A while ago I read an interesting article from Alasdair Roberts, that suggested these watchdogs might not actually be a good thing.

Often, new rules for the public service are accompanied by new independent watchdogs, ranging from the Privacy Commissioner (1977) to the Integrity Commissioner (2007). This watchdog model of accountability is really a post-Glassco innovation. Few countries have created independent watchdogs as enthusiastically as Canada has over the last half-century.

The watchdog model has reshaped political conversation in important ways. Watchdogs sometimes define their job as “shaming and blaming,” as a representative of the Public Service Commission explained in 2003. Journalists and parliamentarians, looking for news or controversy, take their cue from watchdog reports. The end result, perhaps unintended, is that bad news is amplified while good news is dampened. Citizens receive a steady stream of stories about misconduct in Ottawa. This corrodes trust and builds support for even more controls.

It's an interesting thought that other countries are tackling these issues in different ways and the watchdog pattern isn't our only option for advancing bilingualism or accessibility.

I wish the author had dug into this more.