Government Operations Committee on April 11th, 2017

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Colleagues, as you know, we're here to hear from a nominee for the position of president of the Public Service Commission, Mr. Patrick Borbey.

Thank you, sir, for being here with us today.

That will take the first hour of our two-hour scheduled meeting. The second hour we'll go into committee business, which will be in camera, and we'll discuss the committee business from now until the end of this session. We have a bit of a proposed calendar for all of you to take a look at and we'll see if we can make some decisions.

Without further ado, Mr. Borbey, I'm quite sure you know how the committee structure works. We'll have an opening statement from you, and then we'll follow that with questions from our committee members.

With that, welcome once again. The floor is yours.

[Patrick Borbey, Nominee for the position of President of the Public Service Commission, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning.

I am very pleased to be here to introduce myself and to answer your questions with regard to the position of President of the Public Service Commission of Canada.

As you know, the commission has a long and prestigious history as an institution of Canada's public service. Over 100 years ago, Parliament passed a law that created the commission so that Canadians could be served in both official languages by highly skilled and non-partisan public servants representing Canada's diversity and who are appointed on the basis of merit.

Through the passage of time and the adoption and implementation of legislative amendments, such as the modernization of the Public Service Employment Act in 2003, the Public Service Commission's mandate has remained very clear: to appoint, or provide for the appointment of, persons to and from within the public service according to the act; to conduct investigations and audits in accordance with the act; and to administer the provisions of the act relating to political activities of employees and deputy heads.

I would like to now provide a bit of information on my background and why I believe I will bring strong qualifications to this important leadership position.

My career in the public service spans almost 35 years. In fact, my first experience with the public service started in May 1982 when I was employed as a student under the former Career Oriented Summer Employment Program with what was then the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce.

I have to admit that this was not my first choice—I had worked in the mining sector to pay for my education until then. But my experience that summer changed my life, and I knew I had found my calling.

Since those early days, I've had the privilege of working in a dozen different departments and in many different roles. I have worked with program delivery officers, park wardens, administrative assistants, policy analysts, inspectors, communication specialists, regulators, economic development officers, sports experts, scientists, diplomats, information technology specialists, accountants, and human resource advisers. These are all very different roles but with a common commitment to excellence in serving one's country and fellow citizens. I have also worked with dedicated public servants in every part of our country, serving diverse populations. I was particularly impressed with our employees in the territories who work closely with indigenous Canadians to meet their needs and aspirations.

I also have 30 years of experience in a management role.

I have had lead responsibility for human resources in a large department—Health Canada, as well as in a smaller agency—the Privy Council. A common challenge in both organizations was helping employees, managers and human resource professionals navigate the complexities of our staffing system. This is why I was an enthusiastic supporter of the modernization of our human resources legislation in the early 2000s. In fact, under this initiative I co-led, with a representative of the bargaining agents, the development of new guidelines for labour-management consultative committees and for co-development in the workplace. These were adopted in 2003 along with the amendments to the Public Service Employment Act.

I've also been involved in a number of large- and small-scale machinery changes that had important human resource implications, including the creation of the Department of Canadian Heritage in 1993. In the mid-1990s, I led the work on the creation of Parks Canada as a separate agency, including the design of its human resources plan, policies, and systems. This was a rather complex project, as Parks Canada was a large organization with thousands of employees in every region of the country, including many small remote locations. I worked closely with a wide range of stakeholders, from central agencies to bargaining agents, in developing a separate employer regime for the new agency, which eventually was adopted through legislation.

And I have also had the experience of a deputy head with overall authority and accountability for human resources matters.

While CanNor may have been a small agency, managing in the North had its challenges. One of those was the recruitment, development and retention of indigenous employees. In that context, I worked closely with colleagues from other departments and agencies with employees in Nunavut, as well as with the Public Service Commission and the Canada School of the Public Service, to create an innovative program called the Inuit Learning and Development Pilot Project. Through this initiative, Inuit citizens from Nunavut benefited from developmental assignments in federal departments and agencies, were offered a culturally appropriate suite of learning tools and mentorship and were successful in pre-qualifying for federal positions at the end of the pilot's 18-month period. The pilot was evaluated and as a result has now been continued, with a new cohort.

While I have not worked at the Public Service Commission, you can see that over the years I have worked closely with the commission as well as other federal institutions with human resource responsibilities. In that context, in my most recent position at the Department of Canadian Heritage, I had the privilege of serving on the PSC's deputy minister advisory committee. The committee provided guidance to the PSC on the design and implementation of its modernization agenda. My colleagues and I were, for example, very supportive of the new direction in staffing, which was adopted and put in place just over a year ago.

I hope this quick overview of my background will demonstrate that I have acquired much experience and knowledge that would be of direct benefit as president of the Public Service Commission.

