Government rejects call to measure productivity across public service

2025/12/18 2 Comments

Sigh… While some areas intrinsically hard to measure such as policy processes and communications, operational areas are more straightforward such as application and benefit processing, HR, finance and accommodation. Good quotes from Wernick:

The federal government is rejecting a call from a working group to measure productivity across Canada’s public sector, arguing that doing so would not “readily align” with its priorities.

A working group tasked with measuring productivity in the federal public service recommends in a recent report that Statistics Canada explore, test and report publicly on the development of a productivity measurement program for the public sector.

The group says accurate and transparent measurement of public service productivity is “essential to improving outcomes” and that without reliable data, it’s “difficult to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of government services or identify areas for improvement.”

…Former clerk of the Privy Council Michael Wernick says he’s disappointed the government rejected the call to put more effort into measurement, noting it could be included in departments’ annual results reports. 

“It would have been a relatively easy give for them to say they’ll keep working and try to do better,” Wernick said. “It surprised me.”

He said government transformation and efficiency is one of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government’s “signature themes.”

“They should be receptive to it,” Wernick said.

He said there’s “nothing surprising” in the recommendations but questioned whether anything more concrete will be decided in the months to come.

“There’s a lot of specifics missing,” he said.

Source: Government rejects call to measure productivity across public service

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Kermalli: As a Muslim, I grieve the murder of Jews in Australia — the racist attack breaches the ethical core of every faith tradition

2025/12/17 Leave a comment

Good commentary:

..As a Muslim, I grieve this because antisemitism is a form of racism that breaches the ethical core of every faith tradition. I also grieve because such attacks inevitably place Muslim communities under suspicion, intensifying fear of the perceived “other.” This is not an either/or. I can acknowledge and hold both of these realities at once.

It matters, then, that amid this horror, a Muslim man intervened and acted with courage, attempting to stop the violence. The actions of Ahmed al-Ahmed, a 43-year-old father of two and Australian citizen of Syrian origin exemplify what Islam actually demands: the preservation of life, even at personal risk.

Along with the Jewish victims, he is a figure worth remembering — not because he is Muslim, but because moral clarity should guide whose stories we elevate. After the Christchurch mosque massacres in 2019, former prime minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern refused to name the killer, saying she would not give him the notoriety he sought. That restraint mattered. It still does. Let us remember the people who ran toward danger, not those who revelled in it.

What we must also resist is the rush to politicize tragedy. We cannot associate this terrorist attack with pro-Palestinian protests. If we do, we will weaken the moral credibility of movements that stand for human dignity.

Faith teaches that in the face of violence, our response must be measured, compassionate and united. We must resist the forces that seek to turn grief into conflict.

Source: As a Muslim, I grieve the murder of Jews in Australia — the racist attack breaches the ethical core of every faith tradition

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with

ICYMI: A Future Government Blueprint or Return to Yesteryear? [Lynch & Mitchell]

2025/12/17 Leave a comment

Good critique by David McLaughlin. As usual, most of these types of articles are strong in the diagnostique but weak on the how:

This might hold the bitter truth of whether our relentlessly mediocre system of governance will ever be changed. The authors note the importance of leadership in actually changing anything. Their first recommendation for implementing renewal is for the PM “to release a public statement (via a Speech from the Throne) committing the government to a major program of reform and renewal”. The reality is that unless the PM and Clerk of the Privy Council, Cabinet Secretary, and Head of the Public Service invest serious political capital in such an initiative, big necessary change will not occur. 

The authors plant their flag firmly in the terrain of big change, now. “Incrementalism is Not the Answer”, they write in their final chapter heading. “Business-as-usual is not a viable strategy for success in a world of rampant change”. No disagreement here. But good stewardship is grounded in guardian institutions with a guardian mindset. Incrementalism is a feature, not a bug, of such a system and culture. This is what governance reformers are up against as much as anything else. Incrementalism may be the only means to regime change on offer. 

If so, then this governance blueprint, or any other, requires a second layer of engineering and technical schematics as to how to get there. Credit to Lynch and Mitchell for erecting the scaffolding.

