An NDP MP doesn’t like patronage appointments….
So he wants the government to revive a commission, made up of appointed members. To oversee the appointment of other folks, a commission that his party voted against when the Conservative government worked to start said commission?
Perhaps, Mr. Angus you shouldn’t have abused your power when we were in a minority gov’t, eh?
h/t: Mike
Yes, but then there might have been Liberals appointed. Now with that problem out of the way, there is potentially room for more NDP appointees.
Makes perfect sense
Let’s differentiate between patronage and partisan.
Patronage is giving jobs to party members/supporters that are lower echelon – the dog catcher type jobs. Appointing partisans to positions where policy has to be directed and/or Implemented is not patronage – it’s just smart.
If Canada’s bureaucracy has one large weakeness it is that far too many jobs where policy is implemented/created are part of the regular civil service rather than part of the political realm. Thus the bureaucracy has too much institutional inertia and, as seems to be the case in any government, considerably to the left ideologically than the general public and certainly than the CPC.
We elect governments to make decisions. It only makes sense that when we elect a conservative government we get appointments to boards sharing their philosophy. We more or less demand that they have a conservative philosophy.
Who would expect a conservative government to make appointments from among those with a socialist philosophy? Not me.
No one does Stupid like a Socialist.
Well maybe a Progressive.
Then of course you have to consider Envirnutters and Ecowhackos.
@ Gord Tulk:
BINGO!
After 40 odd years of ‘Liberalism’ under various guises the permanent government known as the bureaucracy will have a definite leftward tilt.
It will take a while for that tilt to drift ideologically to the center.
The NDP had three tries in the last elections to put their case to the public. The voters didn’t bite, so maybe their bait is defective. The Conservatives have put together a string of 3 successive elections in which their initial minority was increased and then granted a majority. Notably, the Conservatives dropped the ‘progressive’ part of the banner so of course they are going to put a conservative tilt to the bureaucracy to bring it back to center.
The NDP is simply ideologically opposed to this corrective action, hence the hue and cry about patronage. The job for the NDP is to put their case to the public and win seats; they simply haven’t done so…whining about the result won’t help their cause.
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
The history of the waiving of the merit system in our federal public service began with Mr trudeau back in 1968. He made a point of having his own people replace senior public servants. He also did away with departmental estimates for budgeting and introduced a committee system with cut off dates.The guy actually did more to undermine our system of governance than all others past and present.
The problem with this column is the scribbler didn’t do any homework and he quotes the NDP which is an organization devoid of veracity.
Good grief.A socialist reporter from NS reporting on a socialist.Nuff said.
Once the NDP gets into power, they’re not going to appoint people within their own political tribe.
Riiiiight.
Personally, I am very happy to see that Mr. Harper is appointing partisans to boards and commissions. It is a way to counter the years of Liberal rot.
An appointments review commission, like the previous stillborn model, should be kept in the government’s bag of tricks, though. Should the Conservatives find themselves going into an election in circumstances where there is a good chance they will lose, they should rush through such a commission, and staff it with good Conservatives. A sort of a “poison pill” for the succeeding left-wing usurpers.
” But the parties disagreed on who should run the commission and it was never staffed. It was officially shut down this year.”
Way back then,PMSH had arranged that Gwyn Morgan would head this commission. Mr. Morgan is and was a highly respected businessman. He agreed to do it for the princely sum of $1 per year.
The opposition party did their usual ‘rant and rave’ and killed this plan.
Has Angus ever got anything right?
Yeah well this has been going on for some time.
Back in the day, a new pharoah renamed himself Akenaton, abondoned the vast pantheon of Eygptian gods and instituted sun-god monotheism. This did not make the other pristhoods happy campers. Akenaton was sufficiently strong to impose his will. But religion was politics in the Eygpt of that time.
His successor Tutankomen, rejected the dominance of the sun worshippers, to the glee of the polytheists and the rage of the sun/Aton cult….who probably poisoned “King Tut”.
Currently here in North America, the bureaucracy is dominated by leftists, perhaps as a long standing conspiracy, perhaps because that is the socio-economic element who seek civil service employment…..IOW it’s the nature of the beast.
Probably nothing, short of an emotional event (civil war), will redress this lefty imbalance in the bureaucracies.
Re trudeau appointments:
Trudeau began a process that gets around the bureaucracy:
He added many more People and a lot more Power to the PMO. And it has been growing pretty much ever since – turning into a mini-West-wIng.
I would rather see More levels of each cabinet department having partisan positions were the hiring and firing is done by the ruling party and cabinet minister. That way the power of cabinet ministers would be stronger – and so would their accountability.
Senior civil servants should serve only at the pleasure of the Prime Minister.
Tutenkamen
Yes, Stephen Harper attempted to appoint Gwyn Morgan, an excellent man, which was opposed in some of the worst guttersnipery that the Liberals and NsDaPers ever delivered.
That was more or less the death of any kind of collaborative Parliament, where there was some degree of agreement from all quarters.
Since then the Conservatives have never attempted to “play fair”, nor should they.
The real problem is not the persons appointed by Mr. Harper’s government to these various boards and commissions; it is that these agencies exist at all. Why do we need “the Canada Foundation for Innovation” or the “Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency”? The real conservative act would be to abolish most of them and use the liberated funding to pay down the federal debt.
Canada Foundation for Innovation, CFI, is an attempt by the Fed. civil service to manage university research.
It is one of several ways in which they unconstitutionally inject themselves into higher education,which by BNA 1867 is strictly a provincial matter.
Yes, the money could be better spent.
My great uncle was a minor Liberal Party functionary in a sleepy backwoods maritime provincial/federal seat for most of his life.
Subsistence farmer always, school teacher and Indian agent on occasion, got his long driveway plowed in the winter, but much
too honest and good humoured to get anywhere further up the patronage food chain.One election finally brought the Liberals
down to defeat and hungry Tories filled up the ranks of game wardens, snow plow drivers, and other assorted government jobs.
One day while grocery shopping in the village he ran into the new game warden resplendent in his uniform:
“What do you think, Jack?”, the warden inquired of his old rival.
“Well”, said Jack quietly, “it’s a slut of a job, but it suits you.”
It was so out of character, everyone including the warden busted, a gut laughing.
.
The NDP getting holier than thou about incompetent patronage?
Didn’t the NDP star in a real life comedy series on that subject
among others, in “Boob Rae and the Clampetts’ Wreck Ontario”?
.
Angus & the ndp should shut the f**k up.
Jack layton got the highest patronage appointment last year when Mr Harper sent him off to socialist heaven in stately style.
These asshats dragged Gwyn Morgan through the mud for a percieved slight (mostly not being a leftard) now they can suck it.
Gord Tulk, agreed and well said both times. I may be wrong, but isn’t the US civil service constructed more along the lines of what you suggest in your second post?
sasquatch, “Currently here in North America, the bureaucracy is dominated by leftists, perhaps as a long standing conspiracy, perhaps because that is the socio-economic element who seek civil service employment…..IOW it’s the nature of the beast.” Exactly, and these people fight a right of center government’s every more.
Charlie Angus speaks with forked hypocrite tongue.
Should’nt Angus be in Apiwatiscat, painting walls and hauling water? Oh right, no media to show his indignation. Fools.
Patronage appointments are a very effective and cheap method of filling commissions, boards and the like. Civil service rules to staff such bodies will take six months to a year and involve dozens of HR types.
The problem is when the mentally challenged brother in law of a failed candidate’s campaign manager is appointed to the body. Then a professional civil servent is required to shadow the idiot brother in law to prevent scandals.
When I worked for the Canadian Pension Commission in the 1980’s I was by and large impressed with the credentials, intelligence and competence of the appointed Commissioners (most appointed by Trudeau). These were quality people who gave solid service to Canadians for modest remuneration.
Then Brian Mulroney became PM and the quality of the appointments dropped quickly: failed Tory candidates, party bagmen and others for whom a $65,000/year salary was a major jump in income. They were not boobs but they were not top drawer either.