Before closing, I would like to talk briefly about my priorities for the PSC. First of all, I recognize that I have much learning to do and my first priority would be to engage with the commissioners, the senior management team and all the employees of the PSC and to listen to them. I know my predecessors have done a great job in fostering innovation within the organization, and I would want to build on the positive changes that have already been made.

But I know we can do much more in modernizing our approach to staffing, while at the same time protecting the merit principle and safeguarding the professional, non-partisan nature of the public service.

We know there will be many departures from the public service in the coming years and that this will provide the opportunity to recruit and develop a new generation of public servants. My hope is that we can attract a broad diversity of Canadians to the calling of serving their country and that the public service of tomorrow will truly reflect the Canada of today, from coast to coast to coast. As a proud son of a small northern Ontario community, I know there are talented Canadians in every region of the country who would love the opportunity to join the public service. The PSC's recruitment systems and activities must ensure that we take advantage of this rich and diverse pool of talent.

We have to do a better job in making the public service a model organization when it comes to accessibility. We need to go way beyond just meeting requirements to accommodate and to design our organizations and workplaces so they embrace the tremendous potential of persons with disabilities.

I would also like us to find innovative ways to better attract and retain young Canadians in the public service. I've always been a big fan of student employment, given my own personal experience. I think our millennials bring skills and competencies that can help transform the public service. For such digital natives, the concept of open government is natural, and so is the effective use of social media.

In my current position, I have been amazed at the potential of data analytics to rethink how we manage our programs and activities in ways that will ultimately better serve Canadians. In order to succeed in recruiting and retaining such talent, we need to find much more efficient and effective ways to staff positions without compromising on merit. The long time it takes us to staff is a source of frustration for candidates, employees, and managers alike, and it does not serve the public well.

Finally, I would also like to make official languages a key priority. One of the basic values of our public service is respect for both of our official languages and our commitment to serving Canadians in the language of their choice. We have made significant progress in this area since I first joined the public service, but we still have challenges to meet. For example, our methods of evaluating language proficiency must be adapted to reflect advancements in technology, and we must promote bilingualism actively in our recruitment activities.

I look forward to working with the dedicated and professional team of women and men at the PSC in pursuing these priorities. I also will make great efforts to engage our many stakeholders, including the bargaining agents and the deputy heads of the more than 70 departments and agencies with almost 200,000 employees who fall under the jurisdiction of the Public Service Employment Act.

In closing, I would like to recognize the special relationship that exists between the President of the Public Service Commission and Parliament. I must confess that this is a new field for me and I have a lot to learn. But it's a role I would be eager to assume. It would be a great pleasure for me work with you.

Thank you. It will be my pleasure to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much, Monsieur Borbey.

We'll start with a seven-minute round of interventions. We will start with Monsieur Drouin.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Borbey, for having come here this morning. Your CV is much longer than mine—I mean in experience, not age.

You began your career in 1982. You spoke about the millennials. At this time, the average age in the public service is 37.

[Patrick Borbey]

Yes, approximately.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

You spoke about the time it takes to recruit new employees. How do you intend to attract young people of my generation to the public service?

[Patrick Borbey]

That is an excellent question, one that has a lot of aspects. It isn't just knowing how to attract young people, but also how to retain them. There just happens to have been an article on this topic this morning in the Ottawa Citizen. It showed that there are a lot of barriers and issues to consider.

First, regarding recruitment, I think that young people today are interested in the public service. Perhaps they do not know us well. We have to be present on campuses. I did this myself recently. I act as deputy minister champion for the Ontario College of Art and Design University in Toronto. I went on campus and I met about 30 students. For the vast majority of them, the public service was not really an option. They could not see how the public service could meet their aspirations. But after I'd spent three hours with them, there were at least four or five who had changed their opinion a little. They were open to the idea.

They have to be given interesting work. We have to attract them with interesting positions. When they arrive, we have to trust them. Sometimes I find that the public service hierarchy stifles innovation, particularly among young people. We need to remove certain barriers and to give younger people access to the levers of power, to decision making and influential roles.

Personally, I stayed in the public service since 1982 because when I arrived I was given really interesting work that could allow me to build a career based on my experience and knowledge.

Another element to consider is how we speak to them, how we approach them. I think you have all seen advertisements in the newspapers about available positions in the public service. They are boring and very poorly written. They do not attract people at all. We have to learn. We need to talk to the people at Google, Amazon and other companies like that to see how they manage to attract young workers. In fact, some work has already been done at the commission to change our approach and to make it a little more attractive to youth.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I believe it was the Clerk of the Privy Council who said that the average age at which employees obtained management positions such as director, director general, deputy minister and assistant deputy minister was over 50. We do not give young people the opportunity to get promoted to these positions, even if many have proven their competence when we give them the opportunity. When you look at the history of Facebook, PayPal and others, you see that all of the people who brought in innovations were less than 30. I think it is important to open a path to success for them.

You touched on something that is important to me, and that is official languages and their importance in the public service. If we want to promote official languages, we are going to have to teach through example. I know that you worked at Canadian Heritage. You understand the importance of official languages well.

