The Functionary On PM Carney’s Work Style

2025/06/11 2 Comments

Another interesting assessment of Carney’s management style:

“For too long, when federal agencies have examined a new project, their immediate question has been ‘why?’ With this bill, we will instead ask ourselves ‘how?’” he said.

That’s a signal.

He expects the public service to change how it works: less process, more results. Less caution, more action. Fewer barriers, more execution.

The bill also creates a Major Projects Office — a single federal point of contact to help priority projects through assessment and permitting.

It’s a tall order: a major cultural shift from administration to execution. From gatekeepers to doers. Public servants managed to do it during the pandemic, when rules loosened and they were galvanized by the mission to protect the health of Canadians.

But this time around it won’t be easy. As one long-time deputy minister put it, this is about a “client-focused approach to delivery” for a system built on managing risk and compliance.

“This legislation is a test for us to prove we can deliver. People are excited, but we’ll have to work really hard to do it,” said a senior bureaucrat not authorized to speak publicly.

“How do we streamline our processes to be more efficient? How do we actually think about the national interests of the country while recognizing environmental and Indigenous rights? That culture shift is a different way of thinking and focuses on execution.”….

Ready or not, Carney demands answers
Word has spread fast that Carney doesn’t suffer weak briefings. He’s known to cut them short when officials can’t answer his questions — and to call people out when they’re unprepared.

The stories get retold, maybe reshaped — it is Ottawa, after all — but the message has landed: come ready or don’t come at all.

Everyone’s heard a version: Carney meets with a senior bureaucrat who can’t answer a question. He stops the briefing cold and in so many words tells them to come back when they know their file. Ouch.

The risk in that kind of exchange? Officials might start pulling their punches — and stop speaking truth to power.

Carney brings a “toughness,” as one senior bureaucrat told me. He expects the clerk and deputy ministers to know their files cold. No vague answers. No promises to follow up. He wants clear answers in the room. “He digs and digs,” said one official. “People will just have to adjust and be ready for that.”

Source: The Functionary On PM Carney’s Work Style

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

How DOGE’s push to amass data could hurt the reliability of future U.S. statistics

2025/06/05 Leave a comment

Part of the destruction of government institutions under the Trump administration:

Falling public participation in surveys and trust in government have plagued the U.S. Census Bureau for decades.

And some of the agency’s current and former workers say there’s a new complication to gathering enough survey responses to produce key statistics for the country.

The Trump administration’s murky handling of data, which has sparked investigations and lawsuits alleging privacy violations, has become one of the reasons people cite when declining to share their information for the federal government’s ongoing surveys, these workers say.

“I got more people asking me how I know information isn’t going to be sold or given away,” says a former field representative, who says they were met with “a lot of suspicion” and specific mentions of Elon Musk, President Trump’s billionaire adviser who set up the DOGE team, from some households they tried to interview earlier this year. The former bureau employee, who was let go as part of the Trump administration’s downsizing of the federal government, asked not to be named because they fear retaliation.

A current field representative says they don’t “feel as comfortable” in their role as they felt asking questions for surveys last year — and neither do some people who had previously shared their information. One person specifically mentioned DOGE when declining a follow-up interview, says the current representative, who asked NPR not to name them because they are not authorized to speak publicly.

“It’s a system that runs on trust, and the trust, I would say, has been declining,” the current field representative says. “It makes me sad as an American that distrust is at that level. But I do understand it. I fear for the data I’m collecting. Is it going to be misused? And the privacy guarantees that I describe to people — are those going to be respected?”

These questions don’t surprise Nancy Bates, a former senior researcher for survey methodology at the bureau. Bates has tracked declining public participation in the census going back to the 1990 tally.

Federal law prohibits the bureau from releasing information that would identify a person or business to anyone, including other federal agencies and law enforcement. But a report Bates helped prepare during the first Trump administration found 28% of people surveyed in 2018 said they were very or extremely concerned the bureau would not keep their 2020 census answers confidential.

“Even prior to DOGE, the Census Bureau was always dealing with a level of mistrust about privacy and confidentiality,” says Bates, who, after retiring from the agency in 2020, helped lead its 2030 census advisory committee before the Trump administration disbanded it. “I absolutely can see why the public concern would be increased following these unauthorized and illegal access to data.”…

Source: How DOGE’s push to amass data could hurt the reliability of future U.S. statistics

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Savoie: Public service reform is only possible if the Prime Minister champions the project

2025/06/04 Leave a comment

Yep:

…The government’s agenda can be developed by asking a series of questions. What government structure is needed to promote a unified, single Canadian economy? How can we best redirect resources to high-priority areas such as trade and national defence? How can Ottawa pull back from more areas of provincial jurisdiction? The federal government has nearly 300 organizations, and it’s time to weed out those that are past their best-before dates; the same can be said about some federal government programs. 

