Immigrants from China struggling to obtain security clearances for government jobs, senator says

2025/12/01 2 Comments

Of note and not surprising (Senator Woo tends to underestimate risks of foreign interference):

A senator told a parliamentary committee that he’s hearing of immigrants from China, with marginal connections to the ruling Chinese Communist Party or other government bodies, who are finding it difficult to obtain security clearances for Canadian public-sector jobs.

Senator Yuen Pau Woo raised the matter during a meeting of the Senate committee on foreign affairs and international trade Thursday, where he asked officials from the Department of Global Affairs to address it.

“I’ve encountered more and more cases of individuals looking to do government jobs, maybe work for a senator, or an MP, having their security clearances rejected or not responded to at all,” Mr. Woo said.

On the face of it, Mr. Woo said, it seems this is happening because the applicants “come from the People’s Republic of China and have the most tangential links to the CCP or some government organ,” he said, referring to the Chinese Communist Party, which has ruled China for 76 years….

Source: Immigrants from China struggling to obtain security clearances for government jobs, senator says

Filed under Government, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

A Model Evaluation Framework for Industrial Policy in Canada 

2025/11/26 1 Comment

Most of the recommendations apply more broadly than industrial policy:

The author recommends that governments:

  1. Show leadership from senior decision-makers, with an explicit commitment at the highest possible level to evaluate industrial policy, backed by sufficient resources.
  2. Incentivize industrial policy evaluation by elevating its status in budget and funding decisions.
  3. Create a dedicated, centralized industrial policy evaluation unit, resourced over and above the budgets of existing departmental/ministerial evaluation units.
  4. Spell out clear guidelines for evaluation of industrial policy through mechanisms such as a Cabinet Directive, and mandate the publication of all evaluations.
  5. Develop an industrial policy evaluation schedule that is synchronized with key funding decisions, such as budget cycles.
  6. Devise a system of fast-track evaluations for industrial policy decisions to provide sufficient insights to inform evidence-based decision-making;
  7. Develop a general logic model template to help frame industrial policy evaluations and translate outcomes and impacts into measurable performance indicators.
  8. Adopt a consistent approach to industrial policy evaluation reporting and dissemination to allow for comparison across policies, including tax expenditures.
  9. Invest in advanced digital technologies, such as big data analytics, artificial intelligence and machine learning, to improve the design of industrial policies and lower the cost of evaluations.

The renewed interest in Canadian industrial policy should be accompanied by a renewed focus on sound evaluation practices. Governments need to break the cycle of disinterest in evaluation, given the scale of industrial policies and the risks involved. Robust evaluation practices are critical to the successful use of industrial policy to address Canada’s most pressing challenges.

Douglas Nevison is an economist and a former senior public servant at Environment and Climate Change Canada, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Privy Council Office and the Department of Finance Canada. Throughout his career, he has been a strong advocate for policy and program evaluation and evidence-informed decision-making.

Source: A Model Evaluation Framework for Industrial Policy in Canada

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

Reich: Sinister Pragmatism

2025/11/24 Leave a comment

Well worth reading. Parallels to the rise of Hitler and the Nazis and the supine nature of the German business community:

If you’re a multibillionaire, you might view democracy as a potential threat to your net worth. Control over a significant share of the dwindling number of media outlets would enable you to effectively hedge against democracy by suppressing criticism of you and other plutocrats, and discouraging any attempt to – for example – tax away your wealth. 

You also have Donald Trump to contend with. In his second term of office, Trump has brazenly and illegally used the power of the US presidency to punish his enemies and reward those who lavish him with praise and profits. 

So perhaps it shouldn’t have been surprising that the editorial board of the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post defended the razing of the East Wing of the White House to build Trump his giant ballroom – without disclosing that the Jeff Bezos-owned Amazon is a major corporate contributor to the ballroom’s funding. The Post’s editorial board also applauded Trump’s defense department’s decision to obtain a new generation of smaller nuclear reactors, but failed to mention Amazon’s stake in X-energy, a company that’s developing small nuclear reactors. And it criticised Washington DC’s refusal to accept self-driving cars without disclosing that Amazon’s self-driving car company was trying to get into the Washington DC market. 

