Evidence of meeting #43 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was secretariat.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
If I may, Madam Chair, that is incorrect.
The role of our secretariat has nothing to do with the names, the individuals, or the appointments. We were not the ones who were responsible for vetting the names. That is always the minister's responsibility.
4:30 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
Madam Chair, we had to help people to understand a very complex system. The process could involve almost 3,000 appointments to various organizations, from advisory boards meeting three times a year—
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
Okay. Therefore, you were responsible for the mechanisms surrounding all of these appointments.
4:35 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
Pursuant to the legislation, we first had to devise a code of practice for the commission. Certain principles had to be taken into account, for example, appointments were to be based on merit. The act includes the merit concept. The code of practice would then be used in all of the departments.
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
Therefore, when a given department had to fill a vacancy, it would turn to your secretariat. Once all of the principles were established, you would suggest that they apply them.
4:35 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
Madam Chair, the objective was to establish a code of practice that would eventually be handed down to all of the departments. Then, the ministers would assess the situation within their individual department and their portfolio. It was up to the departments and to the ministers to decide on the best approach, because, as we know, what works for one department will not necessarily work for another one. Flexibility was key. It was up to the departments to set out their own process which would be based upon a code of practice established by the commission.
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
Once the departments took over, the work of the secretariat was done. There was no need to keep an eye on what the departments were doing. Am I correct?
4:35 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
Once again, if I may, I would like to clarify something.
The role of the commission does not end there. The commission's mandate involves ensuring that the process is respected by the departments. That involves audits. It is up to the commission to decide how best to proceed.
The act also provides for an annual report by the commission to the Prime Minister, and the report must also be tabled before the House of Commons and the Senate. It is up to the commission to decide how these reports will be drafted, with the support of the secretariat.
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
You said there were about 3,000 appointments. I assume that is the yearly figure. Are these appointments the responsibility of elected individuals, in other words, the ministers?
4:35 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
When I said 3,000, I was referring to the number of current positions. In some cases, people are appointed for a set period of time, whereas in other cases, the term is at the discretion of the governor in council. There is a yearly rotation, and, for that reason, the situation is quite variable. It depends on the length of the appointment. According to the process, the minister in charge of the portfolio, in other words, of the departments and its agencies, is responsible for providing cabinet with the names which will then be submitted to the governor in council for approval.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Harrison, for being here today.
I want to follow up a bit with the questions relating to the IRB. I understand that in your report you made nine recommendations to the Minister of Immigration, and it's my understanding that the minister has made a statement that those recommendations are accepted.
I want to follow up on the fact that 28% of the applicants who wrote the written test failed, and yet these people were recommended to the advisory panel and then to the minister for consideration. Would this not put an undue workload on the advisory panel in terms of the eventual appointments?
4:40 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
I think in reality, Madame Chair, it would. The purpose of an exam, certainly in my experience, is to test certain competencies. One is either accepted, if one passes, or one fails. The extent to which those who do not meet the criteria move to the next level, I would have to say, increases the workload for that next level.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
It seems to me it also reduces the level of transparency and accountability in wanting to give the Canadian people good value for the money and the time invested.
4:40 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
That is clearly a conclusion from the data. As I responded earlier, we are looking at the data here and simply interpreting what we see.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
I think you mentioned in your report that the time between when the test is administered and the people are referred to the advisory panel is reduced from three months to one and a half months. That seems to be the way we want to move in reducing overhead and costs.
4:40 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
That was the objective of the study we undertook.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
You mentioned in your report that you favour the merging of the advisory panel and the chairman's panel. Can you just explain what impact that would have on expediting the process?
4:40 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
In order to get a good view of the whole process, we had contracts with Sussex Circle to look at the overall process, and in particular the exam.
The procedures that came into place in 2004 had two different groups involved in the selection process--an advisory panel, and the chair's selection board. The observation was made in the analysis by Sussex Circle that there were probably ways of streamlining a little.
The concern we had when we were doing our analysis was that they were two different groups of people, which meant that two different groups of people had to get up to speed on very complicated data for a large number candidates.
Our recommendation was not that those two should be merged, because we didn't feel we'd been able to flesh out the options enough. Our recommendation to the minister was that consideration be given to merging those two bodies, because we felt there were efficiencies to be gained.
Given the member's comments about the minister's decision to move forward, I have to conclude that consideration has been given, and it is seen to be a move in a direction of greater efficiency.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Thank you.
There's one other comment you made in one of your recommendations--I'm not sure which one it was--about ongoing recruitment. You said that previous administration was batching groups of applicants, and there were long waiting periods in between those batches. You pointed out that there may be some efficiencies to be gained by having an ongoing recruitment process. Will you comment on that?
4:40 p.m.
former Executive Director, Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, Privy Council, As an Individual
That is indeed correct. When one is dealing with a high volume.... We refer in the report to “stocks and flows”, the stock being the number of people currently in place, and the flow being the number of people whose mandates are completed and the need to replace them.
We found that recently the IRB had undertaken a fast-track process in order to move efficiently and effectively in proposing names to the minister for consideration by the Governor in Council. We recommended that this was of sufficient importance that recruitment campaigns should be undertaken with a frequency that allows for an appropriate level of resourcing, and at times of high vacancy rates the IRB should begin a new recruitment campaign even before the completion of an ongoing recruitment campaign.
Our objective in that was to suggest that since we know there is a churn and a turnover over time, the planning of that should lead to having recruitment exercises appropriately done on an ongoing basis.
