accountability to Parliament

The commission found that neither the administration of the sponsorship program nor the accountability for it by Parliament was conducted in a non-partisan manner. The first step towards reform is to ensure that administration in government is free from improper political influences. Only once that is assured can Parliament be expected to hold the executive accountable for administration in a non-partisan manner.

Renewed emphasis on administrative responsibilities

Making deputy ministers publicly accountable for their management before the Public Accounts Committee will encourage them to place a higher priority on the task of managing. Their enhanced concern with good management will, in turn, encourage the public servants below them to pay more attention to good management.

Transparency and better management

Given the goal of advancing both government transparency and government accountability, the commission agrees that the stated purpose of the legislation should be full public accountability of government institutions and full public access to records under their control. The guiding principle should be disclosure whenever the public interest in that disclosure clearly outweighs the need for secrecy.

Canadians should be able to consult one single piece of legislation - the Access to Information Act - to know what documents will not be disclosed. Rules of non-disclosure should not be scattered throughout various federal Acts as they are currently.

Whistleblower legislation

The commission takes the position that the new Act could be significantly improved if it were amended. It suggests that:

The definition of the class of persons authorized to make disclosures under the Act ("public servants") should be broadened to include anyone who is carrying out work on behalf of the government.

• The list of "wrongdoings" that can be disclosed should be an open list, so that actions that are similar in nature to the ones explicitly listed in the Act would also be covered.
  
  
• The list of actions that are forbidden "reprisals" should also be an open list.
  
  
• In the event that a whistleblower makes a formal complaint alleging a reprisal, the burden of proof should be on the employer to show that the actions taken were not a reprisal.
  
  
• An explicit deadline should be prescribed for all chief executives to establish internal procedures for managing disclosures.
  
  
• The Act's consequential amendments to the Access of Information Act and to the Privacy Act should be revoked as unjustified.

The commission concludes that the recently announced reform package addresses many of the concerns that relate to Crown corporations. It recommends, however, that appointments to management posts should be free of political influence.