This page has been archived.
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
The original version was signed by
The Right Honourable Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Patricia Hassard
Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet Senior Personnel and Public Service Renewal
The 2006 Federal Accountability Act provides for the creation of the Public Appointments Commission.
The mandate of the Commission is to oversee the processes through which people are appointed to agencies, boards, commissions and Crown corporations. The mandate of the Commission does not extend to making individual appointments.
The Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, which was created by Order in Council on April 21, 2006, is responsible for:
The primary role of the Secretariat is to provide advice and support for the development of the Commission.
Once the Commission is established, the role of the Secretariat will be to assist the Commission to review and implement its Code of Practice and to implement the policies, procedures and partnerships required to successfully oversee and report on the selection processes for Governor-in-Council appointments to the agencies, boards, commissions and Crown corporations under the Commission’s jurisdiction.
The development work of the Secretariat, which includes research and the identification of best practices, is shared with Privy Council Office officials, who work on a daily basis with partners to improve appointment processes and to ensure that the processes are geared toward the specific needs of the organizations.
The Commission has one strategic outcome, as described below, which is supported by two program activities.
Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments covers activities relating to: the development of options for a principle-based and proportional Code of Practice, including minimum standards covering selection criteria, recruitment strategies and assessment processes; the development of procedures and guidance to assist auditors to assess compliance with the Code of Practice, once implemented; continued research into domestic and international agencies responsible for public appointments to identify best practices; the development of frameworks for reporting to the Prime Minister and Parliament; and internal evaluation frameworks to measure success in achieving the mandate. Additionally, advice and best practices are shared with Privy Council Office officials to support ongoing improvements to existing appointment frameworks.
The Public Appointments Commission Secretariat is limited in size and the Secretariat must function as a department within the meaning of Schedule 1.1 of the Financial Administration Act. For this reason, the Privy Council Office's Corporate Services Branch provides most administrative and financial services under a Memorandum of Understanding.
Priority | Type1 | Strategic Outcome(s) and/or Program Activity(ies) |
---|---|---|
Conducting research into domestic and international selection processes to identify trends and best practices. | Ongoing | Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments |
Status2 : Met All | ||
|
Priority | Type | Strategic Outcome(s) and/or Program Activity(ies) |
---|---|---|
Internal management | Ongoing | Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments |
Status: Met All | ||
|
As the Commission was not established/operational in 2010-11, the Secretariat’s work was completed “in draft”; that is, subject to the approval of the Commission, once established. In 2010-11, there was no permanent staffing of the Secretariat. The Secretariat’s work primarily focused on research and identification of best practices, to be shared on a timely basis with Privy Council Office officials, in order to inform their ongoing reform efforts in support of the appointments system.
Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual Spending |
---|---|---|
1,063 | 1,018 | 294 |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
---|---|---|
4 | 1 | 3 |
Performance Indicators | Targets | 2010-11 Performance |
---|---|---|
Implementation of the performance measurement strategy will need to coincide with the establishment of the Commission. |
TBD |
The work of the Secretariat is required to update options developed for the Commission’s Code of Practice, and to address concerns raised about current appointment processes. In 2010-11, this work included: identification of selection criteria for governance boards as well as individual appointments; terms and conditions governing reappointments; communication protocols; performance evaluation systems; and lengthy appointment rounds. The Secretariat continued to develop its planning and reporting instruments, including updates to a human resources strategic plan and an internal audit system. This work helps to ensure that the Secretariat will be in a position to support a quick start-up of the Commission, once established. |
Program Activity | 2009-10 Actual Spending (thousands of dollars) |
2010-113 (thousands of dollars) | Alignment to Government of Canada Outcomes | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main Estimates |
Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
|||
Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments | 238 | 963 | 963 | 918 | 244 | Well-managed and efficient government operations |
Total | 238 | 963 | 963 | 918 | 244 |
Program Activity | 2009-10 Actual Spending (thousands of dollars) |
2010-11 (thousands of dollars) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main Estimates |
Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
||
Internal Services | 53 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 50 |
Departmental Spending Trend (thousands of dollars)
The Secretariat was fully operational in 2006-07, the year of its establishment. Shortly thereafter, the Commission was held in abeyance. Since 2007-08, the Secretariat has been laying groundwork for a new Commission, and its expenditures have remained stable for the past three fiscal years. Total planned spending will only be required once the Commission resumes full operation.
For information on our organizational Votes and/or statutory expenditures, please see the 2010–11 Public Accounts of Canada (Volume II) publication. An electronic version of the Public Accounts is available on the Public Works and Government Services Canada website. 4
Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments covers activities relating to: the development of options for a principle-based and proportional Code of Practice, including minimum standards covering selection criteria, recruitment strategies and assessment processes; the development of procedures and guidance to assist auditors to assess compliance with the Code of Practice, once implemented; continued research into domestic and international agencies responsible for public appointments to identify best practices; the development of frameworks for reporting to the Prime Minister and Parliament; and internal evaluation frameworks to measure success in achieving the mandate. Additionally, advice and best practices are shared with Privy Council Office officials to support ongoing improvements to existing appointment frameworks.
Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual Spending |
---|---|---|
963 | 918 | 244 |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
---|---|---|
4 | 1 | 3 |
Expected Results |
Performance Indicators |
Targets | Performance Status |
---|---|---|---|
For the Commission, outcomes toward success include: public recognition and confidence in public appointment systems; partner compliance with the principles and minimum standards established; widespread use of consistent documents and procedures geared to specific organizational needs; identification and widespread dissemination of best practices; application of procedures to provide for a wider range of applicants; and high quality reporting systems. | As part of a broader performance measurement strategy, performance indicators have been developed for the Commission and its Secretariat. | Implementation of the performance measurement strategy will need to coincide with the establishment of the Commission. |
Ongoing work of the Secretariat has resulted in progress in developing and implementing clear and concise selection criteria and processes; improved timing of appointments; availability of orientation and training for new appointees, which includes addressing conflict-of-interest rules and ethical and political activities guidelines; and development of performance evaluation systems (Auditor General 2009). Successful completion of this work requires establishment of Commission. |
The Secretariat is charged with the development of policy and operational documents for consideration by the Commission once established. Accordingly, materials have been prepared and updated, on an ongoing basis, to reflect practices for similar entities, both domestically and internationally. The materials include guidance for the board of directors, an internal code of conduct, a strategic communications policy, speeches and other outreach materials, such as brochures and leaflets, and the development of a website to be launched with the announcement of a Commission. The website will explain the roles and functions of the Commission and present key documents such as the Code of Practice and associated guidance.
The Treasury Board of Canada has approved the Program Activity Architecture and funding for the Commission and the Secretariat, once both are fully operational. Resources are deemed sufficient for a Commission comprising part-time member(s), a core Secretariat of three to four permanent staff, and an annual contract (via government tendering processes) to secure external auditors to assess compliance with Commission policies and procedures. In advance of the Commission, expenditures have been limited. Funds have been used to support the preliminary work of a core Secretariat, staffed on a temporary basis. Additionally, a management accountability framework has been prepared that outlines how performance for both the Commission and its Secretariat will be assessed, once the former is established.
The Secretariat is currently supported by the Privy Council Office for financial and administrative services via a Memorandum of Understanding. The costing of the Memorandum of Understanding is now fully reflected in all of the Secretariat’s financial reporting. Preparations for permanent staffing have also been completed, which should provide for a quick start-up of the permanent structure once an executive director (as deputy head) is appointed.
The Secretariat has developed options for a Code of Practice, which will be the primary document the Commission will need to review, adopt and publish to fulfill its mandate within the shortest timeframe.
The Code of Practice will be the definitive document for public organizations under the Commission’s jurisdiction, though it could be supplemented by procedures developed and tailored by individual agencies.
The Secretariat’s consultative work and ongoing work programs, including research into procedures and best practices of similar domestic and international accountability bodies, have indicated widespread agreement on the fundamental directions and the range of options developed for the Code of Practice. There is a strong consensus for a Code of Practice that can build on the strengths and recent reforms of the current system, and still maintain the well-established tradition of ministerial responsibility, specifically the following.
The ongoing work of the Secretariat in 2010-11 has provided for continuing development of this draft Code of Practice. Options have now been incorporated which provide for standardization of procedures for reappointments and term extensions, increased requirements for planning to improve the timing of appointments and reappointments, and stronger reporting requirements.
