Government Operations Committee on Oct. 27th, 2011

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

We know there are some issues that have come out recently, particularly with patronage at the IRB, and you mentioned in the report that there might be some issues at the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency.

Could you tell me what is being undertaken right now to respond to those two instances of blatant patronage?

[Maria Barrados]

The set-up of the Public Service Commission—which is very unusual, in that we don't take directions from ministers on the appointment process—is meant to keep ministers out of the appointment processes. So we operate through our audits and our monitoring, and we take complaints.

In the case of the IRB, when we did an audit in 2009, we were concerned by the fact that people appointed through Governor in Council appointments were finding their way into the core public service. Those appointments are made by a minister through a Governor in Council process without independent scrutiny. We continue to do audit work in the IRB, and there have been no more appointments like that. So we did see them in the past, but we haven't seen any appointments like that since then.

In the case of ACOA, we've had a number of complaints. When I get complaints, I send them to my investigative unit. So regardless of who has sent the complaint, it goes to my investigative unit, which consists mostly of lawyers. They will look at a complaint and consider whether it is in our jurisdiction, that is, whether or not we are responsible for the entity; and whether there is an appointment or something that we can potentially correct.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

That's very interesting.

I just have a really quick question for you.

Given the lessons from these cases, what other tools do you need to ensure that these don't continue?

[Maria Barrados]

We do a full investigation. What my office needs and is getting—so I have no reason to make any kind of complaint—is the ability to maintain the capacity to do these investigations and to continue making its reports to Parliament. It is very important that we maintain the link with a committee like this so that if I get resistance from the system, I have a place I can go.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

That pretty well wraps up your time, Matthew.

On the Conservative side, we have Scott Armstrong.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for being here. I listened intently to your presentation, and I have a few questions.

First of all, I'll go back to the issue of merit. My background is in education. I was a school principal, and when we hired, we had to look at seniority. So could you tell me how the public service balances seniority within the system versus merit? How is that set up?

[Maria Barrados]

We don't look at seniority per se. In the merit statement, the statement of what is expected, we expect people to make a statement about the kind of experience they might expect to see. That would be the only way we would deal with seniority.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Are you satisfied that this is an effective way? To me, we need to ensure that the best person gets the job, not the person who might have been around the longest.

[Maria Barrados]

We have done an assessment of the act, and I am satisfied that this is a good tool. We don't have quite enough experience yet with making it work; hence, my comments about areas I think should improve.

I think we have to do a lot more work with it before we start changing it.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

I appreciate that.

You said that you didn't recruit as many younger people into the public service last year but that you also had a drop in the overall number of employees in the public service. Was it the first time this has happened in a while, or the first time ever? How far back does this date?

[Maria Barrados]

It was the first time in 10 years.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

It was the first time in 10 years that the public service didn't grow.

With regard to the lack of recruitment of younger people, if you're hiring people based on merit, wouldn't you have an opportunity to bring younger people in anyway, because they wouldn't be blocked out?

[Maria Barrados]

We make a special effort to bring people in at the entry level, so it's a function of how many jobs there are at that entry level. Because people in the public service tend to spend their careers there—though not necessarily in the same job—it's very important that we keep that flow of young people coming in.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

I'm going to talk a bit now about political activities by employees of the public service. We're all involved in politics here.

People are confused. There's confusion within the public service, both at the provincial and federal levels, about what they're allowed to participate in and what they aren't. For example, can they put up a campaign sign on their lawn if they're a member of the public service but their spouse may not be? Their spouse may want to put up a sign, but they often say they can't put one up because they're a member of the public service.

Does that also apply to provincial parties when there's an election going on? Can you flesh that out, because I know there is confusion out there?

[Maria Barrados]

I will get Hélène to add to this.

Yes, there is uncertainty with it. We had a Supreme Court ruling that said that public servants, as citizens, still have rights to be politically active, but that they must do it in such a way they don't compromise the non-partisan nature of the public service. It comes down to where you are in the public service, how much work you do with ministers, what your profile is, what your responsibilities are. Something that might be quite acceptable for a more junior officer in an operational department would not be acceptable for a junior officer in the Privy Council Office, and it would not be acceptable for a senior person.

Hélène, maybe you would want to talk about our tool on the website, as well as some of the complaints that we've had.

[Hélène Laurendeau, Senior Vice-President, Policy Branch, Public Service Commission of Canada]

As Madam Barrados pointed out, when it comes to determining whether political activity is appropriate or not, it's a matter of an assessment and balancing act that needs to be done between the clear obligations at the very senior level--limited to the right to vote, for the deputy minister, for example--and what is appropriate given the circumstances of someone's employment and the types of activities they're involved in. It could include provincial and federal activities, but it's more about the level of influence there may appear to be, or a threat, if you wish, to the impartiality of the public service.

The assessment will be made. We do that by assisting public servants to do a self-assessment of their own activities in the same way that it would be done, to a certain extent, for conflict of interest. You are entitled to have outside activities. You're even entitled to do things on your own, but you always have to be mindful as a public servant of the impact these activities may have, or whether you leave yourself open to an inappropriate form of influence.

The test is similar for political activity. We have a self-assessment tool on the website, consisting of a series of questions asking public servants about the types of activities they are doing professionally, in contrast to the ones they would like to do as a citizen.

We have received a couple of complaints about it. Some of the bargaining agents told us that they felt it was overly limiting. It's not a compulsory tool, but a guide, like any other information we put on our website, to try to raise awareness among public servants about what it means. We are in the process of reviewing that tool, taking into consideration some of the comments given to us.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Thank you, Scott. That concludes your five minutes.

We go to John McCallum, for the Liberals.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you very much, and thank you all for joining us today.

Going back to the question of merit that was raised at the beginning, did you call them core requirements?

[Maria Barrados]

Essentially.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

You said a set of core requirements should be established, and during the process of looking for the person those core requirements should not change.

Presumably, if they do change, then it is no longer meritorious?

[Maria Barrados]

If they do change, you have to start again.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

That would apply, for example, if one of the core requirements was to be bilingual, and then they hired a person who wasn't?

[Maria Barrados]

The way we operate in the public service is that the language requirement is an essential requirement. Whatever the requirement of the job, it has to be an essential requirement. If you don't meet the language requirement, you don't get the job.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

I know this doesn't come under your jurisdiction, but the reason I mentioned it is that in the recent search process for the new Auditor General, the job was described as requiring a bilingual person, and the person who is about to be hired is not bilingual.

Presumably that does not come under your jurisdiction.