These breaches are inexcusable. 

It’s much the same with the family of Larry Ellison, founder of software firm Oracle and the second-richest person in the world. Ellison is a longtime Trump donor who also, according to court records, participated in a phone call to discuss how his 2020 election defeat could be contested. 

In June 2025, Ellison and Oracle were cosponsors of Trump’s military parade in Washington. At the time, Larry and his son David, founder of Skydance Media, were waiting for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to approve their $8bn merger with Paramount Global, owner of CBS News. 

In the run-up to the sale, some top brass at CBS News and its flagship 60 Minutes resigned, citing concerns over the network’s ability to maintain its editorial independence, and revealing pressure by Paramount to tamp down stories critical of Trump. No matter. Too much money was at stake. 

In July, Paramount paid $16m to settle Trump’s frivolous lawsuit against CBS and cancelled the Late Show with Stephen Colbert, much to Trump’s delight. Three weeks after the settlement was announced, Trump loyalist Brendan Carr, chairman of the FCC, approved the Ellisons’ deal, making David chief executive of the new media giant Paramount Skydance and giving him control of CBS News. 

It is impossible to know the full extent to which criticism of Trump and his administration has been chilled by the media-owning billionaires, or what fawning coverage has been elicited. 

But what we do know is that billionaire media owners like Musk, Bezos, Ellison and Murdoch are businessmen first and foremost. Their highest goal is not to inform the public but to make money. They know Trump can wreak havoc on their businesses by imposing unfriendly FCC rulings, enforcing labor laws against them or denying them lucrative government contracts. 

And in an era when wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals who have bought up key media, with a thin-skinned president who is willing and able to violate laws and norms to punish or reward, there is a growing danger that the public will not be getting the truth it needs to function. 

Source: Ultra-rich media owners are tightening their grip on democracy. It’s time to wrest our power back

Filed under Government Tagged with , , , ,

Savoie: If Canada wants to recapture the national ambition of the 1960s, it must seriously cut the bloat

2025/11/19 Leave a comment

Agree on need to focus on programs and whether or not they are making a significant difference in terms of concrete outcomes. Requires a government willing to expend political capital:

A more promising approach is to take a look at programs that have passed their best-before dates and scrutinize the growing number of departments and agencies. For one, Ottawa should be asking if we still need seven regional agencies. The federal government should try harder to stay in its lane and deal with its core responsibilities, such as national defence. It should also ask provinces to look after their constitutional responsibilities, thus avoiding costly duplications. 

Another place for cuts would be the Canada School of Public Service, which spends $94-million annually and, beyond its responsibility for second-language training, would be hard-pressed to show it has contributed to better management. France did away with its École Nationale d’Administration in 2021 and Britain shut down its National School of Government in 2012. The United States, meanwhile, has long rejected efforts to establish a Public Service Academy. 

There are many other government agencies that should be reviewed, particularly given Ottawa’s difficult fiscal situation. Parliament should also ask if it needs nine officers, when other Commonwealth parliaments make do with less; Australia, for example, has only four. Dealing with these questions would let the whale swim like it did in the 1960s. 

As is often the case, Ottawa has a well-honed capacity to define a new approach and new policies. Where it fails is in the implementation. The test will be not in announcing new projects, but in how Ottawa will declutter the machinery of government and empower those on the front line trying to make the approach work.

Source: If Canada wants to recapture the national ambition of the 1960s, it must seriously cut the bloat

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

Canada needs a smaller, more capable, more affordable public service | MacDougall

2025/11/13 Leave a comment

Agree on potential to improve service and that public sector unions would be better off focussing on how it can and should be used to improve service to the public as well as reduce administrative costs in such areas as finance, HR and others:

…Now, I happen to think the promise of AI is vastly oversold. But it is also the kind of technology that should be able to empower public servants to deliver public services more effectively. It should help a smaller federal workforce deliver exactly the same level of service, if not better. Given the country is staring at red ink and increased debt service charges as far as the eye can see, a little trimming of the federal workforce, like taxes for the general population, is the price we pay for civil society.

