Some thoughts on transparency...

In a day and age where everything is recorded and breaking news is a familiar catchphrase, we tend to hear people of all stripes, from businessmen to elected officials, speaking about transparency and the need for more of it.
Transparency, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, is "characterized by visibility or accessibility of information, especially concerning business practices."
For journalists, transparency thus comes in many forms. In a simplified but nevertheless common scenario, transparency represents the ability to be granted information from the local police detachment, about a crime or incident that has occurred in the local coverage area, in a timely manner.
Sometimes, this information comes easily, while other times prove to be more difficult. In the experience of this newspaper, the access to information from police is not necessarily dependent on the nature of the incident or crime, nor does the Quebec or Ontario factor come into play. Is it a lack of resources on the part of some detachments?
Is transparency from the police something the public should expect, or is it something to fight for?
Another example, referenced in last week's editorial, involves council members of Grenville-sur-la-Rouge leaving the premises of the municipal town hall prior to the beginning of the meeting. To the citizens present at the meeting, there was a complete lack of transparency that evening; however, none of those present at the rescheduled meeting the following week asked the direct question, "Why did you leave, and what is going on here?"
The mayor of the municipality, Jean-Marc Fillion, commented to another local newspaper last week that the councillors' departure was "definitely a lack of respect towards the taxpayers." In the same interview, he declined to comment on their reasons for leaving - as have two of the councillors who left the meeting.
Is transparency from local elected officials something the public should expect, or have we officially entered the political era of No Comment?
At a time when every member of Parliament, from the backbenchers to the prime minister, has a communications advisor, it is worth questioning whether the words coming out of an elected official's mouth are really their own. If they aren't the words of the politician, who do they belong to?
Gone, perhaps, are the days of Pierre Trudeau and René Levesque, or Joe Clark and Jean Chrétien.
Is transparency something people actually want from politicians, or has the public come to expect the glad-handing and overly-careful type? The 24-hour model of modern media, with its ever-watchful eye and increasing tendency to focus on the insignificant, has undoubtedly lent a hand to the prominence of this "perfect" type of politician.
Last Wednesday, provincial environment commissioner Gord Miller said he expected full transparency from the Ontario Power Authority (OPA), following a hastily-announced 27-per-cent cut in the rate paid for solar energy through the microFIT program. Miller says he needed the full financial details from the OPA to understand their justification.
The OPA's vice-president of communications said this week he welcomed the commissioner's interest, noting the company would "try to be as transparent as possible" and would share "as much information as it can," depending on the sensitivity of the information.
"It's not a smart thing to do, strategically, sorting through all of that," he told this newspaper.
Of course, the high subsidy rate paid for solar energy production has received its due share of criticism and, as the Globe and Mail highlighted, "The virtue of solar power alone cannot justify government guarantees of outrageous rates of return."
Still, the provincial environment commissioner was hired with a specific mandate to investigate such issues and, with the powers entrusted to him to do so, the appropriate degree of transparency must be provided by the OPA in order for him to report back to the public.
We may recall that the dictionary definition of transparency was "especially" applied to business practices.
Is transparency, as the OPA says, not always the smartest thing to do?
It might not the ideal answer but, sadly, it is possibly the most honest answer this newspaper has heard lately.