Canadian Public Administration-Administration Publique Du Canada最新文献

Governments produce a steady stream of data, reports, and other information to ministers, legislators, and the public, and generate enormous flows of administrative data. In the digital era the flows of information generated by departments and agencies have expanded by orders of magnitude. The paradox, though, is that much of this information is never used, but many decision makers believe there is insufficient information to meet their specific needs at any time. This note focuses on two streams of reporting by departments and agencies in the Government of Canada informed by “open government” principles—the streams of information supplied via the Canada InfoBase and other reporting, and the Management Accountability Framework—and considers if they are accessible and useful. After setting out options for making them both more useful, this note argues it will inform the work of spending reviews, Parliamentary committees, and engagement with experts and citizens.

This article considers the implications of the contributions to the special issue on “Re-Setting the Public Service of Canada.” It first reflects on the reform directions proposed by contributors, the extent to which they resonate, and identifies overarching themes. It then considers the complexity of furthering and sustaining reform in large public-sector systems, arguing that monitoring progress and motivating public servants will challenge governments and central agencies, especially during times of turbulence and disruption, and that the responsibility for monitoring progress should be more fully shared with Parliament and external observers. This will require investments to improve external reporting and support more systematic, applied and collaborative research from universities and think tanks with public servants, which would lead to fostering a new culture of public sector oversight and a larger community of applied researchers addressing public service issues.

This article examines the relationships between state infrastructural capacity, administrative burdens, and incentives facing political actors. Three recent case studies of federal capacity-building projects with limited success to date point to the roles of bureaucratic proceduralism, risk aversion, and internal administrative burdens imposed in the name of accountability. A path forward requires greater transparency by public servants and commitment by political elites to act as stewards of state capacity, ending the practice of exporting internally generated burdens outward to program users. In addition, political elites must shoulder more responsibility as active agents in the accountability process and providing political capital for risk-taking and innovation in systems renewal and service delivery. Voters may not provide immediate rewards for this action, but citizens' trust in the institutions of the state will benefit over the longer-term.

A well-functioning policy process requires a responsible public service that supports the government and implements its decisions, and a representative legislature that holds the executive to account for policy decisions and actions. Reform of either the public sector or Parliament alone is insufficient to ensure that the relationship between the two bodies works to the benefit of Canadians as intended. This article explores that relationship using committees as a focal point given their centrality to the operation of the policy system. It begins with a discussion of the role of the two bodies in the policy process and criteria for assessing any potential reforms, followed by a brief discussion of recent attempts at reform and their positive and negative lessons. We conclude by identifying three key reform options for the public sector and parliament to improve their interaction in this vital, yet often overlooked, part of the policy process.

This article analyzes persistent challenges in Canadian public procurement, examining in particular the federal government's complex, multi-layered purchasing processes which have contributed to high-profile failures, such as most recently the ArriveCan app and, over the past century, the majority of major military procurement projects. The primary issues found to contribute to these problems include excessive rule layering, unnecessary strategic purchasing complexities, bureaucratic risk aversion and political interference which together form a “toxic stew” leading to poorly designed processes hampering procurement efficiency and effectiveness. The article highlights three main strategic directions for improvement: streamlining procurement to increase efficiency, rethinking strategic purchasing to simplify decision-making, and enhancing transparency and accountability for all projects to combat excessive caution and political interference. These proposals aim to address the key structural and political issues that have undermined procurement and help reform this key area of government activity.

Since its inception, digital government has been a struggle between transformational aspirations and contested reforms grounded within a traditionalist governance ethos. Following a conceptual situating of such tensions, we focus on three interrelated thematic sets of digital governance reforms: i) organizational governance and enterprise architecture; ii) COVID-19 and hybrid work arrangements; and iii) the escalating risks and complexities of cybersecurity. This article argues that the pervasiveness of traditional Westminster principles—notably information secrecy and hierarchical control—has shackled the emergence of an alternative governance ethos more aligned with digital innovation and systemic openness. In order to forge the latter, three critical enablers of systemic transformation must be embraced: first, a more collaborative and open political mindset; second, an alternative governance architecture championed by a new organizational entity; and third, the forging of a more diverse and empowered public service to strengthen digital governance adaptation and anticipatory capacities.

The digital age has helped to create an environment where civic engagement could flourish. The quality and quantity of data have increased and new mechanisms for engagement make it simpler than ever before. Despite this, civic engagement activities often resemble exercises in listening more than active two-way dialogue. With the Government of Canada as its focus, this article asks what changes need to be made to improve civic engagement—to make it more interactive and iterative—so that its potential as an element of good governance can be better realized? Drawing on contemporary examples of engagement related to transparency, it is argued that improvements need to focus on increasing institutionalization of engagement, improving the visibility of engagement opportunities, and building and sustaining relationships and trust with citizens.

Canada has long been a leader in conducting episodic spending reviews to check public spending. However, it has fallen behind many other countries that have taken a more consistent approach relying to a much larger extent on strategic reviews that not only check spending, but also examine the links between spending and policy priorities. To bring greater coherence to review processes, we argue that an embedded system would greatly enhance decision-makers' ability to make more informed budgetary choices that draw on reliable longitudinal data. There are many ways to organize reviews, and this article provides comparative international experience that could inform discussion on the rationale and benefits of an embedded review system that could be led by the Treasury Board Secretariat. We suggest that there may be a pathway to such implementation that must take into certain preconditions for success.

The public service in Canada has undergone major changes and experienced significant pressures in the last decade. These changes and pressures create conditions of uncertainty, and alongside workplace policies, arrangements, leadership, and culture, affect the morale of current public servants and future public service motivation. This issue requires immediate attention because the morale of the public service determines the performance and quality of service delivery to citizens, as well as making the public service a good place to work. This research note prescribes a pathway for reform: 1. Define problems of morale and motivation; 2. Create a time-limited task force with the goal of creating a permanent entity to address motivation and morale; and 3. Collaborate with current and future public servants to provide professional development.