This page has been archived.
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
I am pleased to present the Departmental Performance Report for the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011.
2010-11 was not a normal year in the life of the Office. The unanticipated retirement of the first Commissioner in October, followed by the tabling of the highly critical report of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) in December were two events that had a profound impact on the members of the team and on the priorities initially identified for that fiscal year.
Concrete action was taken in response to the findings in the OAG Report, to review all closed files from the inception of the Office in 2007 to December 20, 2010 when I accepted a term as interim Public Sector Integrity Commissioner. It was essential to retain the services of an objective, third-party that was able to review all of the closed files in a short period of time. The legal services of special advisors were also retained to begin the review of the identified files in order to make recommendations on possible corrective measures in 2011-12.
In my experience, it is crucial that an organization be appropriately staffed in order to efficiently deliver its mandate and to allow for an engaged workforce. Measures were taken to staff certain key management positions based on the identified needs of the Office. In addition, a Policy and Procedures Manual that includes performance standards was formally implemented, which also contributes to strengthening the organization in the implementation of the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.
In order to regain the confidence of our stakeholders, I found it was necessary to take measures to establish strong relationships with those elements of civil society interested in our mandate. As a result, the groundwork was done to establish the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada Advisory Committee to include the range of key players that are involved in either a direct or indirect way with the implementation of the Act and the structures in place to administer it.
We also made concerted efforts to increase communications within the public sector by keeping Agency and Deputy Heads and the Senior Officers informed periodically on topics of interest such as the file review, publication of the annual report and key staffing actions.
All of these activities have one thing in common: to systemize and continue to build on the Office's work in a way that allows it to be more efficient, rigorous and stable. From this point forward, our organization will maximize the opportunities offered by our budget in implementing our constitutive statute. Similarly, complaints and disclosures will be processed with clearly defined timelines by the adoption of the Manual and hiring of additional investigators in 2011-12.
I believe that the measures taken and the arrival of new colleagues will give the Office an opportunity to perform at the level that is expected by Parliament. It was an honour for me to lead this team over these last few months during this period of change and growth.
Me Mario Dion
Interim Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
The Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada (PSIC) is an independent Agent of Parliament established to administer the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act (PSDPA) or the Act, which came into force in April 2007. The Office is mandated to provide a confidential, independent and effective response to:
The Office's approach to achieving its mandate is guided by the following principles:
The Office is currently headed by an Interim Commissioner, whose term ends December 2011, while a selection process to appoint a new Commissioner is underway. The appointment of a Commissioner is made by Order in Council, and as an Agent of Parliament, is approved by resolution of both Houses of Parliament. The Commissioner reports directly to Parliament, and has the rank, powers, authorities and accountabilities of a deputy head of a department or agency.
The Office has jurisdiction over the entire public sector, including separate agencies and parent Crown corporations, which represents approximately 400,000 public servants. Under the PSDPA, members of the general public can also come to the Office with information about a possible wrongdoing in the federal public sector. However, the Office does not have jurisdiction over the Canadian Forces, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, and the Communications Security Establishment, each of which is required under the PSDPA to establish internal procedures for disclosure of wrongdoing and protection against reprisal similar to those set out in the Act.
The Office conducts independent reviews and investigations of disclosures of wrongdoing and complaints of reprisal in a fair and timely manner. In cases of founded wrongdoing, the Commissioner issues findings and makes recommendations to chief executives for corrective action. The Commissioner exercises exclusive jurisdiction over the review, investigation and conciliation of reprisal complaints. This includes making applications to the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal, which has the power to determine if reprisals have taken place and to order appropriate remedial and disciplinary action.
The Office is guided at all times by the public interest and the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. The Commissioner submits an annual report to Parliament, and also reports to Parliament on cases of founded wrongdoing. Special reports may also be submitted to Parliament at any time.
More information about the Office's mandate, roles, responsibilities, activities, statutory reports and the PSDPA can be found on the Office's website: www.psic-ispc.gc.ca.
