EDITORIAL: Ethics questions for federal civil service

Published Sep 02, 2024  •  Last updated 0 minutes ago  •  2 minute read

An employee arrives at the Office of the Prime Minister and Privy Council building in Ottawa, Monday, Feb. 17, 2020. Photo by Adrian Wyld /THE CANADIAN PRESS

Two recent reports, one by the head of the federal civil service and another by the federal Auditor-General, raise troubling questions about the ethical standards employed in the government procurement process.

Article content

John Hannaford, the head of the federal public service, admitted recently that the government failed to live up to the highest standards in the past year because of ethical breaches and sloppy procedures related to government contracts.

In his annual report, Hannaford, Clerk of the Privy Council, promised to implement a culture change within the federal bureaucracy.

He referred to committee reports and news reports that have documented massive cost overruns in contracts.

“While I am continually impressed with the work of public servants, there were instances this year when we as a public service fell short. Whether it is our continued failure to fully resolve the Phoenix pay system or our procurement processes coming into question, we as a public service must face these challenges head on and do better,” he said.

Article content

While his statement is laudable, this is like closing the vault after the tax dollars have sashayed out the door.

One notable contract that leaps to mind is the ArriveCan boondoggle, which was supposed to cost $80,000 and ended up costing about $60 million.

In June, federal Auditor General Karen Hogan tabled a report on contracts to McKinsey & Company, a strategy and management consultant company.

She found that government organizations showed a “frequent disregard,” of contracting and procurement processes when awarding contracts to McKinsey.

The value of these contracts was $209 million, and $200 million was spent.

“The risks to value for money varied across federal organizations, and issues included a failure to show why a contract was necessary, no clear statement of what the contract would deliver, or no confirmation that the government received all expected deliverables,” she said.

“Multiple contracts were awarded on behalf of the same organization to the same vendor for a similar purpose and within a short period of time, Public Services and Procurement Canada did not challenge the organization requesting the contract about whether the procurement strategy used was appropriate.”

It will take great effort to turn that kind of culture around. It’s time to restore accountability to the public service so taxpayers can have confidence their money is well spent.

Article content