Public Administration and Accountability Week 11

2 Accountability “simply means being required to explain one’s actions by answering to someone else” (Inwood, 2012: 363). “it ultimately comes down to the notion that in a democratic society, elected officials must accept responsibility for the actions of their public servants and the government on behalf of the people” (Inwood, 2012: 373).

3 Public Administration & Evaluation internal departmental audits Treasury Board Office of the Comptroller General Auditor General

4 Public Administration & Evaluation Impact of New Public Management restructuring, streamlining, downloading, alternative service delivery, empowerment of front-line employees all present challenges to evaluation and accountability

5 Public Administration & Accountability Responsible Government Ministerial Responsibility  collective ministerial responsibility  individual ministerial responsibility Public Service Anonymity Political Neutrality of Public Service

6 Ministerial Responsibility and the Harper Government “Auditor blasts lack of transparency in doling out generous G8 funds”Auditor blasts lack of transparency in doling out generous G8 funds Tony Clement: “Gazebos and the Governing Morality”Gazebos and the Governing Morality Updated: “Minister of Muskoka”Minister of Muskoka Today’s news (Nov. 23/11): “Files contradict Clement, suggest he had hand in carving up G8 fund”Files contradict Clement, suggest he had hand in carving up G8 fund

7 Changing Nature of Accountability We must be careful not to overstate the degree of accountability in the past growing complexity of government, increased size of governmental departments New Public Management can blur lines of accountability

8 Accountable to who? Are public sector workers accountable: to bureaucratic superiors? to political leadership? to civil service ideals? to public?

9 Gomery Commission Commission of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities Interim Report: November 1, 2005 Title: Who is Responsible? Final Report: February 1, 2006 Title: Restoring Accountability Includes three major research volumes 1. Parliament, Ministers and Deputy Ministers 2. The Public Service and Transparency 3. Linkages: Responsibilities and Accountabilities

10 Commission found: political involvement in the administration of the Sponsorship Program; insufficient oversight at the very senior levels of the public service which allowed program managers to circumvent proper contracting procedures and reporting lines; a veil of secrecy surrounding the administration of the Sponsorship Program and an absence of transparency in the contracting process; reluctance, for fear of reprisal, by virtually all public servants to go against the will of a manager who was circumventing established policies and who had access to senior political officials; the refusal of Ministers, senior officials in the Prime Minister’s Office and public servants to acknowledge their responsibility for the problems of mismanagement that occurred.

11 What went wrong? civil servant Allan Cutler raised concerns about how the program was being run, and was declared surplus Ernst & Young conducted audit in 1996, language of draft report was toned down for final report internal audit conducted in 2000, once again information was dropped from the final report

12 What went wrong? “There were two major flaws in the Sponsorship Program, of which an experienced politician or public administrator should have been aware.” “First, having the program administered by private sector communication agencies was an open invitation to unscrupulous persons to reap unjustified or exaggerated profits” “second, initiating a program of this kind without first developing rules, guidelines and criteria, and without ensuring effective bureaucratic oversight, left the door open to error, abuse and careless administration.”

13 What went wrong? “Ranald Quail, deputy minister of Public Works knew that decisions were being made about the administration of a program for which he, as Deputy Minister, was responsible.” “He abdicated his responsibility to control, direct and oversee the actions of officials in his department.” “In fairness to Mr. Quail, he was, in 1996 and 1997, very busy with the enormous problems associated with program review.” “In addition, he was reluctant to interfere in the Sponsorship Program, which was a priority of the Prime Minister.”

14 What went wrong? “the most troubling facts were that this aberration originated in the Prime Minister's office in the first place, and was allowed to continue for so long, despite internal audit reports, investigations, warnings, and complaints by public servants involved in the actual contracts in question…Coupled with this was a climate of excessive deference to the political arm of government within the public service. It was apparent that Parliament, which should be at centre stage in matters of accountability and responsibility for the expenditure of public funds, had been shifted to the side, kept in the dark, and not involved in important decisions of government policy.”

15 Gomery Recommendations: “Our principal recommendations address the need for a rebalancing of the respective roles of...Parliament and the executive arm of the government.” “We are serious about the need to rebalance the roles of Parliament and government, about putting emphasis on accountability, and about promoting greater government transparency.”

16 Gomery Recommendations: “We want to clarify the respective responsibilities of Ministers and Deputy Ministers, and we propose a process for Deputy Ministers, who may disagree with a specific direction from a Minister, to document the disagreement; We recommend a new method of selecting Deputy Ministers that is more open and competitive and we recommend that they be appointed for longer terms, to provide more stability and accountability;”

17 Gomery Recommendations: “We propose the creation of a Code of Conduct for Exempt Staff and recommend that they no longer be given preference for public service appointments; We recommend the legislative enactment of a Public Service Charter for the reasons given in the report, one of them being that public servants should no longer be caught between their obligations to their political and bureaucratic superiors;”

18 Gomery Recommendations: “We do not recommend the adoption of a lot of new rules, policies and regulations, or the creation of new oversight organizations. What is really needed is a culture change, aiming to foster what one of our respondents called a ‘culture of integrity.’”