The Public Service and the Bottom Line
Aug 10, 2007
Over a decade ago the federal government decided the only way it could make up for the huge deficits being run in Ottawa was to reduce the size of the public service. As a result, approximately 75,000 jobs were slashed.
The biggest pay study to ever be undertaken by the government, which was quietly posted on their website last month, confirms that the size of the public service has now returned to levels similar to the early 1990s. This includes more highly paid professionals such as lawyers, computer specialists and executives and fewer administration and trades people.
The report also details 77 recommendations to curb the increasing costs of maintaining the civil service, including several that will surely catch the attention of employees and unions across the country. Among the possibilities are eliminating the right to strike, reducing the number of unions serving members, a push for early retirement at age 55 and offering a menu of benefits for employees to choose from.
Media coverage surrounding the report’s release has centered on how the public service has “ballooned” and how much it’s costing taxpayers. Valid points to be sure, but the one element, which seems to get lost in the shuffle is the quality of service delivered. And that’s one very important consideration to make when evaluating the public service, be it federal, provincial or municipal.
For instance, it would be difficult for one to argue that the number of services available to citizens has remained the same over the past ten years. Just over a decade ago few Canadians would have thought to search www.canada.gc.ca for information, yet today many can hardly imagine what it would be like to file their tax return without the use of e-mail and the Canada Revenue Agency’s home page.
Similar to the business world, governments look for ways to better serve their constituents – if they didn’t they wouldn’t be re-elected. And constituents are always demanding more for their tax dollars. That’s why we have websites, toll-free numbers and extended service hours.
These types of services certainly provide added value and allow Canadians to enjoy the standards of service expected by most developed nations. However, many of these additional services also require more employees, which of course costs money. The question we need to ask ourselves is “are we prepared to pay for the services we have come to expect as Canadians?”
Comments
Comments are now closed
Wow. They slashed 75,000 and things stayed the same. Then they brought them back and things still stayed the same.
JimCotton - 2007-08-10 19:02
As a victim of civil service job cuts in the 90’s I can tell you things did not “stay the same”. If you worked as a civil servant in the 90’s (in either federal or provincial jurisdictions) you will know all too well that there were devastating cuts and changes to vital social programs because in order to implement and carry out those programs, a workforce is required. Remember the changes to Employment Insurance, Child Tax Benefits, housing, health and social transfers just to name a few. And how about privatization, ever heard of that word? If it was a public program, it was in jeopardy of being privatized. And remember, the costs to those “taxpayers” are costs to themselves, they are Canadians, they pay taxes, they raise families, all 75,000 of them! I believe that because the civil service has finally been reinvested back to the state of the pre-1990’s we now have a fighting chance to keep our social and health programs, to make sure they are safe and regulated and to keep our economy well. Ps I’d like to know where to find a copy of/link to that “quietly posted” report?
D. Navitka - 2007-08-10 20:12
I sure hope in my life time highway maintenance gets some extra funding?
Chuck - 2007-08-17 09:36