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 , ,

Making sense of Canada’s refugee and immigration numbers: Robson

2015/09/09 Leave a comment

Making_sense_of_Canada_s_refugee_and_immigration_numbersJennifer Robson highlights the obscurity of the formal government reports in understanding the refugee program:

I decided I would try to follow the numbers to better understand the current state of Canada’s federal immigration and refugee programs.

I learned at least four things that I thought are worth sharing:

1) As an outsider, it is very difficult to get detailed information, or to even get information that aligns from one source to the next.

2) There is a $10-million cut planned to Citizenship and Immigration (CIC)’s envelope for refugees.

3) Federal refugee programs are complex and complicated.

4) There are doubtless other cuts to other programs in other departments that any new government may have to live with, especially if it plans on a balanced budget for 2016.

Her report comes with a number of useful charts.

Source: Making sense of Canada’s refugee and immigration numbers

Filed under Refugees Tagged with

Explained: How the Harper government put spending on ice – Macleans.ca

2014/12/13 Leave a comment

Department  Authorities for 2014-15 ($millions) Year-to-date (first six months) spending at September 30, 2014 ($millions) % of authorities spent
Agriculture and Agri-food $365 $48 13.2%
Employment and Social Development $1,702 $680 40.0%
Environment $107 $29 27.1%
Fisheries and Oceans $58 $25 43.1%
Health $1,683 $1,047 62.2%
Natural Resources $444 $99 22.3%
Transport $758 $42 5.5%
Veterans’ Affairs $2.7 $1.3 48.1%

Good piece by Jennifer Robson on the various ways to reduce spending:

So, if you’re in government and want to restrain your own spending, another way to do it is to just make it harder to move money out the door.  There are a lot of small but incrementally effective ways to do this.  Some of us use tricks to stop ourselves from spending.  For example, when my mother grew alarmed by her credit card bill, she would put her card in a block of ice in the kitchen freezer.  Really.  I’m not making this up.

The ways:

  1. Increase complexity of Treasury Board processes and requirements;
  2. Limit “March Madness” spending;
  3. Tie executive bonuses to managing spending (good discipline in any case);
  4. Make staffing processes more lengthy and complex;
  5. Increase administrative burden on grants and contributions.

Even at the time when I left government in 2011, some of this was apparent and being implemented.

Explained: How the Harper government put spending on ice – Macleans.ca.

Filed under Government Tagged with ,