The Office has one strategic outcome that guides the pursuit of its mandate and reflects the long-term benefits sought for Canadians as demonstrated in the following chart.
Priority | Type | Program Activity |
---|---|---|
Provide an efficient, safe and confidential disclosure mechanism, and protect against reprisals disclosers and persons who participate in investigations | Ongoing | Disclosure and Reprisal Management |
Status: Mostly Met | ||
|
Priority | Type | Program Activity |
---|---|---|
Inform public servants and Canadians about the role and mandate of the Office | Ongoing | Disclosure and Reprisal Management |
Status: Mostly Met | ||
|
Priority | Type | Program Activity |
---|---|---|
Promote a work-place culture in the federal public service that is open to disclosure and protects from reprisal | Ongoing | Disclosure and Reprisal Management |
Status: Mostly Met | ||
|
Priority | Type | Program Activity |
---|---|---|
Establish a management infrastructure that is solid and consistent with federal government standards | Ongoing | Internal Services |
Status: Mostly Met | ||
|
Priority | Type | Program Activity |
---|---|---|
Implement management practices aimed at fostering a culture that reflects values of integrity, respect, fairness, and professionalism | Ongoing | Internal Services |
Status: Mostly Met | ||
|
The Office has a highly visible profile due to the sensitivity of its mandate and the scrutiny generated by the Office of the Auditor General's (OAG) December 2010 report on the former Commissioner. As an agent of Parliament, the Office operates in a highly dynamic environment that includes new and evolving expectations. The Office is addressing these challenges while continuing to provide effective services. A corporate risk profile has been developed. It identifies and assesses risks of strategic importance. Risk mitigation actions have also been identified, and these have been integrated with business planning and day-to-day program activities.
The risk of losing the trust of public servants and the general public in the Office's capacity to carry out its mandate heightened following the OAG's December 2010 report concerning the former Commissioner. Individuals are less likely to make disclosures if they do not have a clear understanding of the services available or if they lack trust that they will be adequately protected and that their concerns will be appropriately addressed. To help mitigate this risk, the Office initiated a comprehensive third-party review of all closed case files since the inception of the Office to address any doubts about past decisions. Despite the release of the OAG report, the Office experienced a significant increase in operational workloads and anticipates that this trend will continue. In light of this growing demand, the Office will continue to invest in building capacity to deliver on its mandate.
Personnel represents the single largest category of expenses for the Office. Maintaining human resources, namely through attraction, development and retention of employees with adequate competencies, skills and experiences is a demanding management responsibility. The high mobility of skilled professionals and the greater impact of turnover on small organizations, from both a financial and a mandate delivery capacity, can create challenges for knowledge transfer, succession planning and corporate memory. To ensure sufficient capacity, the Office has developed a human resource management plan to mitigate this risk and to continue to meet the Office's mandate.
Information security is critical in the context of disclosures, investigations and the need for preserving confidentiality. Sensitive or private information must be protected from potential loss or inappropriate access in order to avoid potential litigation, damaged reputation and reluctance in coming forward. The Office has implemented many practices aimed at ensuring the security of information, which include briefing and confidentiality agreements, random information security checks within premises, controlled access for the storage of sensitive information, mandatory training for all personnel on managing records and information, and plans to conduct a formal assessment of the effectiveness of the management of security and business continuity. A new Case Management System will also be implemented, resulting in strengthened access and security features.
Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual Spending |
---|---|---|
6,538 | 6,856 | 5,324 |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
---|---|---|
45 | 25 | 20 |
Driven by increased operational workloads, the utilization of resources grew in 2010-11. It is expected that this trend will continue. In light of this growing demand, the Office is investing in building capacity to deliver its mandate and to implement its strategic plans. The Office is well positioned to fully utilize its ongoing level of resources.
Performance Indicators | Targets | 2010-11 Performance |
---|---|---|
Inquiries and investigations are conducted efficiently and in accordance with the PSDPA |
|
As a follow-up to the OAG Report, PSIC initiated and completed a third-party review of 221 past files closed between April 1, 2007 and December 20, 2010 to ensure that these past disclosures and alleged reprisal complaints were dealt with in a manner consistent with the requirements of the PSDPA and with applicable legal, investigative and administrative decision-making standards. |
Retained two Special Advisors to provide recommendations and advice regarding the 70 of the 221 past closed files identified as having issues. | ||
Dealt with increased operational workloads associated with increases of:
|
||
Finalized the internal Policy and Procedures Manual which serves as a reference guide and training tool for PSIC officials regarding the handling of disclosures of wrongdoing and complaints of reprisals under the PSDPA. | ||
Established a contribution program to provide access to legal advice pursuant to subsection 25.1 of the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act. | ||
Established performance standards for intake, inquiries and investigations. | ||
Public servants and Canadians are aware of the role and mandate of the Office |
|
The Office revised its Strategic Plan placing renewed emphasis on being accessible so that the organization is viewed as approachable and transparent. To this end, the Interim Commissioner implemented the practice of providing periodic updates and operational results to public servants and Canadians through the Office's website. |
The Office also continued outreach activities including the continued facilitation of the Senior Officers Support Network, hosting a practical workshop and participating in various conferences targeting public servants. | ||
Recognition of disclosure as a pro-social behaviour |
|
The Office took measures to establish strong relationships with those elements of civil society who are interested in PSIC's mandate. Numerous meetings with representatives from advocacy groups provided an opportunity to convey PSIC's commitment to greater transparency and maintaining a genuine dialogue. As a result, PSIC initiated the creation of an Advisory Committee that will include the participation of the advocacy groups as well as other key players involved in the implementation of the governing statute to provide a more permanent mechanism for stakeholder consultation on disclosures of wrongdoing and reprisal complaints. |
The Office also pursued initiatives to provide other departments and public servants with information on the Office's mandate. |
Program Activity | 2009–10 Actual Spending* |
2010–11
($ thousands) |
Alignment to Government of Canada Outcomes | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main Estimates |
Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
|||
Disclosure and Reprisal Management | 2,189 | 4,191 | 4,191 | 4,395 | 3,318 | Government Affairs |
Internal Services | 1,656 | 2,347 | 2,347 | 2,461 | 2,006 | |
Total | 3,845 | 6,538 | 6,538 | 6,856 | 5,324 |
* The amounts displayed for "Actual Spending" in 2009-10 differ slightly from the "Authorities used in the current year" as reported in the Public Accounts. These amounts were subsequently revised based on the recommendation of the Office of the Auditor General.
The 2010-11 Total Authorities represents an increase of approximately $0.3M, or 5%, over the 2010-11 Main Estimates of $6.5 million. The increase is attributable to funding received for the operating budget carry forward from 2009-10 to 2010-11 and the reimbursement of eligible paylist expenditures for severance pay.
* The amounts displayed for "Spending Authorities" in 2009-10 differ slighly from the "Total authorities available for use" as reported in the Public Accounts due to reprofiling of funds of $1.2 million from 2009-10 to 2011-12.
The Office's spending increased significantly for the 2010-11 fiscal year. This increase was due to:
The costs associated with the former Commissioner's departure and the third-party review are non-recurring. However, the increased salary and professional services costs were driven by the growth in operational workloads and the required support services and it is expected that this trend will continue. In light of the growing demand, the Office will continue to invest in building capacity to deliver its mandate and to implement its strategic plans. The Office is well positioned to fully utilize its ongoing level of resources.
For information on organizational Votes and/or statutory expenditures, please see the 2010-11 Public Accounts of Canada (Volume II). An electronic version of the Public Accounts is available at Public Works and Government Services Canada's Web page: http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/recgen/txt/72-eng.html.