I'd rather have an agency that looks out for its mandated constiuents instead of the companies in the industry it manages, frankly.
Also, as to that article, when its someone from a consulting firm brought in to audit your company who criticizes you, I don't think its necessarily a lack of transparency if those results (even if they're negative) make it to the press and you address the claims. If anything, this is someone submitting an anonymous complaint regarding the management (and such a complaint can be devastating to a person's career if made publically in any industry, hence whistleblower statutes in the first place) that was seen to have merit by an outside body, and is now being investigated.
In the case of the telecommunications industry, they responded to claims they were throttling bandwidth by saying "its good for the customer to not get the service they pay for because we reduce traffic, what, we're throttling programs that could compete with our on-demand programming, don't worry, we're a company, we look out for our customers".
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2...videotron.html
Also, why would you think a private corporation would have more public transparency than a crown corp, which is answerable to the government and the public, rather than a board of directors and possibly the shareholders?
