One of the things that has struck me, looking at the growth of agents of Parliament over the last 150 years, is that they have been created because of the perception of a crisis that needed to be dealt with by a body independent from the Parliament of the day. I see the institutions of agents of Parliament as guardians of value.
There was the creation of the Auditor General's Office shortly after Confederation, when there were a variety of financial scandals. There was the creation of Elections Canada after some of the electoral scandals during and after the First World War. The Official Languages Office was created in 1969 as a response to the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, which was itself a response to the sometimes violent expression of Quebec nationalism. Later governments brought in offices of information, privacy, lobbying, ethics. There are some experts who think that we have gone too far, that the proliferation of offices of agents of Parliament has undermined the role of parliamentarians in holding government to account.
I certainly don't feel that's the case with my office. My advice would be to walk very carefully before immediately creating another officer or agent of Parliament. I would suggest looking at it in the context of the evolution of agents of Parliament and some of the academic literature that has raised questions about whether there are too many.
I think we all now play important roles, but I think parliamentarians should reflect seriously on whether an increase in these offices would contribute to the role of parliamentarians or undermine it. There are some academics like Donald Savoie who argue that the traditional role of parliamentarians has been somewhat undermined by the continual creation of these offices.