Gomery's Blinders and Canadian Federalism

The Quail Enigma

THE QUAIL ENIGMA II se peut bien, dit Castor, que les principes qui reglent radministration des finances publiques soient un peu trop metaphysiques. -Alain (1934) INTRODUCTION The inquiry led by Justice John Gomery into the sponsorship affair kept many people riveted to their television screens. It pertained to a relatively small amount of taxpayers' money (less than seven-tenths of 1 percent of the $19-$20 billion annual budget of the responsible department, Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC). But the testimonies that emerged—envelopes stuffed with cash left on restaurant tables, bills paid without much evidence of work done, and the possibility that taxpayers' money was used to fund a political party—generated much national ire. One may reasonably ask, what went wrong? And what could have been done to prevent such afiasco?Our approach to these questions focuses on one crucial official position: that of the deputy minister who sits on the bureaucratic/political boundary. Was this a simple case of failed oversight by a deputy minister? 27 28 Gomery's Blinders and Canadian Federalism THE QUAIL ENIGMA THE BURDEN OF OFFICE Deputy ministers are expected to be competent, non-partisan, but politicallysensitive; tobecourageousenough tospeak truth to power about the management requirements of government as well as about possible problems with policy or program ideas, including the risk of irreparable damage to the fabric of Canadian society; and to balance formal accountabilities to a minister, to the prime minister, to the Treasury Board, to the Public Service Commission, and in some cases to specific commitments (Kroeger 1996; Osbaldeston 1988). This position requires considerable competence, experience, skill, and above all good judgment. Deputy ministers must loyally serve the government of the day while safeguarding the public trust (i.e., ensuring prudence and probity) and being loyal to the public good (i.e., putting it before their own personal interests). By design in Canada's Westminster system, and because they sit on the boundary between the political and the bureaucratic worlds, they play an especially important role. There are no rules to guide their daily actions and decisions. Thejob is a craft that is usually carefully learned by doing and by watching role models over a relatively long period of time. And it carries a high risk. Appointed by order in council, on the recommendation of the prime minister of the day, deputy ministers virtually all serve at pleasure and thus can be moved, demoted, or fired at a moment's notice. In these circumstances, beyond what they have learned along the way, their triangulation of context, organizational culture (allowing more orless latitude and initiative),and basic values provides guideposts. These three dimensions shape their behaviour and play an important role in determining the moral corridor for their work: the judgments that they make and the way in which these judgments translate into daily actions and decisions. The Quail Enigma 29 QUAIL'S CIRCUMSTANCES It is against this backdrop, then, that we review the Quail enigma as displayed both by the role of Ran Quail (the PWGSC deputy minister from 1993 to April 2001) and by his testimony to Gomery and that of other key players. PWGSC was the agency overseeing the operations of those involved in the sponsorship affair (including advertising and later the sponsorship proposals that became the Sponsorship Program in November 1997). Quail reported thathewasawarethatoneofhissubordinates, J. C. (Chuck) Guite, was handling the sponsorship file directly with personnel in the minister's office and the Prime Minister's Office, that he did not probe the matter with special attention (until early 2000, when he called for an internal audit), and that he did not report any unease about the unusual reporting relationship to the clerk of the Privy Council, although he ensured that the Privy Council Office was aware of it. To be fair, Quail had inherited a file—public advertising— that had longbeen analbatross. Advertising contracts awarded by the federal government have traditionally been fraughtwith political/bureaucratic messiness. A desire to exercise central (and political) control has led in recent times to the development of a "prequalified" list of suppliers assigned to specific departments/agencies for one to four or more years, with specific arrangements negotiated by them according to need and with PWGSCproviding the contracting. The Chretien government campaigned on a platform of greater transparency and competitiveness in this kind of contracting and gave instructions shortly after its election in 1993for new contractingguidelines...