ARCHIVED - Public Appointments Commission Secretariat

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

Section II: Analysis of Program Activity by Strategic Outcome

Performance Analysis of Priorities

Priority 1:  Support the Commission

As the Commission is not yet established, the Secretariat’s work program included the development of policy and operational documents for consideration by the Commission once established. The policy development work included options for a Code of Practice and associated guidance (see Priority 3). Operational materials developed by the Secretariat included governance guidance, including an internal code of conduct, and communications materials. This included detailed documentation of the roles and responsibilities of the Commission with comparisons to other domestic and international government bodies with appointment responsibilities, draft speeches and outreach materials, brochure, leaflets and other media materials, and the development of a website to be launched once the Commission is established.

Priority 2:  Build the Organization

The administrative and financial foundation for the Public Appointments Commission and its Secretariat is largely complete. The Treasury Board of Canada has approved both the Program Activity Architecture and funding for the Commission and the Secretariat, and a draft management accountability framework which will need final approval by the Commission once established and operational.

Treasury Board approved resources are deemed sufficient for a Commission (part time member(s)), a core Secretariat, and an annual contract, via government tendering processes, to secure external auditors to assess compliance to the Commission’s policies and procedures.

It is worth noting that the current status of the Commission’s Secretariat as a distinct departmental authority carries with it a large reporting requirement to central agencies which, in the absence of formal partnerships, might necessitate the hiring of additional resources once the Commission is fully operational.

To continue to provide for a small Secretariat (3 to 4) once the Commission is operational, the Privy Council Office has worked with the Secretariat to develop and implement a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that governs the provision of corporate services to the Secretariat, primarily on a cost recovery basis. The costing of the MOU is now fully reflected in all of the Secretariat’s financial reporting.

In the absence of a Deputy Head, there is currently no delegated authority to staff the Secretariat on a permanent basis.

To prepare for the appointment of an Executive Director (as Deputy Head), a draft Departmental Staffing Accountability Report has been prepared for the direction and guidance of the eventual Commission and the Deputy Head of its Secretariat. It calls for responsibility for all staffing actions to remain in the hands of the Deputy Head, and for PCO Corporate Services to provide advice on a wide range of human resource staffing strategies (e.g., developing mandatory staffing policies and identifying and managing staffing risks) and associated services.

Additionally, a draft Management Resources and Results Structure Policy (MRRS) has been prepared with the assistance of the Treasury Board Secretariat. This outlines proposed performance indicators to measure the expected outcomes of the Commission and its Secretariat, once fully established and operational. Performance indicators will need to focus on base compliance to the Code of Practice, evidence of consistent and quality selection processes, internal cultural support for governance reforms in appointment processes, and increased public awareness and support for the appointment system.

Priority 3:  Develop the Code of Practice

The Secretariat has developed options for a Code of Practice which will be the primary document the Commission will need to review, adopt, and publish to fulfill its mandate within the shortest timeframe.

The Code of Practice will be the definitive document for public organizations under the Commission’s jurisdiction, but could be supplemented by procedures developed and tailored by individual agencies.

The Secretariat’s consultative work and ongoing work programs, including research into procedures and best practices of similar domestic and international accountability bodies, have indicated widespread agreement on the fundamental directions for the range of options developed for the Code of Practice. There is a strong consensus for a Code of Practice that builds on the strengths and recent reforms of the current system, and still maintains the well established tradition of Ministerial responsibility, specifically:

• the processes set out by the Code of Practice will need to be cost-effective, timely, and not burdensome, particularly in light of the wide range in size, scope and profile of federal organizations under the Commission’s jurisdiction, which argues against a “one size fits” all approach;

• the focus will need to remain on competency-based appointments, but with sufficient allowance to meet diversity and representational needs for public boards (i.e., relevant skills, interests and backgrounds);

• the need for the Code of Practice to be flexible and proportionate, meaning that appointment processes are to be appropriate to the nature and profile of the vacancy to be filled and the needs of the organization and its stage of development; and

• in all cases, appointment processes adopted need to be set out clearly and publicly.

Priority 4:  Monitor, Audit and Report

A draft Management Resources and Results Structure Policy (MRRS) has been prepared with the assistance of the Treasury Board Secretariat with respect to performance indicators, to measure the expected outcomes of the Commission and its Secretariat, once fully established and operational. Performance indicators will need to focus on base compliance to the Code of Practice, evidence of consistent and quality selection processes, internal cultural support for governance reforms in appointment processes, and increased public awareness and support for the appointment system in general. It is important to note that the Secretariat will be subject to internal audits, under the supervision of the PCO, as set out in the Memorandum of Agreement.

Lessons Learned

The Governor-in-Council appointment system is well developed. As noted by the Auditor General in her recent reports, there has been much progress in recent years in improving the system. This includes: the creation of a centralized website to publicize Governor-in-Council vacancies; the issuance of guidance documents to support officials assisting in this process; the efforts to encourage responsible Ministers and their officials to plan for more timely appointments and reappointments and announcements of successful candidates; the development of formalized job and role specifications, selection processes to assess candidate and performance assessment systems; and the development of orientation for new appointees and access to ongoing training. Additionally, there is much evidence of best practices across all categories of federal entities with Governor-in-Council appointments.

However, the Auditor General and others critics have noted room for improvements, primarily focusing on the need to provide for more consistent practices across federal organizations, ensuring greater transparency and openness, and providing for more focus and energy on strategic planning to ensure both quality outcomes and reduce the number of vacancies and the period of time to fill them.

The Commission’s mandate as set out in its founding legislation will not extend to involvement in specific appointments and therefore the Commission will not be commenting on the quality of individual appointments. Experience has suggested that this will likely continue to cause much confusion, requiring the Commission at the outset to be pro-active in explaining its role and value added.

While awaiting the creation of the Commission, the Secretariat will need to ensure that its research and work efforts inform and contribute to the ongoing efforts lead by the PCO to improve appointment systems. This will be the main focus of the Secretariat’s program activities for the next reporting period.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page