Investigation by the Québec Ombudsman | “Special treatment” for organizations close to politics

(Quebec) A political cabinet of the Quebec government is accused of “serious failings” in its management of a subsidy program and favored non-profit organizations that were close to power.


“The practices observed constitute a serious case of mismanagement. This is wrongdoing […] concludes an investigation by the Québec Ombudsman, Marc-André Dowd, who took office on March 27.

His investigation was triggered following an anonymous denunciation “targeting the authorities” of the ministry in question, within the framework of the An Act to facilitate the disclosure of wrongdoings relating to public bodies. The watchdog does not name the ministry and does not specify when the facts took place.

The political cabinet of a ministry “would have favored non-profit organizations when awarding grants”, using a program whose budget is nearly 60 million.

The Protector noted “several irregularities in the administration of the budget” and “reproachable practices [qui] have been repeatedly adopted”:

  • The discretion to award a grant was exercised inequitably. In several situations, organizations have truly benefited from preferential treatment;
  • Political authorities have encroached on the roles of the administrative apparatus to influence decisions on granting financial aid;
  • Close relationships existed between the firm and certain organizations. This meant that decisions were taken upstream by the firm to the detriment of the administrative processing of the request;
  • Some recommendations to the Minister not to grant a subsidy have been transformed into positive recommendations;
  • The firm has requested that the file of certain organizations be processed urgently in order to quickly grant them funding;
  • Financial assistance was granted to organizations that had not submitted a formal application or a project.

Political proximity

The ministry pleaded that it acted “in complete transparency with its staff and with respect for its analytical work”, but recognized “the proximity of certain organizations to the ministerial cabinet”.

The Protector did not buy this version, however, and instead concluded that there were “serious breaches of the behavior expected of the authorities”.

He denounced the “unfair treatment” where certain organizations were favoured, the failure of the authorities to “ensure sound management” and to separate the political from the administrative, and believes that the “unfair” practices have demobilized the staff. of the ministry.

The watchdog sent the ministry “nine recommendations”, which aim in particular to “strengthen the integrity of the political-administrative interface”, to “ensure the impartiality of the processes leading to the granting of aid finance”, to “reaffirm directives and clear lines of conduct for its administrative and political staff”.

He affirms that the department in question has “produced a major action plan” and that half of the recommendations have been implemented.


source site-60

Latest