Here’s how the book’s two dozen recommendations stack up:

  • Restore Cabinet Government – 4 recommendations
    • make Cabinet the central place for collective decision-making
    • reduce the size of Cabinet by at least a third
    • return authority and accountability to ministers
    • reintroduce an operations committee to manage key files and keep government on track
  • Reverse the Centralization of Power in the PMO – 5 recommendations
    • counter the creeping ‘presidentialization’ of our Westminster system of government
    • restore the proper role and accountability between public servants and political staff
    • empower parliamentary committee with more independence, staff, and resources and fewer committees with broad mandates
    • right-size government with less spending, fewer agencies, fewer small departments, and simpler governmental organization. 
    • create an appropriate rules and accountability regime for political staff
  • Modernize Core Government Institutions – 11 recommendations
    • modernize and strengthen the public service for tomorrow
    • downsize federal employment by about 17 percent to unwind excessive growth
    • re-mandate the Treasury Board and the Public Service Commission 
    • Establish forward-looking, sophisticated planning and risk management capacity in the public service
    • rebuild a cutlure of purpose, pride, and accomplishment for results in the public service
    • simplify, reduce, and refocus government oversight mechanisms 
    • transform the RCMP into a modern national police force
    • resource, rebuild, and re-equip the Canadian Armed Forces
    • set out focused, longer-term priorities for foreign policy with the resources and capacity to execute
    • establish clear protocols for the distribution and use of intelligence
    • Focus on improving productivity, both in the private and public sectors
  • Implement the Reforms – 4 recommendations
    • release a public statement by the PM committing the government to a major program of reform and renewal
    • create a National Productivity Commission
    • Create a PM’s Advisory Council on the Public Service
    • Create an expert panel on public sector productivity

Source: A Future Government Blueprint or Return to Yesteryear?

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

ICYMI: How Trump is remaking one agency to aid his deportation push

2025/12/17 Leave a comment

The one more facilitative part of Homeland Security being undermined:

The Trump administration is transforming the agency known for processing green cards and citizenship requests into one of its strongest anti-immigration policing arms.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, is one of the three branches of the Homeland Security Department that deals with migration.

Traditionally, its more than 20,000 employees have focused on the various ways people can lawfully immigrate and stay in the U.S. — be that applying for asylum, a green card, citizenship, work visa, or another legal pathway.

Since January, administration officials have taken an axe to that traditional mission by encouraging early retirements, shuttering collective bargaining agreements and drastically cutting back on programs that facilitate legal migration. New job postings lean into the rhetoric of hiring “homeland defenders” and tackling fraud.

During his Senate confirmation, USCIS director Joseph Edlow proclaimed that “at its core, USCIS must be an immigration enforcement agency.”

The efforts come as President Trump seeks to curb illegal immigration but also reduce legal ways to get to the U.S. and stay here, especially for certain nationalities.

It’s rocking the agency from the inside, crushing morale and prompting resignations, according to current and former agency employees.

With the recent changes, at least 1,300 people took the “Fork in the Road” resignation offer for federal employees, while others have left on their own. (Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection employees were not allowed to take the offer.)

And it’s catching immigrants and their families, lawyers and advocates off guard.

“‘Am I going to get arrested?’ … That’s a question, regardless of their past,” said Eric Welsh, an immigration attorney in California who helps his clients apply for various USCIS programs.

“There really is a lot more fear and there is a lot more concern about, should we do it at all?,” Welsh said, about people applying for legal status….

Source: How Trump is remaking one agency to aid his deportation push

Filed under Citizenship, Immigration Tagged with ,

How claiming to be a refugee became a get-out-of-jail-free card

2025/12/17 Leave a comment

Pretty clear case of abuse of asylum that undermines support for refugees:

This month, B.C.’s newly minted Extortion Task Force was zeroing in on 14 foreign nationals accused of participating in an extortion crime wave currently terrorizing the Lower Mainland.

Starting in earnest in 2023, organized gangs have been roving through Surrey and Abbotsford demanding large sums of cash from South Asian businesses, and then attacking non-payers with arson or gunfire.

More than 130 such incidents have occurred just in 2025, yielding a weekly tally of shootings and vehicle fires. This rash of violence is one of the main reasons that Ottawa declared India’s Bishnoi Gang a terrorist entity in September, accusing them of generating terror among Canadian diaspora communities “through extortion and intimidation.”

But according to an exclusive report by Stewart Bell at Global News, just as the Canada Border Services Agency began investigating 14 alleged extortionists, all of them claimed to be refugees, instantly stopping the investigation in its tracks.

