Good luck, Basia Ruta. You're probably going to need it.
Ruta, the province's first auditor general for local government, opened her office in Surrey on Thursday, eager to help local governments across B.C. make sure they're getting the best value possible out of the way they spend taxpayer dollars.
But does she work for the provincial government or the province's municipal governments? And what is her true obligation to either of them?
On paper, Ruta has a dual role. She will go fishing for audit topics that cover many or all municipalities and then compile reports on what the best practices are and who, if anyone, is following these best practices and what local governments could save by incorporating these practices.
She will also have the opportunity to conduct specific audits of specific departments or municipal operations, as requested by a municipal government.
Sorry, folks, she's not in the business of doing core services reviews for free.
She will also not do the overall budget audits local governments are already bound to complete.
It's also not her job to challenge policy decisions made by mayors and councils.
And, sorry Coun. Brian Skakun, it will not be be her job to compel city managers and senior staff to provide detailed explanations for various city expenditures.
The role of audits (and auditors) is to apply scientific rigour to assess an organization's accounting of their overall financial statements or, in the case of the auditor general, specific areas of spending by municipalities. An auditor is looking to see that the numbers were applied using accepted accounting practices and there are no misstatements or misinterpretations of the numbers (their validity) and to check whether the same results are reached each time the numbers are crunched (their reliability).
Sounds dull but it's essential due diligence for any public and private organization.
Ruta will not have the authority, however, to compel any local government to alter its spending habits or to switch to the best practices she identifies. That makes sense - no provincially appointed official, regardless of how well-meaning or knowledgeable they may be, should have the right or the power to demand a locally elected mayor and city council alter its budget or spending practices.
Wait, we already have that. They're called the deputy minister of education and school boards but I digress.
Since municipal governments will have the luxury of dismissing any of Ruta's recommendations, it's unclear what the value of the auditor general for local government will be.
Any mayor unwilling to change municipal spending practices will have speaking notes that look like this:
"While we appreciate Ms. Ruta's diligence on this matter, she doesn't take into account the fiscal realities of [name of your municipality here], compared to [name other B.C. municipalities here]. We will instruct senior staff to study her report in greater detail because we're always open to savings opportunities to benefit taxpayers but her broad recommendations don't apply to our situation."
In other words, a pat on the head for a good job before being shown the doggy door out to the kennel.
Hardly a respectful reaction to such an important office with such an important task.
If she really works for municipal governments, hopefully her reports will be greeted with enthusiasm, so long as they have real value and lead to real savings. But if she works for the the provincial government, who use her findings to further tighten the screws on municipalities and download more programs and services onto them, it's going to be a long five years in that office in Surrey.
