POLITICAL-BUREAUCRATIC RELATIONSHIPS AND TENSIONS IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF CANADA By VALENCIA DA SILVA Integrated Studies Project submitted to Dr. Angela Specht in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts – Integrated Studies Athabasca, Alberta August 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. ABSTRACT..........................................................................................................................3 2. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................4 Setting the stage ................................................................................................................4 Broader issue of concern...................................................................................................5 Subject of this research study ............................................................................................6 3. RELEVANCE AND VALUE OF THIS RESEARCH ........................................................8 Interdisciplinary nature of the research.............................................................................9 4. LITERATURE REVIEW AND ILLUSTRATIVE CASES..............................................11 5. PROJECT OVERVIEW....................................................................................................25 Description and objectives ..............................................................................................25 Major goals of this study.................................................................................................25 Questions explored and analyzed ....................................................................................26 6. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................................26 Participants’ rights and protection ...............................................................................26 Data reliability and protection ........................................................................................27 7. METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................................28 Data collection method ...................................................................................................28 Sampling and recruitment procedures .............................................................................29 8. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS..................................................................................30 Statement regarding data validity....................................................................................30 Survey statistics...............................................................................................................30 Key findings and conclusions on the state of the political-bureaucratic relationship........31 Summary conclusions based on the data..........................................................................37 9. RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................37 10. CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................40 Strengths and limitations of this study .............................................................................40 Suggested areas for further research...............................................................................41 REFERENCES........................................................................................................................42 APPENDIX A Letter of information and consent form for potential participants ..………46 APPENDIX B Research survey ...........................................................................................50 2 1. ABSTRACT The growing institutionalization of political intervention and sensitization within the public service raises significant questions about the capacity of the public sector to be a neutral entity in the service of the public interest. This preliminary study explores the political-bureaucratic dynamic within the Canadian federal government, with particular emphasis on the implications of political-bureaucratic relationships, interactions and tensions as they affect contemporary public servants and the future of the public service institution. The paper presents a literature review of secondary data sources pertinent to the focus of this study. This is followed by a discussion of findings from a small, non-representative survey of public servants. The paper proposes recommendations for improvements to the governing system and offers some ideas for further research. 3 2. INTRODUCTION Setting the stage The federal public service of Canada is an institution used to working in the midst of tensions. While it prides itself on delivering vital programs and services to Canadian citizens, it also faces frequent public criticism that it is slow, unresponsive, and out of touch. It seeks to hire the best and the brightest in Canada’s labour market, but those same much-sought-after recruits chafe under the rules and regulations that permeate the public sector and keep innovation and risk-taking initiatives in check. The public service has traditionally cultivated a character that encompasses professionalism, non-partisanship, impartiality, ethics, and above all, protection of the public interest, but some of these characteristics face increasing pressure from the juxtaposition of partisan political interests and the greater common good. The public service has two masters: the governing party of the day, which has its political agenda, and the common good, which is far more amorphous but is also the higher incentive that draws many toward employment in the public service. Serving two masters is never easy, but never more so than when the ultimate goals of the two can have tendencies to be contradictory or even incompatible. By serving the elected government faithfully and effectively, public servants are thought to serve the common good by extension as well, but tricky dilemmas arise when the two interests collide against each other. The example most often cited to demonstrate this conflict between political and public interests is the sponsorship scandal of 2002. The Liberal government of the time developed a creditable goal to strengthen Canadian unity and shore up federalist support in the province of Quebec. However, the funding program created to achieve these goals was subject to severe and willful mismanagement by program managers and political officials. The resulting political 4 maelstrom spotlighted issues of both political patronage and challenges for civil servants in regard to keeping said patronage in check. The public outrage over the sponsorship scandal cost the Liberals the ensuing general election, and the victorious Conservatives implemented a Federal Accountability Act that was designed to “change the way the government works” and to “restore Canadians’ trust in government and the democratic process” (Treasury Board Secretariat, 2006) by addressing, in part, concerns about reducing conflicts of interest and increasing transparency in public administration. But the essential underlying conflict between political and public interests was not – and cannot – be solved by enacting laws. This conflict cannot easily be solved by a code of conduct either. The Values and Ethics Code of the Public Service (Canada, 2003) states: “Ministers are responsible for … maintaining the tradition of political neutrality of the Public Service and its continuing ability to provide professional, candid and frank advice” (p. 7) and in turn, “public servants must … maintain the tradition of the political neutrality of the Public Service” (p. 8). But clashes between political and public interests are lived and experienced every day by individual public servants working across a variety of departments, agencies, Crown corporations, boards and commissions, and these conflicts repeatedly put public servants’ integrity and impartiality to the test. Broader issue of concern While coping with the complexities of divergent political and public interests, politicization of the public service – i.e., influence of the political ranks on the functioning of the public service – has come to represent a related and equally important challenge to the traditional neutrality of the public service. Politicization of the public service takes many forms. It can be conceived as politically based recruitment and appointment of senior positions within the public service, such as is done in the United States, where heads of government departments are apt to 5 change with each new administration and where political appointments of the most senior public service positions are an accepted practice (House of Commons, 2007). This, however, is not the case in the Canadian governing system. In fact, some commentators consider that the degree of depoliticization in deputy minister appointments in Canada “is unique among comparable countries” (Gow, 2004, p. 8), to the point of being “anachronistic” (Côté, 2007, p. 7). In Canada, politicization of the public service is seen in the normalization of the once- rare practice of summoning public officials to provide information or evidence to parliamentary committees on behalf of ministers. This practice has sometimes led to the ‘naming and shaming’ of public servants who find that blame for departmental errors