Looking Beyond IRAC
by Martin Ruben
published on Saturday, July 18th, 2026
Recently, I had the opportunity to provide a written submission to the body reviewing the Island Regulatory and Appeal Commission.
While some of my comments were based on my experience as mayor of the Rural Municipality of Victoria, I made the submission in my personal capacity, drawing on many years working in public administration, governance and public sector auditing.
My hope is that the ideas I shared will be useful not only in reviewing IRAC but also in thinking about how many public organizations should be governed and held accountable.
DOING THINGS RIGHT
When most people think about government accountability, they think about money. Did the organization stay within its budget? Were the rules followed? Were financial controls in place?
Those questions are important, but they are only part of the picture.
The more important question is whether the organization is actually achieving the public purpose for which it was created.
In other words, it is not enough to know that an organization is doing things right. We also need to know whether it is doing the right things.
That simple distinction has guided much of my career in public service and auditing.
Organizations such as IRAC exercise significant authority on behalf of government. Their decisions affect homeowners, tenants, municipalities, businesses, utilities and taxpayers. They are independent decision-makers, and that independence is essential. But independence should never mean an absence of accountability.
PUBLIC CONFIDENCE
Like many public organizations, IRAC reports on how many files it processes and how many decisions it makes. Those numbers tell us how busy the organization is, but they tell us very little about whether it is meeting the needs of Islanders.
Are decisions being made within reasonable time frames? Are people able to understand the process? Are services accessible? Are decisions contributing to economic development and public confidence? Is the organization providing value for the resources entrusted to it?
Those are the kinds of questions I believe should also be asked.
One recommendation in my submission may sound somewhat technical, but the idea behind it is quite simple. Before deciding whether an organization should expand, reduce or change its responsibilities, we should first have a clear understanding of why it exists, what public outcomes it is intended to achieve, who it serves, what services it provides, and how success should be measured.
That understanding is important not only for governments and review commissions, but also for the public. Meaningful public engagement depends on participants having enough information to understand the role of the organization being reviewed, the rationale for its current responsibilities and the issues the review is intended to address.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Without that foundation, public consultations risk becoming collections of individual experiences and opinions rather than informed discussions about how an organization can best serve the public interest. Decisions about organizational structure may then be influenced more by history, isolated experiences or stakeholder perspectives than by objective evidence about what will produce the best outcomes for Islanders.
A clear service delivery model provides a common point of reference. It helps governments, review commissions, stakeholders and citizens evaluate proposed changes using the same understanding of what the organization is intended to accomplish and how success should be measured.
These principles extend well beyond IRAC.
Provincial departments, Crown corporations, agencies, commissions, boards, and even municipalities all exist to serve the public.
Each should be able to explain:
What public problem are we trying to solve?
What results are we trying to achieve?
How will we know if we are succeeding?
How will the public know whether we are providing value?
Those are reasonable questions for any organization that spends public money or exercises authority on behalf of citizens.
My submission also recommends stronger performance reporting, clearer service standards, greater transparency, more accessible public processes and regular independent performance reviews. None of these recommendations are unique to IRAC. They represent sound principles of good governance that can strengthen public confidence across government.
Islanders deserve public institutions that are not only independent and fair, but also transparent, responsive, accountable and focused on results.
As citizens, we should expect more than activity reports describing how much work an organization has done. We should also expect evidence that the work being done is making a positive difference.
Ultimately, that is what accountability is all about.
Martin Ruben lives in Victoria and has a background in public sector and not-for profit corporate governance.
