The federal government is spending big money on contracts despite expanding the civil service, a situation begging for scrutiny and reform..In recent weeks, contracts to the consulting firm McKinsey and Company have drawn fire from Conservative MPs and become the subject of a standing committee in Parliament. The firm gained $104.6 million from 24 contracts under the Trudeau Liberals, but just $2.2 million under the Harper Conservatives..Ken Coates, a professor at Saskatchewan’s Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, said companies like McKinsey can potentially be helpful..“There's lots of reasons why you would hire McKinsey and lots of reasons why you wouldn't. And it's partly dependent on the individual circumstance. Wouldn't it help to have a company that can draw on expertise in 70 different countries around the world, where they've helped their governments come up with policies and program development? Or you can hire the company down the block who's got experience in your backyard,” Coates said in an interview with the Western Standard..“In certain circumstances, a company like McKinsey, you hire them precisely because they're international, precisely because they're well connected. And oftentimes, they're very well connected to the sources of capital, to invest in capital, or to government approval.”.A Carleton University School of Public Policy and Administration research project found the federal government handed out $22.2 billion in contracts in 2021-22. Brookefield Global Integrated Solutions was the top beneficiary at $1.1 billion, while the $8.2 million given to McKinsey and Co was not even in the top 200 recipients..Coates said he believes there’s a place for government contracts, but such large dollars deserve better assessment..“Contracting out is very common when government wants to expand without increasing the size of the civil service. And that happens quite constructively and quite usefully in lots of different circumstances. It takes a long time to hire people and to get them in place and supervise them and onboard them all the things you do for civil servants. So generally, for crisis management, that's what consultants are very helpful for,” Coates said..“We're facing a challenge that's not all that unique to Canada. Britain is in in disarray right now. You see parts of this in France, you certainly see it the United States, where governments are struggling to keep up with the 21st century. There's no question of that. .“Part of this is government overreach, or government aspiration, call it whatever you like; but the government has taken on a whole bunch of major topics and challenges with a sense of urgency. Climate change is the best example, but that leads to alternative energy systems and the need to look at questions of rapid approval for certain mining projects. These are all emergency, high energy, high-in-demand circumstances.”.Such circumstances, and even the pandemic, don’t give the federal government a free pass, Coates said. He believes more scrutiny is called for..“What always bothers me is when you hire somebody, and they do a project that doesn't work very well, and then you hire them again very shortly thereafter. Is Canada getting full value for the money?.“The government is contracting out at a time with an unprecedented increase in the number of civil servants. They're building incredible bureaucracies right now. We've added tens of thousands of new civil servants on an ongoing basis. So, why are you doing both of these things? You have one or the other, you don't get both.”.The Liberal government has increased the number of civil servants by more than 30% since 2015 and swelled the bureaucracy by 8,570 people in 2021-22. However, Coates said the contracts are harder to scrutinize and deserve more attention..“When you're talking about really big contracts, these are people who are replacing bureaucrats and replacing the usual oversight, and the usual policy-making processes. And in those instances, I think there should be a reporting out to appropriate parliamentary committees. Hey, here's a report to be presented. You want to look at it? It's right here. And here's the value-for-money proposition. And if they don't get value for money, why would you hire them again? Those are perfectly fair questions,” Coates said..“I would love to see a situation where a major project is taken, consultants have come in, and they stand up and say, ‘We've created this incredible new policy and look how it's working so well. We're really thankful for the help and support of the following two consulting companies.’ That would be a good outcome in my view.”.Problems in the public service.Amanda Clarke, an associate professor at Carleton’s SPPA, recently told the House committee investigating McKinsey that failures in the bureaucracy were feeding the need for contracts. She said the bureaucracy was bound by "unhelpful oversight and reporting burdens" due to an “error-free 'gotcha' mentality and a lot of scrutiny."."The demands for error-free government make it very difficult to be creative and innovative in the public service,” she said..The Western Standard asked another policy expert to reflect on Clarke’s comments. The expert requested anonymity due to his continuing roles on committees and government work, but said he was in agreement..“There is a great deal of value and truth in what Amanda Clarke says. I would say that it is embedded in a larger time frame and a larger set of dimensions that go beyond her remarks,” he said..“[This] is redolent of the 1962 Glassco Commission which stressed the idea of ‘let the managers manage.’ In this case and in this era, it is more about let the regular public service managers manage without a lot of petty rules and without relying on the over engagement of external consultants.”.The expert with decades of experience with government processes said “a long history of slogans and management consulting buzz words” have been imposed on bureaucrats by their political masters and even by the vendors. By now, bureaucrats have so many considerations, they struggle to get anything done..“Smaller organizations that do business with or rely on aspects of the federal government must deal with an increasingly complex and sometimes internally inconsistent set of rules. My perspective on this is not shaped by a formal study, but it is supported by a lot of anecdotal information based on interactions with various groups that deal with government,” he said..“Many aspects of contracting, procurement and grants have become so wrapped up with new rules that are vaguely related to well-intentioned slogans at the top — some from political sources and others from major consulting firms that thrive on the invention of slogans.”.The days when bureaucrats’ only adjustment was to a newly elected government are over..“The great problem of the civil service was adjusting to those accumulating directives before the next set of "big ideas" came down from above. Now there are more sources of change and more intrusion into details of administration. In some parts of the civil service, you now have relatively inexperienced people trying to adjust to new directives which are sufficiently unclear,” the expert stated..“Solutions must be at a practical level and not driven, on the one hand, by ideological slogans, or, on the other hand, by some idealized view of the civil service and associated values. Both have been huge problems in Canadian public administration and management.”.Contracts not the biggest spending problem.Whatever the federal problems are with its spending on contracts, Coates believes other areas of a free-spending federal government deserve even more attention..“They're doing that on every file, and they're spending way more money on direct transfers to Canadians than they are on consulting firms. And, quite frankly, the media is paying very, very little attention to those expenditures. Look at the billions and billions of dollars that was misspent on CERB and other of the emergency measures. In my mind that's where our attention should be right now. We've got Canadians ripping Canadians off left, right, and centre..“It's important for the media to keep [its] eye on what government does, and our government doesn't use the media as a way of telling Canadians how they're using our money. It's not the Government of Canada's money. It's Canadian taxpayers’ money. And the money should be used in a way that benefits us all.”
The federal government is spending big money on contracts despite expanding the civil service, a situation begging for scrutiny and reform..In recent weeks, contracts to the consulting firm McKinsey and Company have drawn fire from Conservative MPs and become the subject of a standing committee in Parliament. The firm gained $104.6 million from 24 contracts under the Trudeau Liberals, but just $2.2 million under the Harper Conservatives..Ken Coates, a professor at Saskatchewan’s Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, said companies like McKinsey can potentially be helpful..“There's lots of reasons why you would hire McKinsey and lots of reasons why you wouldn't. And it's partly dependent on the individual circumstance. Wouldn't it help to have a company that can draw on expertise in 70 different countries around the world, where they've helped their governments come up with policies and program development? Or you can hire the company down the block who's got experience in your backyard,” Coates said in an interview with the Western Standard..“In certain circumstances, a company like McKinsey, you hire them precisely because they're international, precisely because they're well connected. And oftentimes, they're very well connected to the sources of capital, to invest in capital, or to government approval.”.A Carleton University School of Public Policy and Administration research project found the federal government handed out $22.2 billion in contracts in 2021-22. Brookefield Global Integrated Solutions was the top beneficiary at $1.1 billion, while the $8.2 million given to McKinsey and Co was not even in the top 200 recipients..Coates said he believes there’s a place for government contracts, but such large dollars deserve better assessment..“Contracting out is very common when government wants to expand without increasing the size of the civil service. And that happens quite constructively and quite usefully in lots of different circumstances. It takes a long time to hire people and to get them in place and supervise them and onboard them all the things you do for civil servants. So generally, for crisis management, that's what consultants are very helpful for,” Coates said..“We're facing a challenge that's not all that unique to Canada. Britain is in in disarray right now. You see parts of this in France, you certainly see it the United States, where governments are struggling to keep up with the 21st century. There's no question of that. .“Part of this is government overreach, or government aspiration, call it whatever you like; but the government has taken on a whole bunch of major topics and challenges with a sense of urgency. Climate change is the best example, but that leads to alternative energy systems and the need to look at questions of rapid approval for certain mining projects. These are all emergency, high energy, high-in-demand circumstances.”.Such circumstances, and even the pandemic, don’t give the federal government a free pass, Coates said. He believes more scrutiny is called for..“What always bothers me is when you hire somebody, and they do a project that doesn't work very well, and then you hire them again very shortly thereafter. Is Canada getting full value for the money?.“The government is contracting out at a time with an unprecedented increase in the number of civil servants. They're building incredible bureaucracies right now. We've added tens of thousands of new civil servants on an ongoing basis. So, why are you doing both of these things? You have one or the other, you don't get both.”.The Liberal government has increased the number of civil servants by more than 30% since 2015 and swelled the bureaucracy by 8,570 people in 2021-22. However, Coates said the contracts are harder to scrutinize and deserve more attention..“When you're talking about really big contracts, these are people who are replacing bureaucrats and replacing the usual oversight, and the usual policy-making processes. And in those instances, I think there should be a reporting out to appropriate parliamentary committees. Hey, here's a report to be presented. You want to look at it? It's right here. And here's the value-for-money proposition. And if they don't get value for money, why would you hire them again? Those are perfectly fair questions,” Coates said..“I would love to see a situation where a major project is taken, consultants have come in, and they stand up and say, ‘We've created this incredible new policy and look how it's working so well. We're really thankful for the help and support of the following two consulting companies.’ That would be a good outcome in my view.”.Problems in the public service.Amanda Clarke, an associate professor at Carleton’s SPPA, recently told the House committee investigating McKinsey that failures in the bureaucracy were feeding the need for contracts. She said the bureaucracy was bound by "unhelpful oversight and reporting burdens" due to an “error-free 'gotcha' mentality and a lot of scrutiny."."The demands for error-free government make it very difficult to be creative and innovative in the public service,” she said..The Western Standard asked another policy expert to reflect on Clarke’s comments. The expert requested anonymity due to his continuing roles on committees and government work, but said he was in agreement..“There is a great deal of value and truth in what Amanda Clarke says. I would say that it is embedded in a larger time frame and a larger set of dimensions that go beyond her remarks,” he said..“[This] is redolent of the 1962 Glassco Commission which stressed the idea of ‘let the managers manage.’ In this case and in this era, it is more about let the regular public service managers manage without a lot of petty rules and without relying on the over engagement of external consultants.”.The expert with decades of experience with government processes said “a long history of slogans and management consulting buzz words” have been imposed on bureaucrats by their political masters and even by the vendors. By now, bureaucrats have so many considerations, they struggle to get anything done..“Smaller organizations that do business with or rely on aspects of the federal government must deal with an increasingly complex and sometimes internally inconsistent set of rules. My perspective on this is not shaped by a formal study, but it is supported by a lot of anecdotal information based on interactions with various groups that deal with government,” he said..“Many aspects of contracting, procurement and grants have become so wrapped up with new rules that are vaguely related to well-intentioned slogans at the top — some from political sources and others from major consulting firms that thrive on the invention of slogans.”.The days when bureaucrats’ only adjustment was to a newly elected government are over..“The great problem of the civil service was adjusting to those accumulating directives before the next set of "big ideas" came down from above. Now there are more sources of change and more intrusion into details of administration. In some parts of the civil service, you now have relatively inexperienced people trying to adjust to new directives which are sufficiently unclear,” the expert stated..“Solutions must be at a practical level and not driven, on the one hand, by ideological slogans, or, on the other hand, by some idealized view of the civil service and associated values. Both have been huge problems in Canadian public administration and management.”.Contracts not the biggest spending problem.Whatever the federal problems are with its spending on contracts, Coates believes other areas of a free-spending federal government deserve even more attention..“They're doing that on every file, and they're spending way more money on direct transfers to Canadians than they are on consulting firms. And, quite frankly, the media is paying very, very little attention to those expenditures. Look at the billions and billions of dollars that was misspent on CERB and other of the emergency measures. In my mind that's where our attention should be right now. We've got Canadians ripping Canadians off left, right, and centre..“It's important for the media to keep [its] eye on what government does, and our government doesn't use the media as a way of telling Canadians how they're using our money. It's not the Government of Canada's money. It's Canadian taxpayers’ money. And the money should be used in a way that benefits us all.”
