ARCHIVED - Public Appointments Commission Secretariat - Report

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

Section II: Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome

Strategic Outcome

Program Activity: Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments

Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments covers activities relating to: the development of options for a principle-based and proportional Code of Practice, including minimum standards covering selection criteria, recruitment strategies and assessment processes; the development of procedures and guidance to assist auditors to assess compliance with the Code of Practice, once implemented; continued research into domestic and international agencies responsible for public appointments to identify best practices; the development of frameworks for reporting to the Prime Minister and Parliament; and internal evaluation frameworks to measure success in achieving the mandate. Additionally, advice and best practices are shared with Privy Council Office officials to support ongoing improvements to existing appointment frameworks.

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

Support the Commission

The Secretariat is charged with the development of policy and operational documents for consideration by the Commission once established.  Accordingly, materials have been prepared and updated, on an ongoing basis, to reflect practices for similar entities, both domestically and internationally. The materials include guidance for the board of directors, an internal code of conduct, a strategic communications policy, speeches and other outreach materials, such as brochures and leaflets, and the development of a website to be launched with the announcement of a Commission. The website will explain the roles and functions of the Commission and present key documents such as the Code of Practice and associated guidance.

Build the Organization

The Treasury Board of Canada has approved the Program Activity Architecture and funding for the Commission and the Secretariat, once both are fully operational. Resources are deemed sufficient for a Commission comprising part-time member(s), a core Secretariat of three to four permanent staff, and an annual contract (via government tendering processes) to secure external auditors to assess compliance with Commission policies and procedures. In advance of the Commission, expenditures have been limited. Funds have been used to support the preliminary work of a core Secretariat, staffed on a temporary basis.  Additionally, a management accountability framework has been prepared that outlines how performance for both the Commission and its Secretariat will be assessed, once the former is established.

The Secretariat is currently supported by the Privy Council Office for financial and administrative services via a Memorandum of Understanding.  The costing of the Memorandum of Understanding is now fully reflected in all of the Secretariat’s financial reporting. Preparations for permanent staffing have also been completed, which should provide for a quick start-up of the permanent structure once an executive director (as deputy head) is appointed.

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, though it 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 and the range of options developed for the Code of Practice. There is a strong consensus for a Code of Practice that can build on the strengths and recent reforms of the current system, and still maintain the well-established tradition of ministerial responsibility, specifically the following.

• 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 Code of Practice will need to be flexible and proportionate, meaning that appointment processes are to be appropriate to the nature and profile of the vacancy to be filled, the needs of the organization and its stage of development.
• In all cases, appointment processes adopted need to be set out clearly and publicly.

The ongoing work of the Secretariat in 2010-11 has provided for continuing development of this draft Code of Practice.  Options have now been incorporated which provide for standardization of procedures for reappointments and term extensions, increased requirements for planning to improve the timing of appointments and reappointments, and stronger reporting requirements.

Monitor, Audit and Report

A draft Performance Measurement Framework has also been prepared, with the assistance of the Treasury Board Secretariat. This framework will enable measurement of performance in relation to the expected outcomes of the Commission and its Secretariat, once fully established and operational. Performance indicators are based on compliance with 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. A proposed framework has also been developed for the Commission’s Annual Report. The Commission and its Secretariat will be subject to internal audits, under the supervision of the Privy Council Office, as set out in the Memorandum of Understanding.

Lessons Learned

Governor-in-Council appointments are made by the Governor General on the advice of the Cabinet. This consists of approximately 2,500 appointees, including a large number of non-judicial appointments that are made to agencies, boards, commissions and Crown corporations each year. The appointment system to fill these vacancies follows well-developed policies and procedures, with a view to providing for qualified appointments and achieving efficiency in this sector. Filling vacancies can be accomplished through reappointments of incumbents or by searching for, selecting and evaluating new candidates.

Officials designated to assist the Governor in Council with respect to appointments need to accurately identify and manage vacancies in a timely manner to ensure that boards have the capacity to operate at or close to their full potential. This requires internal systems and active management.  Planning is also required to determine an appropriate approach to filling a position. Up-to-date selection criteria are a prerequisite to reflect the needs of the organization and the specific qualifications required of the prospective office holder. Once determined, the Privy Council Office-developed and managed centralized website will allow prospective candidates to find out about vacancies. Selection procedures will also be developed based on position requirements and implemented through formalized selection processes. Candidates recommended for possible appointment will also be assessed for probity and possible conflicts of interest. Once chosen, the names of candidates will be publicly announced and the candidates will be provided with appropriate orientation and training.