In a Thursday statement, Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke called out how the “international thugs and criminals” abused the asylum system in order to “extend their stay in Canada.”

Guests in our country who break our laws need to be sent home,” she said.

The case of the Surrey 14 is one of the more brazen abuses of the refugee system to date. But it’s nothing new that a foreign national would claim refugee status to evade deportation. Or that asylum status would be used as a tool of foreign criminal gangs.

Because, as the Surrey case illustrates, it works.

If the accused are indeed extortionists, they’re likely to eventually face some kind of removal order or criminal prosecution. But by merely telling border authorities “I am seeking asylum,” they’ve potentially obtained up to two additional years on Canadian soil.

As of the most recent estimates of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, there is a backlog of at least 24 months until refugee claimants can have their case put before an immigration officer.

As such, any foreign national claiming to be a refugee can be assured of at least two years of living in Canada under the status of an asylum claimant….

Source: How claiming to be a refugee became a get-out-of-jail-free card

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with , , , ,

ICYMI – Saunders: A better way to manage the border after the collapse of the Safe Third Country Agreement

2025/12/16 Leave a comment

More practical than most of the other ideas floated. The Biden administration’s similar approach was starting to deliver results:

…A new, simplified and better-designed version of Safe Mobility should be launched, in the hands of Canadians in partnership with our southern neighbours who share the same problems. It might be online-only or phone-based at first, and widely publicized among migrant communities.

It would allow prospective migrants and refugees, including those living in the United States and along the road in the Americas, to have their case considered and their background screened before coming to the border. Worldwide experience shows that most migrants prefer to apply for legal programs even if there’s only a slight chance of succeeding, rather than the vast expense and mortal danger of overland migration and smuggling. If rejected, they mostly apply for somewhere else, rather than trudge further north.

A new study by the Denmark-based Mixed Migration Centre proposes Safe Mobility schemes as one of the best ways to end human smuggling. They’re considered the best solution to Britain’s and Europe’s boat-migration crises. I recently conducted a study of migration-governance initiatives for a report by the Canadian Council for the Americas on improving Canada-Latin America relations, and found a big appetite for Safe Mobility schemes across the hemisphere.

Best of all, they could be launched without the participation of the United States – even while the STCA still exists. They’re the best way to take pressure off our border, now that Washington isn’t helping.

Source: A better way to manage the border after the collapse of the Safe Third Country Agreement

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with , ,

New Trump-Miller Strategy Clashes On Immigration And Innovation

2025/12/16 Leave a comment

One of many:

The Trump administration’s National Security Strategy document appears to bear the strong influence of Stephen Miller and assumes America can gain the benefits of immigration without admitting immigrants. The document, released Dec. 5, criticizes immigration but welcomes innovation and economic growth, which immigrants contribute to, and praises merit but opposes allowing companies to hire immigrants if they are the best fit for a position. The strategy document encourages other countries to open their markets while the United States maintains tariffs to protect favored industries. It also criticizes America’s allies in Europe and minimizes the role of NATO such that a Russian government spokesperson said the strategy is “largely consistent with our vision.”

A Contradiction On Merit And U.S. Immigration Policy

The National Security Strategy document’s immigration references show the significant influence of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. The document criticizes admitting even the most highly skilled individuals to the United States. 

“Competence and merit are among our greatest civilizational advantages: where the best Americans are hired, promoted, and honored, innovation and prosperity follow,” according to the strategy document. “Should merit be smothered, America’s historic advantages in science, technology, industry, defense and innovation will evaporate. The success of radical ideologies that seek to replace competence and merit with favored group status would render America unrecognizable and unable to defend itself.”

However, in a glaring contradiction, the document goes on to declare that hiring a foreign-born person, even if they are talented and the best person for the job, would be wrong. “At the same time, we cannot allow meritocracy to be used as a justification to open America’s labor market to the world in the name of finding ‘global talent’ that undercuts American workers. In our every principle and action, America and Americans must always come first.”

That sentiment is consistent with the administration’s immigration policy, which has sought to tilt the playing field against foreign nationals to prevent their hiring in the United States. (That does not mean companies won’t shift resources and hire high-skilled foreign nationals and place them in other countries.) H-1B temporary visas are often the only way for high-skilled foreign nationals to work in the United States long term. The administration has imposed a $100,000 fee on the entry of new H-1B visa holders from outside the United States, making them prohibitively expensive to hire. The Labor Department will propose a rule to raise the prevailing wage requirement with an expected aim of pricing H-1B visa holders and employment-based immigrants out of the U.S. labor market.

