OK, Everybody

[The Mississauga Muse]

Define "accountable" in this statement:

"That in recognition of the fact that all municipal governments are responsible and accountable governments"

Part Two:

Email a politician at either the municipal of provincial level and try to get him/her to define "accountable" in that statement.


Enjoyyyyyyyyyy!

 

[bizorky]

Should we accept guesses?

 

[The Mississauga Muse]

Should we accept guesses?

Thanks for asking that, bizorky. You see, I've already done this email exercise --trying to get a politician/bureaucrat to define "accountable" as he/she's used it in a particular statement.

But I remember now, that before I emailed, I first pondered what "accountable" meant as a member of the Public might think "accountable" meant.

I just GOOGLED "david miller" and "accountable" and found this document

[PDF]what makes a city great? Mayor David Miller’s vision of Toronto in 2010

In this document it states:

Efficiency and Accountability at City Hall

Torontonians receive a wide range of services from City Hall. Mayor David Miller believes that taxpayers are entitled to high
quality, efficient, and easily accessible services. His vision of government is to work with people – to get results for people.

To clean up City Hall and get it working for the people of Toronto, Mayor David Miller undertook significant reforms in his first term. These included:

• Establishing the office of Integrity Commissioner to help restore the public’s confidence in City Hall. Toronto was the first
municipality in Canada to introduce such a role.

• Overhauling the City’s administrative structure to make it more efficient, responsive, and accountable.

This is the first time I've seen "accountable" used in:

• Overhauling the City’s administrative structure to make it more efficient, responsive, and accountable.

So. As a member of the Public, what do you think "accountable" means there?

Just a word of warning, bizorky, when it comes to getting anyone to define "accountable"? Ya can't get there from here.

It's something I'd love to see Rick Mercer do. Go up to politicians and public servants, read a statement they said or wrote using the word "accountable" and then ask them to define "accountable".

By the way, after pondering long and hard? I DO know what "accountable" means as politicians/bureaucrats use it. So I also understand why they don't want to define "accountable".


Signed,
The Mississauga Muse

 

[bizorky]

Well Muse, on the basis of my years working for government, I and many others have come to the conclusion that the problem with words like "accountability" and "efficiency" are not that they have a limited meaning, but that they can be given an assigned meaning. In other words, when generating policy, you can always identify what you want your outcomes to be before you have a grasp of what the problem actually is (or even if there is a problem). Of course, sometimes the "problem" gets missed in the whole process.

For example, better transit does not automatically solve the problem of traffic congestion. More roads do not automatically reduce traffic. Yet these ideas continue to have an almost natural weight ascribed to them like truths written in stone. Sometimes issues like these get layered on with notions like improving quality of life, which are just more than a little difficult to apply quantitative measures for determining quality of outcomes.

Carying out one action is viewed as being accountable (we did something), seeking out measures to show efficiency can then be selected so as to show how valuable the accountability process is (the something we did, did something).

Then critics show up and kinda spoil the party by exposing the all the limitations. And around we go.

But hey, that's politics, after all.

Of course social policy becomes even more nebulous with respect to words like "accountable" and efficient."

Just a word of warning, bizorky, when it comes to getting anyone to define "accountable"? Ya can't get there from here.

No doubt about it, Muse.

 

[The Mississauga Muse]

Hey bizorky,

NEAT stuff there --lots to munch on.

You wrote:

Of course social policy becomes even more nebulous with respect to words like "accountable" and efficient."

OK. I know 100% what the word "accountable" means at least at the municipal level. Really. I've thought the entire thing through and I finally HAVE it.

I figured it out when no matter how hard I tried or how often I back-and-forthed with politicians, I could NOT get them to define "accountable".

That's because "accountable" means they are elected. Politicians are accountable because they must answer to the electorate.

That means bureaucrats AREN'T accountable.

Simple, eh? Took me since November to figure it out, mind you.

But then the ol' light came on and **BLING** --it explains almost EVERYTHING.