Imagine if — just once — a federal public sector union put their hand up and acknowledged some need for cuts and/or reform? Imagine if the public service unions had the humility to acknowledge imperfection and their extremely privileged position vis-à-vis the vast majority of Canadians with lower salaries and cubic zirconium-plated pensions (if they have any pension savings at all)? Imagine if a public service union were a part of the solution instead of part of the problem? The country doesn’t need any more blocks on reform. It needs a smaller, more capable, more affordable public service.

Which isn’t to denigrate the role of unions. I’m sure Mark Carney’s blind trusts are full of investments in the kinds of companies that have chipped away all manner of worker protections to increase investor profits, as are many of our pension funds. I wouldn’t want to be an Uber driver or an Amazon fulfillment centre worker any more than you do, even if I benefit from their services. That hypocrisy is a prime example of why the people who most need union representation are not those in the public sector. What’s more, if recalcitrant public sector unions are the only remaining examples of union stewardship, their function will engender more anger than sympathy amongst the general population.

More to the point, the modernization of the public service can only happen effectively if the unions and government work together. Again, what the public service unions need to realize and accept is that this government might be the last one that approaches the task with a scalpel instead of a chainsaw.

Source: Canada needs a smaller, more capable, more affordable public service | Opinion

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

May: Leadership Signals – Take it as permission to simplify

2025/11/12 Leave a comment

Her weekly posts are required reading. This week’s except that I liked:

…Small things can be transformative, says Allen Sutherland, president of the Institute on Governance. Such as: the steady signals Carney and Sabia send about not letting process or the “web of rules” get in the way. Streamline. Simplify.

“If there is some transformation in the public service day to day — where public servants act with more commitment to implementation and less focus on simply being rule followers — then I’d say that’s very transformative.”

In short, leadership signals can drive change and behaviour across the public service.

For Michael Wernick, who once sat in Sabia’s chair as clerk, the budget falls short on real transformation. It has aspirational reforms, but none of the legislative fixes, structural pruning, or deep investment in public-service capacity needed.

For Sahir Khan, the budget is like a solid mid-term grade. But “the final mark will depend entirely on execution — and that burden falls squarely on the public service,” says Khan, vice president at OttawaU’s Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy.

One senior bureaucrat summed it up: Carney’s approach isn’t about transforming the institution or rethinking its principles. It’s pragmatic: the public service is being reshaped by being told to deliver on priorities.

“That’s the Carney transformation. You don’t waste time on a grand plan. You set aspirational goals and tell them to get it done.”

Another added: “The government isn’t focused on institutional theory but on practical, delivery-focused fixes. Carney isn’t interested in changing the public service to be different — he’s interested in it changing to deliver something he wants done differently. The focus is on results.”

This approach of skipping grand plans is concentrating attention and decision-making in the PMO and PCO on departments tied to top priorities. Some bureaucrats worry that political staff will jump in to fill gaps if public servants can’t move fast enough. That would blur accountability. It also raises questions about whether departments not directly tied to top priorities are getting enough attention.

Source: May: Leadership Signals – Take it as permission to simplify

Filed under Government Tagged with , , , , ,

Canadian government employees’ productivity dropped 4 percent below private sector workers in last decade: Study

2025/11/05 Leave a comment

Worrisome, timing perfect in context of expected public service cuts. Really find the observation in the CSPS study on various program reviews is asking the right question:

“Technological developments during the past 80 years, if not the past 30 years, should have reduced the labour requirement. Computers, digital automation, and internet communications have made direct services easier to provide to Canadians. Forms and databases automate many tasks with higher accuracy, e.g. security checks, benefit applications, tax returns. Yet, the same number of Canadians is served by each public servant after decades of efficiency measures in spending restraint. Why is this? An un-nuanced early result appears to be that programs are more complex, as is the work to deliver them, even while the inflation-adjusted value delivered to each Canadian has not changed much in the last fifty years. However, some of this complexity may be unnecessary.”

The productivity of Canadian public sector workers declined over the last decade at a loss of 0.3 percent annually, while private sector employees’ productivity grew by 0.5 percent per year on average, according to a new research paper published by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI).

The study also found that if the productivity of government workers (federal and provincial) matched that of the private sector, Canada’s GDP in 2024 would have been $32 billion more or 1.5 percent higher.