Recently, efforts have also been made to closely integrate the appointing process within the general framework of agency governance. For example, the President of the Treasury Board has concluded a review of all Governor-in-Council positions to agencies, boards, commissions and Crown corporations in order to determine the optimal size of these organizations, implement reductions where appropriate and necessary, and ensure operational efficiency and fiscal responsibility. This review recommended a reduction of 245 positions. Most jurisdictions go a step further and are now moving toward formalizing such reviews through regular monitoring, with the goal of ensuring that agency mandates remain relevant and that agencies continue to perform effectively the public function for which they were established.

Much progress has been made since 2006 to strengthen the appointment system and to improve its rigour. A centralized Commission website, still under development, has been updated and upgraded on an ongoing basis.  Greater clarification has been provided for roles and responsibilities in all aspects of the appointment process, including the involvement of boards of directors in the search for and selection of CEOs of Crown corporations.  Orientation and training programs for new appointees in leadership positions have been revamped, and ministers and deputy ministers now receive strengthened guidance and support, including advice on communication protocols and a monthly vacancy report that outlines all appointments set to expire within the upcoming year. To further strengthen vacancy management, guidance now requires that incumbents receive adequate notice if their terms will not be renewed.

Secretariat research further suggests that consideration be given to strengthening specific areas of the system. This includes: developing and implementing an interactive component for the website, where Canadians can learn about the regular workings of the public appointment system and self-identify their interest in being considered for public appointments; engaging in greater active outreach to encourage a wider range of applicants; ensuring that all vacancies posted provide sufficient information on the qualifications and experience required to allow individuals to self-assess; ensuring that sufficient information on selection and decision-making processes is made available to the public; and providing regular reports on the population of Governor-in-Council appointees, including key characteristics such as age, sex, language, region of operation, appointment and reappointment terms, and range of remuneration.

The development and implementation of strong reappointment policies will also bolster efficiency and support quality competency-based appointments.  Reappointments can provide for the retention of experienced and highly skilled individuals, thereby promoting board balance and stability. They can also promote timely vacancy management, and capitalize on appointee training and development costs, as well as avoid both the costs and time associated with launching initial appointment procedures. At the same time, a decision to reappoint may need to be balanced against the advantages of introducing fresh thinking to a public organization through the appointment of new and qualified candidates.

Currently, there are no consistently applied protocols regarding reappointments. Reappointment protocols include considerations such as whether a board member continues to meet the qualifications for the position to be filled, whether the incumbent has performed satisfactorily during his/her latest term, and whether the incumbent should be assessed against other interested and qualified candidates. Assessment of adequate performance, for example, might require that appointing authorities determine, in advance, assessment criteria related to job requirements and ensure that all new appointees are made aware of the performance criteria against which they will be assessed. Performance assessments should also be considered for incumbents in quasi-judicial positions, although this would necessitate the development of assessment criteria that do not interfere with the principle of organizational independence. The precise role of board members in performance evaluation might also be addressed through formalized protocols with responsible ministers.

In addition to the above considerations, efficiencies could be found by requiring appointing authorities to outline, in advance, their strategies to fill a vacancy including: information on the proposed recruitment and selection processes; a detailed timetable; up-to-date documentation relating to the position and the public organization; consultation plans (if required); and communication protocols. Post-appointment evaluations could then be reviewed in relation to planning documents.

Program Activity: Internal Services

The Public Appointments Commission Secretariat is limited in size and the Secretariat must function as a department within the meaning of Schedule 1.1 of the Financial Administration Act. For this reason, the Privy Council Office's Corporate Services Branch provides most administrative and financial services under a Memorandum of Understanding.

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

The Privy Council Office provides administrative and financial services under a Memorandum of Understanding, with most services provided by the Privy Council Office on a cost-recovery basis.

Lessons Learned

In 2010-11, the Secretariat continued to access the expertise of the Privy Council Office in order to reduce operating costs.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page