Skip to content

Jury of One: Do we need the integrity commissioner?

Maybe it is time to look once again at the value of the position.
column_tracey
Jury of One with Scott Tracey

Integrity commissioner Robert Swayze is scheduled to present his latest annual report to councilors on Monday.

Hopefully it will be the last such integrity commissioner report.

Over the past couple years, Swayze's report has provided ample justification to doing away with the position all together.

"I received no complaints and carried out no investigations in 2015," the latest report reads. "Similar inactivity was experienced in 2014 and having no investigations for two years is a credit to all members of council during those two years."

Which would be all well and good, were we not paying for this "inactivity."

The city pays $5,000 annually to keep the Caledon lawyer on retainer, plus $245 per hour when he actually does something. Last year he spent 25 hours providing advice to councilors and the clerk, to the tune of $6,174 on top of the $5,000 base.

Swayze's contract with the city expired at the end of 2015, but was extended until the end of this month while the city seeks proposals from those interested in the position for the next five years.

The time is now, therefore, for councilors to seriously consider whether we need someone acting in such a role.

There has been precious little evidence publicly available since Swayze was first retained in late 2011 to suggest that is so.

His first -- and still highest-profile -- investigation involved reviewing a 2012 Guelph Mercury article written by yours truly in which some councilors expressed frustration over their perceived inability to get information from staff.

Swayze -- who never interviewed the councilors nor the author of the article -- eventually concluded the comments violated council's Code of Conduct, but suggested no further action be taken.

That advice cost more than $10,000 and landed Guelph on Maclean's magazine's list of "99 stupid things the government did with your money" in 2012.

(One of two local entries on the dubious list. Terry Bradshaw's expensive infomercial was also highlighted.)

A year after the Mercury investigation, Swayze billed the city $2,800 for an investigation into comments then-Coun. Maggie Laidlaw made at a Committee of Adjustment meeting. It would have cost more, but Laidlaw said sorry to the aggrieved staffers and the whole thing was dropped.

Since that second matter, Swayze's day timer -- at least with regard to Guelph matters -- has been wide open.

It's not clear if this is because councilors have become better at minding their Ps and Qs, or that they are more hesitant to raise concerns given the non-results of previous attempts.

In any event, with just a few days left in Swayze's contract, some councilors must be asking why we still have an integrity commissioner.

Bob Bell, for example, has repeatedly and publicly said he sees "no value" in the position.

And our mayor, back when he was a councilor, called Swayze's Mercury investigation "a complete waste."

"It doesn't matter if it's $500 or $25,000, every dollar is not the government's to spend," Guthrie said three years -- and two years of "inactivity" -- ago.


Comments

Verified reader

If you would like to apply to become a verified commenter, please fill out this form.




About the Author: Scott Tracey

Read more