“Essentially what we’re seeing through the data is that the size of government is growing, but a variety of different measures that you look at, for its overall performance and outputs and efficiency, [they’ve] been going down over time,” said Stephen Tapp, the author of the MLI study—“The Growing Government Gap”—and chief economist at the Centre for the Study of Living Standards. “So [public sector productivity is] obviously lagging behind and dragging [GDP] down.”

Tapp found that public sector worker productivity went from being slightly higher on average than private sector counterparts in 2015, then dropped 4 percentage points lower by 2024.

Despite this marked dip in productivity, government workers still earn an average of 27 percent more per hour worked than Canadians in the private sector. The MLI study mirrors a recent Fraser Institute study, which showed government employees in Canada make an average of 4.8 percent more, as well as receive more generous pensions and retire two years earlier on average….

Tapp found that for 88 percent of government subsectors, job growth outpaced the private sector; the same was true in eight of 10 provinces, and 78 percent of federal government organizations. He believes the Carney government’s reported plan to cut 15 percent across all government departments may be the wrong approach because some outlier government departments actually have a higher productivity rate….

Source: Canadian government employees’ productivity dropped 4 percent below private sector workers in last decade: Study

Filed under Government Tagged with , , ,

May: The Day of [Budget] Sacrifice

2025/11/03 Leave a comment

Good piece:

….The budget, he [Daniel Quan-Watson] says, also marks a sharp philosophical turn. For a decade, the public service operated on a “do everything” instinct – fix every injustice, chase every big ambition, launch every initiative.
 
That era is over.
 
“It’s not that yesterday’s priorities don’t matter,” he says. “It’s that some things matter even more today. You ask, ‘Where are the injustices?’ You get one – maybe six, but it isn’t 22.”
 
“We’re not going for stars now – we’re going for low-orbit satellites. And if you catch one, you’ll be lucky.”
 
This is the moment to lead. As Anil Arora, Canada’s former chief statistician puts it, the public service needs doers, not more talkers.
 
“For too long, leadership has been about coming up with ideas, putting them out there and walking away. That won’t cut it anymore. The country doesn’t just need policy – it needs people who can implement and deliver. This is real. This is our moment. Step up when the country needs you.”

The warning signs of decline. All this comes against a backdrop of a public service – while still among the world’s best – is showing cracks. Jocelyne Bourgon is a former clerk. She is one of the architects of the 1995 program review and has advised governments around the world. She’s taken a hard look at how Canada’s public service stacks up globally. Her conclusion: it’s slipping.

The warning signs are there. Morale is down. Fewer public servants feel valued. Citizens report declining satisfaction with government services – from health care and passports to Phoenix pay, digital procurement, and CRA call centres. Canada’s e-government ranking tells the same story: we were third in the world in 2010. Now we’re 47th.
 
Bourgon (above) calls this an inflection point – a moment to act before the decline deepens. And with the Carney government signalling major downsizing and operational shifts in the budget, the public service is about to face that challenge head-on.

Source: The Day of Sacrifice

This CSPS is a very good reference document. Have highlighted the lessons learned but a must read for those interested in governance and program reviews. Found the tech observation particularly of interest:

Lessons from Past Spending Reviews

  • Lesson 1: Review impacts are not well tracked or understood.
  • Lesson 2: Spending reviews have not presented detailed analysis of the service-level impacts to Canadians.
  • Lesson 3: It is generally difficult to determine the impact of spending reviews on services to different populations in Canada.
  • Lesson 4: Program reductions tend to be undone over time.
  • Lesson 5: Spending reviews affect the federal workforce through job losses, expected productivity gains, uncertainty around change, and other morale-related considerations.
  • Lesson 6: Several second-order observations from this review have implications for how future spending restraint may be carried out.

These observations are not directly related to the mechanics of reviews, but could constrain fiscal or other policy in a way that changes the shape or importance of spending reviews. The following observations fall into this category.

  • Lesson 7: Canada is unlikely to further increase free trade in the same dramatic manner as with the 1991 launch of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
  • Lesson 8: Raising consumption taxes (i.e. HST) remains a broad-based option for increasing revenue.
  • Lesson 9: Canada’s public service uses roughly the same labour mix to run its programs as it has since 1946.

