Jump to content

PMO to shuffle top Cabinet staffers


Recommended Posts

http://www.thehilltimes.ca/html/index.php?...huffle/&c=2

The Prime Minister's Office is in the midst of reviewing the most senior staffers in Cabinet ministers' offices with an eye to shuffle chiefs of staff to fill four vacant positions and to better prepare for the next Parliamentary session and federal election.

But the process is creating negative blowback in the top echelons of the Harper government.

Some Cabinet staffers claim the PMO will play "favourites" and say the move could create more problems than it solves.

"It's a bit absurd to change people who are so dedicated and intimately linked to their ministers. You create more problems and you probably end up creating more holes in the future because they [chiefs of staff] may or may not be happy in their new roles and they could end up leaving. People don't understand the logic," said one top Conservative in an interview with Hill Climbers.

It is obvious there are problems with staffing with so many open chief positions.

I can't recall a sitting government having this many problems before finding people to fill positions as we are seeing now.

It will be interesting to see if there is indeed blowback as some have hinted in the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.thehilltimes.ca/html/index.php?...huffle/&c=2

It is obvious there are problems with staffing with so many open chief positions.

I can't recall a sitting government having this many problems before finding people to fill positions as we are seeing now.

It will be interesting to see if there is indeed blowback as some have hinted in the article.

Oh they'll be blowback. My own conversation with a chief of staff had him express it roughly this way:

It's over. You know you've lost too many games in the regular season and won't be competitive in the playoffs. Nothing will change that. But suddenly the coach wants you to move down to the second line and kill penalties instead of working the power play. You know that you're not the reason the team is losing and they know it too. They're just fiddling with the lines because they've got nothing else - they've simply given-up on solving the problem.

I was left speechless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said before, nobody is going to want to join as a staffer when the CPC's defeat seems imminent. Why leave a good and secure job for one that's likely to dissapear shortly?

There have been minorities before. I can't recall such a problem on a consistent basis. As for their defeat being imminent, I think that isn't entirely clear.

There is something else going on. I think it has more to do with interference in departments and not being allowed to lobby or work for the government afterwards that is the big turn off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think those might be a helping factor yes but at the same time it might be a good measure in the long run. To some extent, I think, it might help prevent the cronyism so rampant in our politics.

Politicians come from so many different professions that most of them are more than capable of finding work elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been minorities before. I can't recall such a problem on a consistent basis. As for their defeat being imminent, I think that isn't entirely clear.

There is something else going on. I think it has more to do with interference in departments and not being allowed to lobby or work for the government afterwards that is the big turn off.

The lobbying restrictions are a big part of their recruitment woes. Another biggie is their propensity to throw staffers to the wolves when difficulties are encountered.

Defeatism runs quite deep from what I've witnessed. The growing sense that Quebec is lost and with it, any hopes of a majority has instilled a "I coulda been a contender" mentality: a sense that their best days are behind them. Parties in this psychological state have a tendency of self-destructing.

The "Raitt-gate" episode could be seen as an example, but the best indication is the recent ad campaign against the Bloc in Quebec. The ad I listened to can only serve to inflame passions and improve Bloc support rather than bring Bloc supporters to the Conservative ranks. To the average Quebec federalist, the ads seem deliberately aimed to stoke the Bloc base as a way of blunting Liberal progress in the province. Such tactics are signs of retreat. Not the mark of a party confident about its prospects.

While the attack ad is aggressive, it comes across as a defensive move and, in Quebec, defensive politics tends to lead to disasters at the polls. Don't believe me? Just ask Mario Dumont.

Edited by Visionseeker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...