But unless the Prime Minister ensures that these questions are answered and action is taken, the government will be like the proverbial goldfish, going around and around in its bowl repeating nice castle, nice castle. 

Source: Public service reform is only possible if the Prime Minister champions the project

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

ICYMI: Former top bureaucrat Jocelyne Bourgon calls for bold public service reform to match Carney’s economic plan

2025/05/23 Leave a comment

As always, the challenge lies in the doing, but a good list:

…Among areas to start with:

Previous promises: Governments should take a hard look at pre-election and election commitments. If they no longer fit the fiscal or policy needs, restructure, postpone – or drop them. Finding cheaper ways to deliver them should also be on the table, too.

Review temporary funding: Governments have long relied on “temporary funding” for short-term initiatives, which can be up to 30 per cent of some departments’ budgets. This distorts the true deficit picture, encourages governments to focus on “announceables,” and leaves others to manage expiring funds. Review them to ensure these initiatives align with government priorities, such as reducing dependency on the U.S., or to phase them out altogether.

Tax Expenditures: Canada’s tax system hasn’t been reassessed since the 1960s, and most tax credits and exemptions haven’t been reviewed since the ’80s. Bourgon says revisiting them could yield more savings than any program review could.

Simplify, simplify, simplify: A key step is to simplify – everything. From regulations, legislation, to forms to internal processes, simplification is its own type of reform, and one that could make government more effective and less costly.

Agencies and Structures: When Bourgon was clerk, there were 109 departments, agencies, and Crown corporations. Today, there may be 250 – or more. That growth has brought over 2,000 senior executives, each with internal supports. Has it improved results? She suggests full portfolio-level reviews to cut, consolidate, or integrate agencies.

Central agencies: Since 2000, the budgets of the Privy Council Office, Treasury Board, and Finance have soared — up 250 per cent, 540 per cent and 220 per cent respectively. Bourgon says it’s time to review them. When central agencies get too operational, she warns, they lose the big picture. Bogged down in transactions, they stop thinking strategically – and when excellence slips, the public service falls behind its global peers.

Start at the top: Look at political staff. Their ranks have swelled to 765, up 60 per cent since 2011 and six times more than the U.K., a country with nearly double our population. Shrink the number and refocus their roles on building political alliances, maintaining party unity, and managing Parliament. The savings might be small, but the message is powerful.

And, she notes, a smaller cabinet also performs better – and costs less.

Source: Former top bureaucrat Jocelyne Bourgon calls for bold public service reform to match Carney’s economic plan

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

ICYMI – May: Could ‘mission government’ solve Ottawa’s delivery problems?

2025/05/23 Leave a comment

Agree with overall assessment. Political and bureaucratic will central to any efforts:

…Longtime bureaucrats say they’ve seen other versions of this before—tiger teams, super ministers, special cabinet committees—and that mission government is just the latest trendy management brand to fix age-old problems. One noted the government already has many of the tools it needs to fix things. What it takes is political will and strong, focused leadership. Without that, the system reverts to the status quo—and resists change. 

“I’m not sure it really matters how you do it. What you need is the prime minister to say, ‘This needs to get done,’ and a political co-ordination mechanism to drive it across departments. So, call it mission or whatever.” 

Many bureaucrats expect Carney to govern like a CEO focused on priorities, outcomes, and results. Some anticipate he’ll be ruthless if progress stalls. Others question whether his central banking background fully prepares him for the operational demands of governing. 

In his first press conference as prime minister, Carney outlined his priorities: meeting with Trump, cutting internal trade barriers, launching nation-building projects, accelerating housing, tightening border security, and toughening bail for some crimes.

Those familiar with early briefings say Carney’s mindset seems clear: “’How quickly can we do this? How do we accelerate? How do we show action?’ There’s a rigor to the way he thinks, and the system will have to adapt to keep up. It’s kind of refreshing to see,” said one senior bureaucrat.

Source: Could ‘mission government’ solve Ottawa’s delivery problems?