A lot of progress has been made since you joined the public service. In your opinion, what issues should you work on in the next 10 years?

[Patrick Borbey]

Well, there are several issues.

I am somewhat worried about the use of French in the public service. There has been a lot of progress and there are more and more bilingual positions. People meet the minimum linguistic requirements for these positions. Nevertheless, I see that work is generally done in English even in departments that are bilingual in nature. There has to be leadership and we have to lead by example. This responsibility is incumbent upon anglophones and francophones. Everyone has to show leadership, particularly my francophone colleagues who hesitate to use French in important discussions. I try to encourage them to do so, because even if it takes 30 seconds more to intervene on an issue, it is worth it. It is also worth it for our anglophone colleagues who can learn French in this way.

By not using French on a regular basis, we are impoverishing that language in the public service and people wind up no longer knowing certain terms and acronyms. We refer to them in English and we always wind up using that language. This is an important issue to my mind.

In my role at the Public Service Commission of Canada, I would like to review some of our methods of evaluating language proficiency. With new technology we can do much more interesting things and find ways of encouraging people to keep up their skills once they have reached the required linguistic levels.

I would also like to explore how we could recruit more young people who graduate from French language immersion programs and then go on to university courses. When they have completed their studies, there is no real way to recruit them and encourage them to become public servants. There are several things we could do to reach them, and I can assure you that this would be a priority for me.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I don't have a lot of time left but I want to speak briefly to the issue of official languages.

After having discussed this with several anglophone and francophone public servants, I got the impression that the bilingualism requirement is for them a barrier to obtaining another position, an obstacle on their career path. I expect that the issue for you would be to see how to lift that barrier and put forward the fact that the other language must not be seen as a barrier, but rather as an asset.

I wish you good luck, and I thank you very much for your testimony.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Patrick Borbey]

Thank you. I apologize if my answers were a bit long.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

That's fine.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. Clarke, you have the floor for seven minutes.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Borbey, thank you for being here with us this morning. I congratulate you on your nomination, which will probably be confirmed.

I would like to submit a motion to the committee. If I may, Mr. Chair, I would like to read it now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Yes, you may.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

The motion reads as follows:

That, in relation to the briefing on the use of national security exceptions, the committee invite the Minister of National Defence to appear before the committee no later than on Tuesday, May 30, 2017, to substantiate the use of the exception contained in subsection 3(1)(g) of the Government Contract Regulations regarding fighter jet procurement; and that every effort be made to ensure that the appearance of the minister be televised.

I will explain the reason for my motion for my Liberal and New Democrat colleagues.

May I explain why I am tabling this motion, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Procedurally, yes.

Colleagues, in case you're unaware, the motion is in order. Notice of this motion was given prior to today's meeting. The introduction means that debate ensues immediately.

Mr. Clarke, you have the floor.

I'm looking for a speakers list.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I will be succinct and quick.

Last Thursday evening, the parliamentary secretary Mr. MacKinnon and myself had a good, honest and transparent discussion. I indicated to Mr. MacKinnon that according to government contract regulations, the Minister of Public Services and Procurement must have received a letter from the Department of National Defence explaining which exception is used to enable them to purchase Super Hornet fighter jets without a call for tenders.

I asked the parliamentary secretary to show us a document from the Department of National Defence signed by the Minister of Public Services and Procurement showing that there is a lack of capacity, as required by law. With diligence and transparency, the parliamentary secretary replied: “The member is looking for proof, and I will let the Department of National Defence provide the details concerning that lack of capacity.”

Thursday evening I was very happy to note this transparency on the part of the government, and that is why I am tabling this motion today. As the parliamentary secretary said so well, it is up to National Defence to provide that proof, and so I would like the committee to invite the Minister of National Defence to appear at the earliest opportunity, that is to say before the end of the session, no later than May 30, 2017. That's all.

Mr. Chair, thank you for having given me the opportunity to speak about this issue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

Madam Ratansi.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Borbey, for being here. Sorry to delay you in this way.

We have a problem with the wording of the motion. The Minister of National Defence is not responsible for paragraph 3(1)(g) of the contracts regulations. PSPC is. The resolution is confusing because it deals with two separate issues. These issues are national security versus government contracts regulations. The government has not awarded any contract for the interim fleet, but rather has a mandate to discuss with Boeing and the U.S. government the possibility of purchasing the Super Hornets. That is being discussed with the defence committee.

Mr. Chair, I suggest that we call the vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Madam Ratansi, as a former chair, I'm sure you're aware of the procedural avenues you have before you. Just asking to call the vote will not get it done. Perhaps you would care to put that in the form of a motion.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

I put a motion that we now call the vote for the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I'll give you some guidance here. If you're looking to curtail the debate, the motion would have to be to adjourn the debate.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Then I put a motion that we adjourn the debate.