Source: New Trump-Miller Strategy Clashes On Immigration And Innovation

Filed under Immigration, Trump administration Tagged with , ,

Urback: Canada’s hate speech laws don’t need a rewrite. They need to be enforced

2025/12/16 Leave a comment

Agree:

…Whether that was a reasonable conclusion is a matter of debate (who, I wonder, was Mr. Charkaoui referring to when he called for the killing of Zionists?), but the religious exemption under the Criminal Code is not what got him off the hook. And even if Mr. Charkaoui was charged with hate speech and he decided to lean on 319(3)(b) as a defence, the Crown could still make the case that his statements were not a “good faith” reading of a religious text, and that he was willfully promoting hatred with an intention that went well beyond an interpretation of scripture. It seems the problem here – as with many other instances of, for example, protesters intimidating people outside of their homes or places of worship, or individuals spreading hateful messages at public events – is one of enforcement of existing laws and a willingness to prosecute, and not of a subsection defence in the Criminal Code.

It is easy to see why many people would think scrapping the religious exemption is a good thing. Why wouldn’t we want to remove any crutch upon which bigots can rely to get away with spreading messages of hate? But on principle, we should demand government restrictions on speech to be as narrow as possible, so that the law doesn’t end up criminalizing good-faith readings of religious texts. In his capacity as chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, Marc Miller, now the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, cited Bible verses he personally considers “hateful.” That’s fine as a matter of personal opinion, but alarming when the government is opening the door to criminal conviction. 

Source: Canada’s hate speech laws don’t need a rewrite. They need to be enforced

Filed under Hate crimes, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , , ,

Terry Newman: Liberals give $100K to antisemitic group to fight antisemitism

2025/12/16 Leave a comment

More than 15 years ago, when I was responsible for multiculturalism at Canadian Heritage, officials were shocked when the political staff would check the websites and social media of groups applying for grants, to check whether the values in the submission matched the public website values. The websites in question are skimpy with no board or members listed.

Some embarrassing disconnects and it appears that those habits, forced under the Harper government, have been forgotten under the Liberals. Should be part of due diligence:

…Instead, Savoie [IRCC] wrote, “The Government of Canada remains committed to ensuring that public funds are allocated responsibly and in alignment with Canadian values, ensuring that every dollar spent contributes to fostering equity, inclusivity and respect for all Canadians. Grants and contributions are actively monitored by the department to ensure program funding terms and conditions are duly respected.”

This is interesting, because clearly these funds were not “allocated responsibly and in alignment with Canadian values,” nor do they “foster equity, inclusivity, and respect for all Canadians.” And if they’re actively monitored to ensure conditions are respected, then what the government is telling us, is that it approves of TPF’s conduct.

And just in case his response seemed insensitive, Savoie added: “Jewish-Canadians deserve to feel safe, supported and accepted, and the government reaffirms its commitment to ensuring they can practise their religion and culture freely. The country cannot tolerate any form of antisemitism in any context.”

Reading this response had me questioning which dystopia I’m living in — Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four” or Kafka’s “The Trial” — perhaps both.

Savoie suggested I contact Toronto Palestinian Families and Toronto Jewish Families directly if I would like information on their organizations and their activities.

Round and round we go. No explanation. No accountability. No responsibility taken by the Canadian Heritage department.

Savoie also ignored my question about whether he thought it was troubling — at a time of skyrocketing antisemitism in Canada — that an explicitly anti-Zionist group has been given almost $100,000 of taxpayer money for a grant based on false pretenses.

The Canadian Heritage department doesn’t appear to be taking any responsibility, nor does it appear to be concerned about what it has funded.

What are Canadian Jews to make of all of this?

Source: Terry Newman: Liberals give $100K to antisemitic group to fight antisemitism

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Plaidoyer de Fatima Aboubakr pour une laïcisation complète au Québec

2025/12/16 Leave a comment

The extreme laïcité perspective:

…Fatima Aboubakr s’explique mal pourquoi l’interdiction de porter des signes religieux prévue dans le projet de loi 9 s’appliquera aux centres de la petite enfance et aux garderies privées subventionnées, mais pas aux garderies privées non subventionnées — y compris celle qu’elle dirige à Laval. « Nos institutions au Québec sont universalistes, sont égalitaires, sont mixtes. Et les religions ne sont ni universalistes ni égalitaires, et quelques-unes d’entre elles ne sont pas mixtes. Donc, il est juste cohérent que la laïcité commence dès la petite enfance [et s’étende] jusqu’à l’université », explique-t-elle.

Elle déplore au passage la contestation de la constitutionnalité de mesures favorisant la laïcité, adoptées par le gouvernement québécois, telle l’interdiction du port de signes religieux pour certains employés de l’État, par une organisation de défense des droits comme le Conseil national des musulmans canadiensau nom des 500 000 personnes de confession musulmane qu’il dit représenter. « Même en islam, il y a plusieurs lectures et interprétations qui permettent [aux femmes] d’enlever le voile si elles sont obligées de le faire », souligne-t-elle.

Fatima Aboubakr trouve également que le gouvernement Legault a manqué une belle occasion de légiférer afin d’interdire le visage couvert dans l’espace public, après que les membres de la CAQ lui eurent demandé de le faire en septembre dernier. « Le visage découvert, c’est vraiment un enjeu de sécurité », fait-elle valoir.

François Legault n’est pas à l’abri des critiques de Fatima Aboubakr. En accusant les « islamistes radicaux » de perpétrer des attaques contre « certaines de nos valeurs communes » comme l’égalité entre les femmes et les hommes sans donner plus de détails, le chef du gouvernement a semé, selon elle, de la « confusion ». « Un jour, une madame m’a [écrit :] “La personne qui a fait ma livraison de Maxi, elle est voilée. Je vais appeler Maxi pour leur dire de ne jamais m’envoyer cette personne.” Donc, dans sa tête, c’est une islamiste radicale. Je lui ai expliqué que ce n’est pas parce qu’elle porte un voile qu’elle est islamiste ou dans une idéologie. Tu peux juste prendre ta livraison et lui dire merci », relate la membre du conseil d’administration du MLQ.

Vendredi dernier, François Legault a promis de « continuer à protéger la laïcité » et de poser de nouvelles actions si le besoin s’en fait sentir.

Fatima Aboubakr « souhaite » que, durant la prochaine campagne électorale, « on ne parle plus des Québécois issus des communautés musulmanes ou de communautés juives ou… mais qu’on parle des Québécois tout court ».

Source: Plaidoyer de Fatima Aboubakr pour une laïcisation complète au Québec

… Fatima Aboubakr can’t explain why the ban on wearing religious signs in Bill 9 will apply to early childhood centres and subsidized private daycares, but not to unsubsidized private daycares — including the one she runs in Laval. “Our institutions in Quebec are universalist, egalitarian, mixed. And religions are neither universalist nor egalitarian, and some of them are not mixed. So, it is just consistent that secularism begins from early childhood [and extends] to university,” she explains.

In passing, she deplores the contestation of the constitutionality of measures promoting secularism, adopted by the Quebec government, such as the prohibition of the wearing of religious signs for certain state employees, by a rights organization such as the National Council of Canadian Muslims on behalf of the 500,000 people of Muslim faith that it says it represents. “Even in Islam, there are several readings and interpretations that allow [women] to remove the veil if they are forced to do so,” she emphasizes.

Fatima Aboubakr also finds that the Legault government missed a great opportunity to legislate to ban the face covered in public space, after members of the CAQ asked her to do so last September. “The uncovered face is really a security issue,” she argues.

François Legault is not immune from the criticism of Fatima Aboubakr. By accusing the “radical Islamists” of perpetrating attacks against “some of our common values” such as equality between women and men without giving more details, the head of government sowed, according to her, “confusion”. “One day, a lady [wrote to me:] “The person who made my delivery of Maxi, she is veiled. I will call Maxi to tell them never to send me this person.” So, in her head, she is a radical Islamist. I explained to her that it is not because she wears a veil that she is Islamist or in an ideology. You can just take your delivery and say thank you, “says the member of the MLQ board of directors.

Last Friday, François Legault promised to “continue to protect secularism” and to take new actions if the need arises.

Fatima Aboubakr “wishes” that, during the next election campaign, “we no longer talk about Quebecers from Muslim communities or Jewish communities or… but that we talk about Quebecers altogether”.

Filed under Interculturalisme, Laïcité, Multiculturalism Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →