Heritage Minister James Moore is “on shaky ground” by requiring the chairs of the boards of some of Canada’s top cultural institutions develop and maintain an “effective relationship” with him and his staff, say two former directors of appointments.
Penny Collenette and Senator Percy Downe, who oversaw appointments for Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, both said the clause, which has been inserted into job notices for positions like chairperson of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and the National Gallery of Canada, appears to be unprecedented.
“This new turn of events is quite stunning,” said Collenette, pointing out that a lot has been done since the early 1990’s to clean up the appointments process and make postings and job requirements more transparent.
“It’s as though the transparency train has been stopped in its tracks. How will anyone know how to “get along” with a particular Minister’s staff? The logical answer is that only Tories need apply. Are they going back to the famous Mulroney era of unbridled patronage?”
While the heritage department appointments that include the clause aren’t quasi-judicial, Collenette said Moore “is on very shaky ground.”
“Artists protect their independence of thought and art. I would think that the artistic communities will be aghast.”
Downe said the clause is “strange and disturbing” and a sign the government is looking for “Yes men.”
“The concern of course is that it will become the norm for all appointments, quasi-judicial boards and others and then you have removed from the government a valuable source of advice. In other words, if agencies and boards of the government are advising the government on a contrary course of action to what the government is proposing, that could now, under this procedure, be considered not getting along with the minister.”
Downe said he was particularly surprised to see the requirement that appointees maintain effective relationships with the staff of the minister.
“These are political appointees, highly enthusiastic young people, but they are political appointees not public servants and they should have nothing to do with these agencies and boards other than passing to the minister the required documents from the board and arranging appropriate meetings.”
“Getting along with the boards and agencies should have nothing to do with them and quite frankly, it should have little to do with the minister.”
Under fire in Question Period, however, Moore defended the decision.
“The process by which we choose people for these kinds of appointments is open and transparent,” he said, describing the iPolitics report on the job postings as “really ridiculous” and later as a “non-story.”
“Yes, it does require that the minister and these organizations, crown corporations and agencies have an open dialogue and an ongoing conversation for the best interests of taxpayers. This process has been used for years and we will continue to do so.”
The comments come after iPolitics revealed that a number of job vacancy notices for appointments to bodies that fall under Moore’s portfolio have included the requirement that the person selected be able to develop and maintain an “effective relationship” with the heritage minister and staff in the minister’s office.
The clause appeared in the recent postings for chairpersons for the CBC, the National Gallery and the National Battlefields Commission.
The clause was not in the 2006 posting for a CBC chairman, in January’s posting for a chairperson for the CRTC or a March posting for a chairperson of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority.
However, a similar clause did appear in the November 2008 notice of vacancy for the National Gallery chairman’s position and in late June 2011 for the chairman of the Canadian Museum of Civilization. A posting in March for a new chairperson for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation also contained a similar clause.
Wednesday, James Maunder, spokesman for Moore, pointed out that the clause also appeared in 2005 postings for a CBC chairperson and for a chairperson for the Canadian Race Relations Foundation. Both positions would have reported to then Heritage Minister Liza Frulla.
Tuesday, the clause came under fire during Question Period from NDP heritage critics Pierre Nantel and Andrew Cash.
“Our common heritage is too important and those entrusted with it should not have to be required to be the minister’s BFF,” said Cash. “It is not only the chair of the CBC who is required to be friends with the minister. If they want to apply to be chairman of the National Gallery or the National Battlefields Commissioner, they are going to have to like the minister’s status too.”
“If the minister really wants more friends, and it is clear that he needs them, why does he not stop picking the pockets of Canadian artists?”
Outside the House, Liberal Leader Bob Rae waded into the debate.
“Of course you don’t want to immediately appoint somebody with whom you are going to have a dysfunctional relationship – that’s a reasonable statement. But on the other hand, given this government’s predilection for control, it’s not a healthy sign.”
Original Article
Source: ipolitics
Author: Elizabeth Thompson
Penny Collenette and Senator Percy Downe, who oversaw appointments for Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, both said the clause, which has been inserted into job notices for positions like chairperson of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and the National Gallery of Canada, appears to be unprecedented.
“This new turn of events is quite stunning,” said Collenette, pointing out that a lot has been done since the early 1990’s to clean up the appointments process and make postings and job requirements more transparent.
“It’s as though the transparency train has been stopped in its tracks. How will anyone know how to “get along” with a particular Minister’s staff? The logical answer is that only Tories need apply. Are they going back to the famous Mulroney era of unbridled patronage?”
While the heritage department appointments that include the clause aren’t quasi-judicial, Collenette said Moore “is on very shaky ground.”
“Artists protect their independence of thought and art. I would think that the artistic communities will be aghast.”
Downe said the clause is “strange and disturbing” and a sign the government is looking for “Yes men.”
“The concern of course is that it will become the norm for all appointments, quasi-judicial boards and others and then you have removed from the government a valuable source of advice. In other words, if agencies and boards of the government are advising the government on a contrary course of action to what the government is proposing, that could now, under this procedure, be considered not getting along with the minister.”
Downe said he was particularly surprised to see the requirement that appointees maintain effective relationships with the staff of the minister.
“These are political appointees, highly enthusiastic young people, but they are political appointees not public servants and they should have nothing to do with these agencies and boards other than passing to the minister the required documents from the board and arranging appropriate meetings.”
“Getting along with the boards and agencies should have nothing to do with them and quite frankly, it should have little to do with the minister.”
Under fire in Question Period, however, Moore defended the decision.
“The process by which we choose people for these kinds of appointments is open and transparent,” he said, describing the iPolitics report on the job postings as “really ridiculous” and later as a “non-story.”
“Yes, it does require that the minister and these organizations, crown corporations and agencies have an open dialogue and an ongoing conversation for the best interests of taxpayers. This process has been used for years and we will continue to do so.”
The comments come after iPolitics revealed that a number of job vacancy notices for appointments to bodies that fall under Moore’s portfolio have included the requirement that the person selected be able to develop and maintain an “effective relationship” with the heritage minister and staff in the minister’s office.
The clause appeared in the recent postings for chairpersons for the CBC, the National Gallery and the National Battlefields Commission.
The clause was not in the 2006 posting for a CBC chairman, in January’s posting for a chairperson for the CRTC or a March posting for a chairperson of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority.
However, a similar clause did appear in the November 2008 notice of vacancy for the National Gallery chairman’s position and in late June 2011 for the chairman of the Canadian Museum of Civilization. A posting in March for a new chairperson for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation also contained a similar clause.
Wednesday, James Maunder, spokesman for Moore, pointed out that the clause also appeared in 2005 postings for a CBC chairperson and for a chairperson for the Canadian Race Relations Foundation. Both positions would have reported to then Heritage Minister Liza Frulla.
Tuesday, the clause came under fire during Question Period from NDP heritage critics Pierre Nantel and Andrew Cash.
“Our common heritage is too important and those entrusted with it should not have to be required to be the minister’s BFF,” said Cash. “It is not only the chair of the CBC who is required to be friends with the minister. If they want to apply to be chairman of the National Gallery or the National Battlefields Commissioner, they are going to have to like the minister’s status too.”
“If the minister really wants more friends, and it is clear that he needs them, why does he not stop picking the pockets of Canadian artists?”
Outside the House, Liberal Leader Bob Rae waded into the debate.
“Of course you don’t want to immediately appoint somebody with whom you are going to have a dysfunctional relationship – that’s a reasonable statement. But on the other hand, given this government’s predilection for control, it’s not a healthy sign.”
Original Article
Source: ipolitics
Author: Elizabeth Thompson
No comments:
Post a Comment