The death of the old boys’ club is better late than never

Share

The Auditor-General slapped the federal government's wrists Tuesday for being chronically tardy in making certain public appointments. But the criticism masks a larger, and happier, truth.

Patronage is a dying vice in the federal government. Yes, a prime minister chooses whom he chooses, when making Governor-in-Council appointments, as they're called. But we have largely said goodbye to the era of "jobs for the boys," and the Trudeau administration is going even further to ensure a meritocratic process.

For all the carping, Canadians have never been more fairly governed than they are today.

One of a prime minister's most important powers is the power to appoint. Richard Gwyn, in his biography of John A. Macdonald, argues that the first prime minister's masterful use of patronage in public appointments helped keep the young country together. In Norman Hillmer's recent biography of O.D. Skelton, he describes how the man Mackenzie King had selected as deputy minister of foreign affairs worked flat out for the Liberals during election campaigns.

In the 1984 election, Brian Mulroney castigated John Turner for his patronage appointments. But Mr. Mulroney was hardly better, maintaining: "you dance with the one that brung ya."

But the sponsorship scandal of the last decade spurred the Chrétien government to clean up party financing, and Stephen Harper rode to power with his Accountability Act, which imposed tough new controls on spending and lobbying.

Mr. Harper had also promised to create a review board to ensure merit in public appointments. But he angrily scrapped the panel after opposition MPs vetoed his choice for the board's chair.

Still, the public-appointments process was generally cleaner on the Conservatives' watch than it had been under the Liberals, who in turn were cleaner than the Conservatives before them, who in turn …

Today, Government-in-Council vacancies are posted on the government's website and qualified applicants can generally expect a fair hearing.

Nonetheless, Mr. Harper took criticism for renewing a number of appointments late in his term that would not take effect until after the election.

During that election campaign, the Liberal Party had promised to "adopt a new government-wide appointment process that is open and based on merit." Shortly after the government took office last November, a spokesman stated: "Appointments will be open, transparent and merit-based and we will ensure gender parity and that more indigenous peoples and minority groups are reflected in positions of leadership."

In a February interview, Michael Wernick, Clerk of the Privy Council, said: "You will see in the coming weeks a more rigorous process around Governor-in-Council appointments, like all of the 1,500 appointments or so that are the gift of cabinet to give."

On Tuesday, Treasury Board president Scott Brison reiterated the Liberal promise of "a transparent and merit-based process for Governor-in-Council appointments."

Donald Savoie, probably Canada's best known authority on how the public service operates, welcomes the reforms, but cautions: "One can wrap any process around appointments and make it much more transparent than in years past, but on appointments that truly matter to him, the prime minister will have his way."

For example, Mr. Trudeau had no hesitation in appointing Matthew Mendelsohn to the Privy Council, and David MacNaughton to Washington as ambassador. Both are highly qualified. Both worked on the Liberal election campaign.

And in the end, whoever sits on whatever board that vets candidates for government appointments will know the prime minister's mind as they vet.

But just as the Senate expenses scandal created tighter controls on Senate expenses, so too public impatience with patronage is bringing about a better and fairer process for government (and Senate, for that matter) appointments.

Nothing run by humans, especially nothing political, is perfect. But international indexes invariably rank Canada among the least corrupt nations on Earth. And the trend line is going in the right direction. It's something to bear in mind, when the next occasion arises to flay public figures for their transgressions.

Editor's note: an earlier version of this column incorrectly identified Matthew Mendelsohn as Michael.