A draft Performance Measurement Framework has also been prepared, with the assistance of the Treasury Board Secretariat. This framework will enable measurement of performance in relation to the expected outcomes of the Commission and its Secretariat, once fully established and operational. Performance indicators are based on compliance with the Code of Practice, evidence of consistent and quality selection processes, internal cultural support for governance reforms in appointment processes and increased public awareness and support for the appointment system in general. A proposed framework has also been developed for the Commission’s Annual Report. The Commission and its Secretariat will be subject to internal audits, under the supervision of the Privy Council Office, as set out in the Memorandum of Understanding.
Governor-in-Council appointments are made by the Governor General on the advice of the Cabinet. This consists of approximately 2,500 appointees, including a large number of non-judicial appointments that are made to agencies, boards, commissions and Crown corporations each year. The appointment system to fill these vacancies follows well-developed policies and procedures, with a view to providing for qualified appointments and achieving efficiency in this sector. Filling vacancies can be accomplished through reappointments of incumbents or by searching for, selecting and evaluating new candidates.
Officials designated to assist the Governor in Council with respect to appointments need to accurately identify and manage vacancies in a timely manner to ensure that boards have the capacity to operate at or close to their full potential. This requires internal systems and active management. Planning is also required to determine an appropriate approach to filling a position. Up-to-date selection criteria are a prerequisite to reflect the needs of the organization and the specific qualifications required of the prospective office holder. Once determined, the Privy Council Office-developed and managed centralized website will allow prospective candidates to find out about vacancies. Selection procedures will also be developed based on position requirements and implemented through formalized selection processes. Candidates recommended for possible appointment will also be assessed for probity and possible conflicts of interest. Once chosen, the names of candidates will be publicly announced and the candidates will be provided with appropriate orientation and training.
Recently, efforts have also been made to closely integrate the appointing process within the general framework of agency governance. For example, the President of the Treasury Board has concluded a review of all Governor-in-Council positions to agencies, boards, commissions and Crown corporations in order to determine the optimal size of these organizations, implement reductions where appropriate and necessary, and ensure operational efficiency and fiscal responsibility. This review recommended a reduction of 245 positions. Most jurisdictions go a step further and are now moving toward formalizing such reviews through regular monitoring, with the goal of ensuring that agency mandates remain relevant and that agencies continue to perform effectively the public function for which they were established.
Much progress has been made since 2006 to strengthen the appointment system and to improve its rigour. A centralized Commission website, still under development, has been updated and upgraded on an ongoing basis. Greater clarification has been provided for roles and responsibilities in all aspects of the appointment process, including the involvement of boards of directors in the search for and selection of CEOs of Crown corporations. Orientation and training programs for new appointees in leadership positions have been revamped, and ministers and deputy ministers now receive strengthened guidance and support, including advice on communication protocols and a monthly vacancy report that outlines all appointments set to expire within the upcoming year. To further strengthen vacancy management, guidance now requires that incumbents receive adequate notice if their terms will not be renewed.
Secretariat research further suggests that consideration be given to strengthening specific areas of the system. This includes: developing and implementing an interactive component for the website, where Canadians can learn about the regular workings of the public appointment system and self-identify their interest in being considered for public appointments; engaging in greater active outreach to encourage a wider range of applicants; ensuring that all vacancies posted provide sufficient information on the qualifications and experience required to allow individuals to self-assess; ensuring that sufficient information on selection and decision-making processes is made available to the public; and providing regular reports on the population of Governor-in-Council appointees, including key characteristics such as age, sex, language, region of operation, appointment and reappointment terms, and range of remuneration.
The development and implementation of strong reappointment policies will also bolster efficiency and support quality competency-based appointments. Reappointments can provide for the retention of experienced and highly skilled individuals, thereby promoting board balance and stability. They can also promote timely vacancy management, and capitalize on appointee training and development costs, as well as avoid both the costs and time associated with launching initial appointment procedures. At the same time, a decision to reappoint may need to be balanced against the advantages of introducing fresh thinking to a public organization through the appointment of new and qualified candidates.
Currently, there are no consistently applied protocols regarding reappointments. Reappointment protocols include considerations such as whether a board member continues to meet the qualifications for the position to be filled, whether the incumbent has performed satisfactorily during his/her latest term, and whether the incumbent should be assessed against other interested and qualified candidates. Assessment of adequate performance, for example, might require that appointing authorities determine, in advance, assessment criteria related to job requirements and ensure that all new appointees are made aware of the performance criteria against which they will be assessed. Performance assessments should also be considered for incumbents in quasi-judicial positions, although this would necessitate the development of assessment criteria that do not interfere with the principle of organizational independence. The precise role of board members in performance evaluation might also be addressed through formalized protocols with responsible ministers.
In addition to the above considerations, efficiencies could be found by requiring appointing authorities to outline, in advance, their strategies to fill a vacancy including: information on the proposed recruitment and selection processes; a detailed timetable; up-to-date documentation relating to the position and the public organization; consultation plans (if required); and communication protocols. Post-appointment evaluations could then be reviewed in relation to planning documents.
The Public Appointments Commission Secretariat is limited in size and the Secretariat must function as a department within the meaning of Schedule 1.1 of the Financial Administration Act. For this reason, the Privy Council Office's Corporate Services Branch provides most administrative and financial services under a Memorandum of Understanding.
Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual Spending |
---|---|---|
100 | 100 | 50 |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 0 |
The Privy Council Office provides administrative and financial services under a Memorandum of Understanding, with most services provided by the Privy Council Office on a cost-recovery basis.
In 2010-11, the Secretariat continued to access the expertise of the Privy Council Office in order to reduce operating costs.
% Change | 2010-11 | 2009-10 | |
---|---|---|---|
Total Assets | 1% | 93 | 92 |
Total Liabilities | 8% | 94 | 87 |
Equity of Canada | -120% | -1 | 5 |
Total | 1% | 93 | 92 |
% Change | 2010-11 | 2009-10 | |
---|---|---|---|
Total Expenses | -11% | 359 | 404 |
Total Revenues | 0 | 0 | |
Net Cost of Operations | -11% | 359 | 404 |
Total net cost of operation was $359 thousand at the end of fiscal year 2010-11, a decrease of $45 thousand from fiscal year 2009-10. The decrease is mainly due to lower costs for translation, the Employee Benefit Plan and severance pay.
Total assets at the end of fiscal year 2010-11 were $93 thousand, an increase of $1 thousand over the previous year. Accounts receivable represent 100% of the Secretariat’s assets.
Total liabilities were $94 thousand at the end of fiscal year 2010-11, an increase of $7 thousand from fiscal year 2009-10. The increase was mainly related to higher accounts payable to other federal departments.
The Secretariat has two Program Activities related to its strategic outcome. The Program Activity “Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments” represents the main activity and contributes to the achievement of the Government of Canada outcome “Well-managed and efficient government operations” by ensuring that selection processes for federal Governor-in-Council appointments are fair and competency based. The Internal Services Program Activity supports the effective and efficient delivery of the first program.
In fiscal year 2010-11, $216 thousand (60%) was spent under the program activity “Oversight of Governor-in-Council appointments” and $143 thousand (40%) was spent under the program activity “Internal Services”.
The Secretariat’s financial statements can be found at www.pco-bcp.gc.ca in the Reports and Publications section.
There are no supplementary information tables for the Secretariat for fiscal year 2010-11.5
Public Appointments Commission Secretariat
155 Queen Street
Room 319
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A5
Tel: (613) 952-4906
Fax: (613) 957-5016
Email: info@pac-cnp.gc.ca
1. “Type” is categorized as follows: Previously committed to— committed to in the first or second fiscal year before the subject year of the report; Ongoing—committed to at least three fiscal years before the subject year of the report; and New—newly committed to in the reporting year of the Departmental Performance Report.
2. Performance/Priority Status Legend:
3. Commencing in the 2009–10 Estimates cycle, the resources for Program Activity: Internal Service is displayed separately from other program activities; they are no longer distributed among the remaining program activities, as was the case in previous Main Estimates. This has affected the comparability of spending and FTE information by program activity between fiscal years.
4. See Public Accounts of Canada 2010.
5. All electronic supplementary information tables found in the 2010–11 Departmental Performance Report can be found on the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat website. See 2010–11 Part III—Departmental Performance Reports (DPR): Supplementary Information (Tables).