This article was originally published on Talk, an independent and non-profit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. Disclosure information is available on the original site.

___

By Heath Pickeling, doctoral student in public administration, KU Leuven

Canadians are soon heading to the polls to cast their votes in the 2019 Federal election after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made an effort to deflect the political controversy that has dogged him in this election year.

Known as the SNC-Lavalin case, it involved attempts to interfere with the judicial system and led to the resignation of two Cabinet Ministers and the Prime Minister’s chief Secretary, Gerald Butts.

The high-profile scandal involving one of Trudeau’s most trusted confidants has brought renewed attention to the size and influence of Canada’s political advisers.

Since the 70s and 80s, Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand have seen a steady growth and influence of political personnel. But Canada has the largest cohort of political staff of any Anglo-Westminster country. In 2018-19, the Federal government employed a record 667 employees, according to the office of the ethics Commissioner, which tracks conflicts of interest with appointed officials.

In the United Kingdom, where Canada modeled its Westminster system of government, the number of equivalent special advisers was 100 (the UK has a headcount limit and mostly only senior positions). Australia, like Canada, is enthusiastic about recruiting political staff and has about 447 employees at the Federal level.

The most influential advisers work for the Cabinet.

These Ministerial staff are appointed to political positions in the Cabinet and in opposition offices. Strictly speaking, they are not civil servants – they are sometimes called exempt employees – and do not need to be politically neutral.

They provide an additional voice to the government and perform political tasks that apolitical civil servants cannot and should not perform. In addition to working for Federal politicians, another cohort of political advisers can be found at the subnational level in canadian provinces, Australian States and devolved UK governments.

Why so many?

Canada quickly experimented with a system of consultants.

Growth began in the 1960s under Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, but doubled under the next administration of Pierre Trudeau. Australia began experimenting with Ministerial staff in the mid-70s.

Tom Axworthy, Pierre Trudeau’s former chief Secretary and speechwriter, explained to me the goal of doubling the number of party advisers in 1968:

“The Executive needed a political perspective on bureaucratic political consultations. Civil servants will have their point of view. The guerrillas could offer another, useful addition. Political advisers can also protect civil servants from doing what can be classified as political work. Today, however, the role has expanded more than I imagined.”

Over the past 50 years, the staff of Ministers has steadily increased and become more political.

In 1967, for example, Pearson employed more than 40 people in his office, nearly all of whom were recruited into the civil service. Twenty years later, in 1987, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney employed 117 staff in his Cabinet, with political appointments and seconded civil servants.

Not all roles are political. There is a distinction between the roles of Junior advisers, who provide clerical support, and those of senior advisers, who influence policy and political strategy. Although difficult to measure, senior political adviser positions range from 20 to 25 per cent, and clerical positions range from about 75 to 80 per cent.

New governments also affect the number and influence of Ministerial staff. In 1993, the liberal government of Jean Chretien reduced the number of employees, in part to demonstrate frugality, and because liberals traditionally have greater confidence in the use of public servants.

In contrast, the size of the Prime Minister’s office increased dramatically after the election victories of conservative governments led by Mulroney in 1984 and Stephen Harper in 2006.

Mulroney also promoted the position of “Executive assistant” in the PMO to the position of “head of staff”. This expanded the role of influence adviser and salary equal to the most senior civil servant in the government Department.

Advice for Ministers

Whether Trudeau wins a second term or Andrew Scheer’s conservatives form the next government, each incoming government must invest time to organize cabinets.

Trudeau was slow to recruit staff to his office in the first 12 months of his new government. In March 2016, about five months after winning the election, his government recruited just 381 Ministry employees. At the same time, in the last four years of his tenure, the previous Harper government poured in an average of 553 Ministerial staffers. The sluggish set wasted precious time, slowing efforts to implement Trudeau’s agenda.

This is not a criticism of Trudeau. Managers often put little effort into having their office structured or organized. They often recruit loyal party activists who invariably lack experience and capacity as government advisers.

New governments, in particular, recruit poorly experienced advisers if they have been in opposition for years (the liberals have been in opposition for about 10 years).

So here are five tips for the new government to come on October 22:

1. Improve workforce planning to test the role of consultants and ensure staff training.

2. Have more civil servants seconded to Ministers. Civil servants provide continuity and state experience. Don’t worry if their recruitment tarnishes their neutral reputation.

3. Lure experienced political advisers from provincial Ministerial offices (they bring expertise, local knowledge and networks).

5. Relax some regulatory controls. Current bans and restrictions on former advisers working as lobbyists or transferred to positions in the public service are holding back smart, capable people from becoming advisers.

There is no doubt that Ministers need both administrative and political staff to support their important portfolios. However, Canada’s generosity in this area is disproportionate to other countries of the Westminster model. A national review of political personnel could strengthen the system.

___

This article is republished from “Conversation under Creative Commons license”. Disclosure information is available on the original site. Read the original article:

https://theconversation.com/canadas-next-government-should-assess-why-we-have-so-many-political-advisers-123501

Heath Pickeling, doctoral student in public administration, KU Leuven, Canadian press

Like us on Facebook to see similar stories

Please give an overall rating of the site: