While the composition of the new Parliament will not shift political power beyond the status quo dynamic that existed before the September 20th election, there is now an opportunity to reform our democratic institutions, including Parliament, if the political will can be mobilized. Former Clerk of the Privy Council Kevin Lynch and former CN and BMO executive Paul Deegan offer a brief prescription for positive change. 

Kevin Lynch and Paul Deegan 

Thomas Jefferson is credited with saying, “The government you elect is government you deserve.” While the make-up of the 44^th Parliament is all but a repeat of the 43^rd, Canadians should hope that this Parliament works better.

Members of Parliament have been elected to tackle a whole host of very difficult challenges, and Canadians deserve real and meaningful progress. While hardly discussed during the election campaign, the government now has to improve our pandemic preparedness; build a more resilient health care system; shake the Canadian economy into a better long-term growth trajectory; reboot our relationships with a more protectionist United States and a more threatening China; shift significantly toward a low- carbon future; rein in Big Tech; and strengthen social cohesion with a focus on inequality and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples. 

The American leadership coach Marshall Goldsmith famously coined the catchphrase, “What got you here won’t get you there.” And what won’t get us to real and meaningful progress is a continuation of the fierce partisanship, centralized control, short-termism, rhetoric over results, and inadequate committee resources that characterized the past few parliaments. This approach to governing is not a recipe for success when dealing with daunting policy challenges, nor does it inspire public trust in our most important institutions.

Our institutions of governance can and must work better for Canadians. Here are five ways to make the 44^th Parliament effective.

Lessening the control of the prime minister’s office. Leadership starts at the top. In Ottawa, that means the Prime Minister’s Office. Going back to the 1980s, there has been an increasing trend toward more centralization of power in government. As former longtime Liberal MP Wayne Easter told the Hill Times recently, “I think there’s far, far, too much control in the Prime Minister’s Office.” This control in the PMO diminishes the authority and accountability of ministers.

In theory, a Canadian prime minister is a first among equals around the cabinet table, but they are much more than that. The prime minister sets the overall agenda of the government through the Speech From the Throne. The PM controls the appointment of ministers. The PMO controls each minister’s agenda through the ministerial mandate letters. It appoints ministerial chiefs of staff. It controls ministerial communications through centralized vetting, and it controls relations with the media, which can stymy reporters, slow the flow of information, and inhibit the public’s right to know. 

The prime minister should ensure that ministers be ministers again, with clear responsibilities, and that PMO moves back to a coordination role from a controlling one. Mandate letters to ministers have become a mishmash of issues with no clear prioritization or accountability except to the PMO. Periodic renewal in the PMO of non-elected political advisers would help ensure that they don’t become too insulated from cabinet ministers and caucus. 

Making cabinet more effective. The PMO is not the cabinet. Cabinet is a key element of our Westminster system of government, yet, over time, it has become a shadow of its former self. Cabinet, not the PMO, should be the main forum for debating and responding resolutely to the challenges of today and tomorrow.

To be effective, cabinet needs strong ministers with a diversity of experience, who know their portfolios and have the authority to develop policy initiatives and bring them to their colleagues at the cabinet table.  Cabinet should be a collective decision-making body. If we want independent ministers, we should start with giving them the scope to appoint their own chief of staff and have meaningful input into their mandate letters. They should also have the scope to develop effective relations with the Parliamentary Press Gallery beyond PMO-approved talking points.  

We should also consider the size of cabinet. Simply put, it’s too big to be effective. In the corporate world, you rarely have 30 executives sitting around the senior decision-making table, and yet, there are far more
in government.

Tapping the talents of the public service. At the start of this government’s term in office, the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford ranked Canada’s federal public service as the most effective in its comparison of 31 countries. It got strong marks for offering evidence-based policy advice to the government of the day, in designing programs, in delivering services to people, and in speaking non-partisan “truth to power”. 

After decades of centralization of power and control in the PMO, the public service feels the political pull to be more an administrative service than a public service providing independent policy advice. And yet, their expertise and experience should complement the political considerations that partisan strategists bring to the table. The prime minister is best served by a strong, independently minded clerk of the Privy Council. Equally, ministers should rely on their deputies for unvarnished advice. A diverse, independent, and excellence-driven public service is a key element of the Westminster system of governance. 

Resourcing parliamentary committees to be effective. Parliamentary committees lie at the very heart of our Westminster system of government. They are intended to provide a serious bipartisan forum for both the study and scrutiny of issues, policies, and legislation. The role of the opposition is to oppose not obstruct; the role of the government is to propose not dispose; it is the role of Parliament to decide.

Today’s parliamentary committees are too overtly partisan. Committee chairs are typically appointed by the PM, rather than being elected like the speaker of the House of Commons. Committees are not appropriately resourced, and this comes at the expense of analysis, informed discussion, and debate. In the United States, Congressional committees are equipped with expert staff with deep policy chops. There are also too many parliamentary committees, which spreads already scarce resources too thin and muddies accountability. 

Why not establish a Canadian version of the Australian Productivity Commission? It has been instrumental in putting evidence-based policy issues and policy options in front of Australians—government, Parliament, public service and citizens—for years with much success.

Where are the government Green Papers and White Papers of yesterday that framed important policy issues and allowed parliamentary committees to hold hearings and test the temperature for change? Why are committees not initiating more independent studies? Indeed, some of the best policy work in the past came from the committee process and commissions. Former Liberal Senator Michael Kirby’s work on health care and taxation comes to mind. Committees should allocate more time to hearing from experts, including deputy ministers, chief executive officers, and academics. And they should exit the Ottawa bubble more often and listen directly to the voices of Canadians.

Making partisanship less polarizing. Parliament should be partisan, but that doesn’t mean divisive. Let’s not emulate the political dysfunction and incivility of American politics. Sure, heckling is part of question period and always has been, but it shouldn’t be petty and mean-spirited. Lack of respect for others turns Canadians off politics, drives cynicism about the political process, and dissuades too many Canadians from running for public office. Here, the speaker has an important role to play in setting the parliamentary tone, as do the party leaders. 

Canadians have spoken. The issues before us are complex but not insurmountable, provided we make this Parliament more effective and less acrimonious. It’s time to restore public trust and confidence in government. It’s time for our federal political parties to work together and advance policies and legislation that will make our people and our economy more resilient in these challenging times.  

Contributing Writer Kevin Lynch is a former Clerk of the Privy Council and a former vice chair of BMO Financial Group. 

Contributing Writer Paul Deegan was deputy executive director of the National Economic Council in the Clinton White House and led government and public relations at BMO and CN.