Technological developments during the past 80 years, if not the past 30 years, should have reduced the labour requirement. Computers, digital automation, and internet communications have made direct services easier to provide to Canadians. Forms and databases automate many tasks with higher accuracy, e.g. security checks, benefit applications, tax returns. Yet, the same number of Canadians is served by each public servant after decades of efficiency measures in spending restraint. Why is this? An un-nuanced early result appears to be that programs are more complex, as is the work to deliver them, even while the inflation-adjusted value delivered to each Canadian has not changed much in the last fifty years. However, some of this complexity may be unnecessary.

  • Lesson 10: Federal operations have legislative or policy barriers that reduce the full benefit of technological advances and maintain or increase complexity.

Source: CSPS: Canada’s Federal Spending Reviews – Lessons

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Lang: Ottawa’s bureaucracy has too many managers who are busy managing their own bloat

2025/11/01 Leave a comment

One of the interesting nuggets in this analysis is that the growth appears highest among ADMs as the overall growth since 2015 has been relatively stable, ranging from 2.9 to 3.0 percent of all public servants:

…Seventy years ago, British historian C. Northcote Parkinson coined “Parkinson’s Law,” which helps explain this staggering growth of the public service and its executive class. Observing the expansion of the British Colonial Office, which occurred alongside the decline of the British Empire, Parkinson pointed out that the ranks of the public service tend to grow regardless of the volume of work to be done. He attributed this to two claims: “An official wants to multiply subordinates, not rivals” and “Officials make work for each other,” in other words, there is a natural tendency to multiply subordinates to sustain the rise of officials, which in turn creates demand for more and more officials. As Parkinson put it, “Far more people have taken far longer to produce the same result. No one has been idle. All have done their best.” 

Ottawa’s bureaucracy is well aware of the problem, even if it hasn’t done much to fix it. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, recent attempts at work-force reduction have targeted term and casual employees, while the share of permanent positions, such as those occupied by executives, has reached a decade high. 

A report by the Public Service Management Advisory Committee could have been lifted directly from Parkinson’s playbook: “New [executive] jobs at all levels are created, in many cases without a significant change in the organization’s mandate.” The result is “dilution and duplication” leading to “unnecessary layers of decision-making and unclear accountabilities. It slows down productivity and creates workplace conflicts.” Former clerk of the Privy Council Michael Wernick has raised concerns that Ottawa’s “pyramid of executives” are slowing decision making and impeding communication.

Businesspeople will recognize the pathology. When companies multiply vice-presidents, decisions slow, accountability blurs and egos multiply faster than outcomes. But in the private sector, profit and loss eventually impose discipline. In government, the taxpayer funds the experiment until someone yells “enough is enough.” …

Source: Ottawa’s bureaucracy has too many managers who are busy managing their own bloat

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Lavoie: Should Carney, the businessman, really run Canada like a business?

2025/10/30 1 Comment

One of the better explanations of the difference between business and government:

…Business has one objective that trumps all others: maximizing profit and shareholder return. Shareholders care little if their product serves no noble purpose, nor is the welfare of their workers necessarily a priority. Consumers care little if a company goes bankrupt because of poor decisions – they simply buy elsewhere. And the bad decisions that eventually sink a company may have already generated fortunes for CEOs and shareholders, who often depart before the collapse. 

The government’s goal is providing the institutional framework that allows current and future constituents to enjoy a good quality of life. This means tackling complex, interconnected issues such as poverty, public health, the environment, justice, security and the functioning of markets – not optimizing a single metric. The trade-offs between various government objectives and between current and future generations require careful analysis, consultation, collaboration and compromise.

Governments must be more risk-averse than businesses. Failing to provide Old Age Security, the Canada Pension Plan, public security or law enforcement – or leaving a crushing burden to future generations – would have far more dire societal consequences than a company bankruptcy. Government cannot act without societal acceptance or outside accepted cultural norms, both of which change slowly. This means it will never be as nimble as a business. And that’s a good thing….

Source: Should Carney, the businessman, really run Canada like a business?

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →