Clement warns budget will spark a 'culture shift'

[oneh2obabe]

Susana Mas, CBC News
Posted: Mar 10, 2012 2:45 PM ET
Last Updated: Mar 10, 2012 10:53 PM ET

The upcoming federal budget will mark the start of a "culture shift" in Ottawa from "spending enablers" to "cost containers," Treasury Board President Tony Clement says.

Clement, the minister responsible for finding anywhere from $4 billion to $8 billion in annual savings as part of the government's plan to reduce the deficit and balance the books, made the comments in a speech to Conservatives gathered at the Manning Centre Conference in Ottawa on Saturday.

He said everyone who works in government ought to ask themselves not only how they can do their job to the best of their ability but also how they can do it "in an excellent way at less cost to the taxpayers."

The way to do that is "by changing the incentives and rewards, and by changing the internal governance and accountability that should be felt at every level," Clement said.

"If you take nothing else from my talk this morning, please take this: We are working to change the culture in official Ottawa from one of spending enablers to one of cost containers.

"The take-home lesson is to ingrain this idea of efficient and constrained use of tax dollars on a day-to-day basis, at every level, from the politician all the way down to the proverbial mail clerk, at every level of bureaucracy."

Clement predicted the government will face "resistance" from "public sector union bosses" who he said would be "working hand-in-hand with the NDP Opposition."

"Their goal is simply to perpetuate the status quo," he said. "Their only solutions seem to be: hire more, tax more, spend more."

In a written statement to CBC News on Saturday, NDP spokesperson Karl Belanger said: "As the Conservatives are getting ready to cut services to Canadians and gut the fiscal capacity of the government to help people, the NDP will keep standing up against their narrow-minded, ideologically driven approach, and keep working to defend Canadian working families."

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has said there will be no "draconian measures" in the budget he will present March 29. But public-sector unions have warned of widespread cuts resulting in the loss of "tens of thousands" — numbers Flaherty has rejected.

While Clement did not reveal any details of the budget, he said the review was "not just about finding savings, but also a tool by which we can help to modernize government."

Clement also spoke about cutting red tape as a way to help businesses grow and invest for the future, and the open government initiative as a way to make government more transparent and accountable.

Clement's remarks come on the heels of a federal report on the public service that was released Thursday.

The report clearly indicates that public-sector layoffs will be a part of the government's cost-cutting plans.

"We are conscious that the Public Service is on the verge of significant changes, driven in part by the immediate requirements of deficit reduction, but also by a more fundamental need to renew public institutions for the future," said the report by the Prime Minister's Advisory Committee on the Public Service.

The committee is co-chaired by former Privy Council clerk Paul Tellier and Conservative cabinet minister David Emerson. It is the sixth report of its kind since the committee was established in 2006.

"One of the major tasks that senior leaders will face is the deliberate downsizing of the Public Service," states the committee.

[SIDEBAR]

By the numbers:

The year 2011 generated projected savings of $1.570 billion in program spending in 13 departments by 2013–14.

The government’s actions to reduce growth in operating expenses were projected to save $0.9 billion by 2011–12 and $1.8 billion by 2012–13.

This was the second consecutive year in which there was no growth in the size of the public service.

In the 2012 budget, departments and agencies will learn the details of their contribution to the government’s deficit reduction action plan.

Source: Sixth report of the Prime Minister's Advisory Committee on the Public Service

[/SIDEBAR]

The report goes on to state that it is "essential" that the government invest in long-term thinking.

"As Ministers move to implement the deficit reduction action plan, they must protect essential policy and research capacity."

The committee acknowledges that changes inside the public service will affect "many people's lives" and recommends that this vision be "communicated regularly and openly" with employees by the leadership of the public service and politicians alike.

And with respect to public sector unions, "frank and productive dialogue between labour and management can generate results that serve the interests of both sides," the report says. "This kind of dialogue must continue."

In a statement to CBC News on Friday, a spokesperson for the Public Service Alliance of Canada said "the government isn't consulting anyone in this process."

"It is foolish to pretend that Canadians must choose between a strong economy and good public services," said Alain Cossette from PSAC. "They have the right to expect both."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201 ... shift.html

[EdCase]

I won't be holding my breath! The Harper Government™ have lots of room to cut their own profligate spending.

 From 2006/7 - the first full year of the Harper Government™ - to 2011/2, Federal expenditures increased 22% from $222.2B to $270.5B. The number of federal employees has also grown 25% from 423,00 to 530,000. Cuts of 5 to 10% won't even start to make a dent in the fiscal incompetence shown by this government.



Right now, they are in full panic mode. Canada's total debt - government, corporate & personal was 313% of 2010 GDP (Bank for International Settlements). This compares with the US 268, Germany 241, Australia 235 & Greece (yes Greece) at 265. We are one of only three OECD countries - the other are the UK & Portugal - that exceed the safe threshold level for all three debt components.





The only thing that has been baling us out is the demand for our commodities, but this may not carry us forward. Global growth is forecast at only 1.4% pa through 2018 with recessions likely in 2012/13 and 2016/17; even China will go through some painful readjustment of its growth.





This government has got to get serious about responsible financial management or there is a real possibility we will go the way of Italy.

[Homeownertoo]

Let's hope it's not a false alarm. Such changes are sorely needed and long overdue.

[NAB]

Canada's total debt - government, corporate & personal was 313% of 2010 GDP (Bank for International Settlements). This compares with the US 268, Germany 241, Australia 235 & Greece (yes Greece) at 265. We are one of only three OECD countries - the other are the UK & Portugal - that exceed the safe threshold level for all three debt components.

.....This government has got to get serious about responsible financial management or there is a real possibility we will go the way of Italy.

Thanks for that Ed. It really helps when someone shows the total Canadian debt picture and puts it in global perspective. At last estimate some 68,000 federal jobs face the axe, and can BC be far behind?.

Nab

[steven lloyd]

... can BC be far behind?

Let's start with the premier non-elect.

[EdCase]

At last estimate some 68,000 federal jobs face the axe...

Nab

NAB - that's only half the number of the increase in federal jobs under this fiscally incompetent government and I have serious doubts that they have the guts to cut even this number.

[heymac]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/03/12/pol-weston-public-service-budget-severance.html

[EdCase]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/03/12/pol-weston-public-service-budget-severance.html

I notice that this story talks about cuts of 30,000 federal jobs over 3 years or only 25% of the jobs the Harper Government™ has added: and Clement calls this a culture shift?!?

[Al Czervic]

Let's hope it's not a false alarm. Such changes are sorely needed and long overdue.

Agreed.

[Merry]

I only hope that any cuts will be made based on whether or not a particularly position is really necessary, as opposed to a blind "percentage" based cut that's merely aimed at public relations and vote getting. Because even though I do want to see fiscally responsible government, I don't want to see inadequate or poorly run government.

The bottom line is that there are many civil service jobs that are necessary in order for our country to run efficiently, and too much job cutting just for the sake of cutting will have a harmful effect on that efficiency.

For example, do we want to risk the safety of our food supply due to an overly large reduction in the number of inspectors? Ditto for safety and the environment. What about federal employees such as air traffic control, or the RCMP? How about people in the CRA, or the immigration department? We already have a huge backlog in immigration applications, are we prepared to make that even worse?

Just exactly where are these cuts going to be, and what is the justification (other than merely cost cutting) behind them?
Once I know that I'll decide whether or not I'm in full support of such cuts. In the meantime I'll just wait and see.

[EdCase]

I don't want to see inadequate or poorly run government.

The bottom line is that there are many civil service jobs that are necessary in order for our country to run efficiently, and too much job cutting just for the sake of cutting will have a harmful effect on that efficiency.

No question Merry, but there were 117,000 less civil federal civil servants before the Harper Government™ came to power and we weren't complaining about inadequate government services then. We will soon be adding bother 30-some MPs with their excessive salaries, pensions and expenses.

Spending by this government has been out of control from Day 1 and I have no confidence they will make anything more than cosmetic, politically motivated cuts.

[Captain Awesome]

No question Merry, but there were 117,000 less civil federal civil servants before the Harper Government™ came to power and we weren't complaining about inadequate government services then. We will soon be adding bother 30-some MPs with their excessive salaries, pensions and expenses.

For some reason, I don't believe it...

[EdCase]

From John Ibbitson's column in the Globe & Mail this morning:

The Conservatives are not gearing for a major showdown with their unions. But they do expect future pay increases to be based more on performance and less on seniority. They want to reverse the trend of new arrivals who quit after a year or two, frustrated with the legendary inertia of the federal bureaucracy. They want those who demonstrate an ability and willingness to do more with less to rise quickly, at the expense of those who simply fight to retain the status quo.

To which you should respond: Yeah, right. Governments across the developed world have proclaimed the same goals over and over again, and achieved little. The nature of the public service discourages individual initiative for a reason: Assuming personal responsibility, pushing the envelope, treating government like a business can result in savings and improved performance. It can also result in cock-ups, and unlike the private sector, public-sector cock-ups earn headlines and gleeful attacks by the opposition.

Don't hold your breath folks!

[Homeownertoo]

We will soon be adding bother 30-some MPs with their excessive salaries, pensions and expenses.

Spending by this government has been out of control from Day 1 and I have no confidence they will make anything more than cosmetic, politically motivated cuts.

No quibble with your last statement. But you do know why they are adding MPs, don't you. It's due to Quebec's constitutionally mandated MP minimum that forces the gov't to increase the total as Quebec's proportion of the country's population continues to decline.

[EdCase]

But you do know why they are adding MPs, don't you. It's due to Quebec's constitutionally mandated MP minimum that forces the gov't to increase the total as Quebec's proportion of the country's population continues to decline.

HOT - I do understand the constitutional reason why these MPs are being added; that does not mean they need to be added at this time when the government should be leading by example and showing restraint.

This is a subject for a whole other discussion. Our constitution and governance structure is so far out of date it's pathetic: however, no politician or party has the necessary leadership capability to tackle this one!