For the public service, the first thing to do is clarify the “conventions” or unwritten rules underpinning its role on policy advice, as well as carrying out programs and delivering services, says the panel.

Lynch said that clarity should come in a statement from the prime minister. He said the statement should be made in Parliament, with all-party support, and would be the benchmark for future behaviour.

After the sponsorship scandal of the Chrétien era, the Conservative government under Stephen Harper passed legislation that beefed up the role and responsibilities of deputy ministers, making them “accounting officers” responsible for the management of their departments.

The panel wants deputy ministers to also annually attest to measures that ensure regular meetings between the minister and deputy ministers, as well as working relationships between the minister, minister’s office and departmental officials.

Deputies would also have to attest to the “highest levels of integrity and impartiality” in the department on policy advice, program delivery, regulatory administration and departmental communications. They would have to confirm departments have the policy capacity to deliver the government’s agenda and handle the study of long-term issues.

The department would also be expected to consult Canadians and use digital technology to stay abreast of the public’s views when developing policies and programs.

Many argue the existing legislation for “accounting officers” covers much of this territory because deputy ministers are responsible for following all Treasury Board policies and the code of conduct.

Lynch said the panel was intent that its report, published by the Public Policy Forum, not be shelved without debate so it is taking the discussion on the road. He and other members are touring the public policy and management schools at universities across the country to discuss the proposals.

Academics and public management experts have sounded the alarm for years on the deterioration of Canada’s democratic institutions as more power was centralized in the Prime Minister’s Office. Many argue the problems got worse under the Conservative government.

Lynch said the panel is proposing “practical” fixes that could be done quickly without changing the constitution and new legislation.

A big problem for the public service is the mushrooming army of political staffers led by the PMO, the “political service” that has taken over some of the work of the public service.

Politicians began to rely on staffers for ideas and advice, sidelining the public service. As a result, the public service didn’t use, and thus lost, some of its policy capacity, and deputy ministers ended up more connected to the PMO than their ministers.

The panel recommended a new code of conduct for political staff that would clearly spell out the roles and duties of public servants and what political staff can do. It also urged more training and an oversight body for political staff.

Trudeau introduced a new code of conduct for staffers in his updated Guide to Ministers.

But Lynch said “short-termism” and political parties being in “permanent campaign” mode have changed the nature of the work of the public service and its relationship with politicians.

“This is not about going back to the good old days,” said Lynch. “These broad trends are happening regardless and what we have to do is figure out — given that reality — the checks and balances that will ensure (our institutions) work they way they are intended.”

Politicians are racing to keep up with today’s rapid, “technology-driven round-the-clock news cycle.” Parties are seen to be always in campaign mode and focus on short-term issues for political gain rather than long-term policies and strategies. Public servants, however, are supposed to be neutral and have no role in campaigns.

“We have drifted into a period of permanent campaigning, which is an American phenomenon …. which is not a good thing for the role of the public service because it doesn’t have a role in a campaign, said Lynch.

“Political parties operate less as a government and more as a party for re-election so the more we get into permanent campaign modes, it changes the relationships and not necessarily in good ways.”

Lynch argued that once the governance issue is fixed, the next challenge for the public service will be changing the way it does policy in a world driven by big data and analytics. Public servants must learn to manage risk; they will have to become innovative and use more open communications and using social media.

First, a strong analytic policy capacity that is both broad and deep is a basic necessity of effective governing in an increasingly interconnected, complex and uncertain world….

Second, a risk-management orientation. In a world experiencing a sharp spike in risk and volatility, the smart response by government is proactive – not reactive – risk management….

Third, an innovation focus. In a world where technological innovation is at an inflexion point, disrupting how business is done in sector after sector, government should be at the leading edge of innovation adaptation. It is not.  …

The public service plays a core role in our Westminster system of government. It is nonpartisan, it is permanent, serving governments past, present and future, of any political party, with equal loyalty and effectiveness, and its appointments are merit-based. It offers evidence-based policy advice to the government of the day, it administers the policies, programs and regulations approved by Parliament on a nonpartisan basis, and it provides the essential services of government. Given its roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities, a Westminster public service should not be mistaken for an administrative service, nor should it be confused with an American civil service, which is institutionally designed to be partisan and non-permanent at all senior levels.

These same global trends are impacting Canadian public services, both federally and provincially. Demographics—our public services are aging, and recruiting, training and retaining the next generation of public servants, and developing its leaders are a key challenge. The competition for exceptional talent is intensifying, and the public service will be able to attract such talent only if the work environment within government offers the ability to make a difference, help shape policy options and choices, be innovative in service delivery, and do great science. Globalization—a public servant today needs a worldview not a parochial one, an understanding that something happening anywhere in the world can have impacts here in Canada. And technology—innovations in ICT, social media, cloud computing, data analytics and adaptive learning have enormous potential to reshape both the “back office” of government operations and the “citizen-facing” service delivery and interaction functions.

The public service is under stress, both responding to these demographic, globalization and technology pressures and dealing with a challenging governance environment. At a time when Canada faces many longer-term policy issues, there seems to be little demand for public service policy advice. At a time when the private sector is shifting to distributed leadership and entrepreneurship models and risk management, the governance model of the federal government is moving towards ever greater centralization and risk aversion. At a time when attracting and retaining superb talent to the federal public service is facing stiff competition from the private sector here and abroad, there is ambiguity from the government itself about the importance of government and governance to the economy and society in these transforming global times—hardly motivating to prospective public servants. As leading experts on the public service such as Donald Savoie have stressed, the apparent antipathy of the government today toward the public service may have deleterious long term impacts on the public service as an institution.