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

Does size really matter? Rethinking public service reform

2025/04/04 Leave a comment

Larger public service does not equal improved public services as we have learned from the Trudeau years. That being said, more fundamental examination of program outcomes and efficiencies needed (e.g., program review exercise), but size and high growth rates are proxies that most people understand:

…Interestingly, neither Carney’s nor Poilievre’s perspectives acknowledge that higher program spending and larger headcounts has not led to significant improvement in public service delivery, as shown by a recent analysis by Jennifer Robson, one of our co-authors. 

This is a critical point. The effectiveness of public services cannot be accurately assessed by size alone. The simplistic equation of a larger public service with inefficiency, or a smaller one with effectiveness, ignores the complexities inherent in governance. 

Effective public service requires a nuanced approach that considers not just the quantity of personnel but also the quality of services provided, the efficiency of processes and the outcomes for citizens. 

While the Trudeau government expanded the public service, this did not necessarily translate into improved services. As Robson points out, this discrepancy suggests that merely increasing or decreasing staff numbers is not a panacea for the challenges facing public administration.  

The focus, therefore, should shift from a binary debate over size to a more comprehensive discussion about efficacy. 

This includes examining how public services are designed and implemented, how they adapt to changing societal needs and how they can be reformed to better serve the public without necessarily expanding or contracting the workforce arbitrarily. 

Such a perspective moves beyond partisan talking points and addresses the real issue: delivering high-quality public services that meet the needs of Canadians efficiently and effectively. 

This perspective would also better reflect nuanced public opinion. Concerns about government spending do not necessarily translate into support for across-the-board cuts. Instead, Canadians prioritize investment in essential services. 

This is not just a debate about numbers on a balance sheet. It is a battle over the role of government itself. 

By reducing it to a question of ideological alignment – big government versus small government, or populists versus bureaucrats – politicians risk weakening institutional legitimacy and public trust. 

This also diverts discourse and resources away from the core issues affecting public service efficacy, including procedural barriers, resource constraints, and training and talent management.  

Framing this debate as being over size makes for a slippery slope toward the deeply entrenched partisanship evident in the U.S. and toward an erosion of public trust in the public service. 

Canada now faces a defining question: Will we follow the U.S. in politicizing public institutions? Or will we maintain a commitment to evidence-based, professional and accountable governance? The answer will shape the future of Canada’s public sector – and the country’s political landscape – for years.  

Source: Does size really matter? Rethinking public service reform

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Savoie: The election campaign is a chance to rethink Canada’s public sector

2025/04/01 1 Comment

It is, like so many issues. However, unlikely to gain traction given more pressing issues and few short-term political benefits in doing so:

…Canada’s underperforming public service is too big, too costly. It keeps growing in good and bad times at both the federal and provincial levels. Since 2020-21, the size of the federal public service, for example, has grown by 3.7 per cent annually, above the average growth rate of 1 per cent between 2007 and 2020 (the pre-COVID pandemic period). The IMF reports that the public sector in Canada accounts for 42.5 per cent of GDP. In the U.S., the figure is 36.3 per cent – and that was before Mr. Musk was let loose with his chainsaw.

Canadians know that they are not getting value for their money from the public sector, as public opinion surveys show. It’s time to finally deal with activities that have long passed their best-before date and to accept that our public sector managers have lost the ability to manage and, in particular, deal with non-performers. This is costly and saps the morale of many public sector workers who work hard in the public interest. What is often lost in the debate is that public sector managers want to perform at the top level; they don’t want to be handcuffed by overly demanding transparency requirements and the work of public sector unions.

These unions have a lot to answer for. The fact that 77 per cent of public sector workers in Canada belong to a union, compared to 15.5 per cent in the private sector, speaks to the problem. Their purpose is to promote the interest of their members, because that is what they are paid to do. They only need to push against political will, which is at times shaky, while private sector unions must push against unbending markets forces that are certain to become more difficult in the Trump era.

An election campaign provides the opportunity for a debate on the role of government and public sector unions, and to ask if the federal government still requires nearly 300 organizations. Canadians should also ask if the federal government has encroached too far in areas of provincial responsibilities because it has the spending power to do so. Time would be better spent debating these issues rather than reacting to every social media message or change of mind that comes out of the White House.

Source: The election campaign is a chance to rethink Canada’s public sector

Filed under Government Tagged with

Snyder: Twenty Lessons, read by John Lithgow

2025/04/01 Leave a comment

Good reminder (most of the US business, academic and other leaders failing the moment):

1. Do not obey in advance. Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do.

2. Defend institutions. It is institutions that help us to preserve decency. They need our help as well. Do not speak of “our institutions” unless you make them yours by acting on their behalf. Institutions do not protect themselves. They fall one after the other unless each is defended from the beginning. So choose an institution you care about — a court, a newspaper, a law, a labor union — and take its side.

3. Beware the one-party state. The parties that remade states and suppressed rivals were not omnipotent from the start. They exploited a historic moment to make political life impossible for their opponents. So support the multiple-party system and defend the rules of democratic elections. Vote in local and state elections while you can. Consider running for office.

4. Take responsibility for the face of the world. The symbols of today enable the reality of tomorrow. Notice the swastikas and the other signs of hate. Do not look away, and do not get used to them. Remove them yourself and set an example for others to do so.

5. Remember professional ethics. When political leaders set a negative example, professional commitments to just practice become more important. It is hard to subvert a rule-of-law state without lawyers, or to hold show trials without judges. Authoritarians need obedient civil servants, and concentration camp directors seek businessmen interested in cheap labor.

6. Be wary of paramilitaries. When the men with guns who have always claimed to be against the system start wearing uniforms and marching with torches and pictures of a leader, the end is nigh. When the pro-leader paramilitary and the official police and military intermingle, the end has come.

7. Be reflective if you must be armed. If you carry a weapon in public service, may God bless you and keep you. But know that evils of the past involved policemen and soldiers finding themselves, one day, doing irregular things. Be ready to say no.

8. Stand out. Someone has to. It is easy to follow along. It can feel strange to do or say something different. But without that unease, there is no freedom. Remember Rosa Parks. The moment you set an example, the spell of the status quo is broken, and others will follow.

9. Be kind to our language. Avoid pronouncing the phrases everyone else does. Think up your own way of speaking, even if only to convey that thing you think everyone is saying. Make an effort to separate yourself from the internet. Read books.

10. Believe in truth. To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle. The biggest wallet pays for the most blinding lights.

11. Investigate. Figure things out for yourself. Spend more time with long articles. Subsidize investigative journalism by subscribing to print media. Realize that some of what is on the internet is there to harm you. Learn about sites that investigate propaganda campaigns (some of which come from abroad). Take responsibility for what you communicate with others.

12. Make eye contact and small talk. This is not just polite. It is part of being a citizen and a responsible member of society. It is also a way to stay in touch with your surroundings, break down social barriers, and understand whom you should and should not trust. If we enter a culture of denunciation, you will want to know the psychological landscape of your daily life.

13. Practice corporeal politics. Power wants your body softening in your chair and your emotions dissipating on the screen. Get outside. Put your body in unfamiliar places with unfamiliar people. Make new friends and march with them. 

14. Establish a private life. Nastier rulers will use what they know about you to push you around. Scrub your computer of malware on a regular basis. Remember that email is skywriting. Consider using alternative forms of the internet, or simply using it less. Have personal exchanges in person. For the same reason, resolve any legal trouble. Tyrants seek the hook on which to hang you. Try not to have hooks.

15. Contribute to good causes. Be active in organizations, political or not, that express your own view of life. Pick a charity or two and set up autopay. Then you will have made a free choice that supports civil society and helps others to do good.

16. Learn from peers in other countries. Keep up your friendships abroad, or make new friends in other countries. The present difficulties in the United States are an element of a larger trend. And no country is going to find a solution by itself. Make sure you and your family have passports.

17. Listen for dangerous words. Be alert to use of the words “extremism” and “terrorism.” Be alive to the fatal notions of “emergency” and “exception.” Be angry about the treacherous use of patriotic vocabulary.

18. Be calm when the unthinkable arrives. Modern tyranny is terror management. When the terrorist attack comes, remember that authoritarians exploit such events in order to consolidate power. The sudden disaster that requires the end of checks and balances, the dissolution of opposition parties, the suspension of freedom of expression, the right to a fair trial, and so on, is the oldest trick in the Hitlerian book. Do not fall for it.

19. Be a patriot. Set a good example of what America means for the generations to come. They will need it.

20. Be as courageous as you can. If none of us is prepared to die for freedom, then all of us will die under tyranny.

Source: Snyder: Twenty Lessons, read by John Lithgow

Filed under Government, Trump administration Tagged with

HESA: That Was The Quarter That Was, Winter 2025 [Trump administration]

2025/04/01 Leave a comment

ùMore on the impact of the Trump administration’s higher education policies:

…On top of this came attacks on institutional autonomy, which for the most part consisted of threats to defund any institution which continued activities deemed to be “DEI”, a term the Administration defined in terms so vague as to make it nearly impossible to comply. In the case of Columbia University, it also threatened to defund an institution due to its failure to combat “antisemitism”, which was an odd thing to demand given how many genuine antisemites seem to orbit the Trump regime (Columbia caved). And also there was the detention and potential deportation of hundreds of international students, mainly it seems for the crime of exercising free speech and freedom of assembly in such a way as to be critical of Israel. The cumulative impact of what has happened in US in the past seventy days will take years if not decades to reverse. Careers have been destroyed. Promising lines of research – such as those involving mRNA research – have simply been dropped. If one wanted to destroy America’s future prosperity and scientific pre-eminence, one could scarcely have done more than the Trump Administration has done. This will be to the good fortune of some individual institutions in other countries, but to the world as a whole – especially North America – the faltering of science and the economic progress that depends on it will lower economic growth potential for a decade or more to come.


There are, broadly, three aspects to the whole US story. The first is one of anti-scientism, a broad disdain for the idea that anyone other than those in power are permitted to say what the truth is. This is most obvious when looking at the policies of the Department of Health and the NIH around the non-promotion of vaccines, but it permeates the administration generally. There are no other parts of the world – for the moment – where we see anything similar. But the other two aspects her – attacks on institutional autonomy and academic freedom on the one hand, and reductions in the financial capabilities of universities on the other, do have echoes elsewhere.

With respect to state controls over institutional autonomy and academic freedom, the most obvious parallel case to the United States over the past three months is Georgia, where the controversial pro-Russian government sees universities as a centre of dissent and wishes to increase supervision over them and thereby limit autonomy.  India and Pakistan have also seen flare-ups over the past few months with respect to autonomy – mainly but not exclusively relating to government use of the power to name vice-chancellors – but this is less a “new shift” than the latest incidents in a long-running battle.


The other issue, of course, is overall university funding. The United States is certainly unique in the extent to which scientific research budgets are under attack. And it is unique in the sense that it seems to be the only country where individual institutions are being singled out for specific funding reductions in the manner of Columbia University. But it is not unique in the sense that universities are feeling the need for quick retrenchment.There two closest parallels are Argentina and the Netherlands. In the former, President Milei’s inflation-busting program involves reducing government spending to well below the rate of price growth. By some accounts, real transfers to universities are now down about 30% on last year, which has led to a series of strikes. In the latter, the still new-ish coalition government, elected in 2024, is still enacting both a series of cuts to university finances and imposing restrictions on teaching programs in English, which has the effect of reducing universities’ international student fee income. This too, is leading to strike action.

Among OECD countries, universities in France, already struggling to deal with last year’s reductions in funding, got hit with a new round of compressions in the February budget, and most are looking at deficits both this year and next. The anglosphere trio of the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia are also facing continuing struggles from the loss of international students stemming from a combination of tighter visa restrictions, reduced demand and greater international competition, but unlike the other examples cited, these financial challenges in the short-term stem from a loss of market income, not government income….

Source: That Was The Quarter That Was, Winter 2025

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Open letter to the next prime minister: We need a royal commission on Canada’s future

2025/03/27 2 Comments

Yet another call:

There is no longer any room for doubt. Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency is a seismic shift for the entire world. 

However, the liberal international order that Trump threatens and that benefited Canada so greatly for so long has been unraveling for more than two decades. As a result, Canadian policies and mindsets rooted in the late 20th century are hopelessly outdated.

The time for complacency is over. Canada must wake up, adapt and steel itself for the harsh realities of today. In short, we need a royal commission on securing Canada’s future. 

The world in which Canada operates has fundamentally changed in the last 20 years. It began with the 9/11 terrorist attacks.  Afterward, security trumped trade in the U.S. New and enhanced security measures led to a “thicker” border. More rules, regulations, paperwork and scrutiny caused delays and increased costs. Canada-U.S. trade suffered as a result. 

This shift further illustrated the risks of Canada’s deep economic dependence on its southern neighbour, but our reaction was to work even more closely with the U.S. to keep the border open to trade. Since then, the escalating climate crisis, the rapid digital transformation, the global financial crisis, China’s economic and political rise, Russia’s authoritarian resurgence and U.S. fears of hegemonic decline have only intensified America’s focus on national security as a defining feature of its economic relations, pushing other countries to do he same.

The policies and governance mechanisms that underpin Canada’s society, economy and security were not designed for the current illiberal international landscape.   …

Source: Open letter to the next prime minister: We need a royal commission on Canada’s future

Filed under Government Tagged with , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →