What department in Canada is not broken...

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

The problem that needs fixing is transparency and accountability

Thats a lie your repeat over and over to try to make yourself feel better about your own failings.

What accountability problem was there with harper and the atlantic fisheries.

Quote

. That could happen with a just a few principled strokes of a pen. 

Ok - tell me what the pen wrote.  What is this pen writing?

You know you're just making shit up again. But maybe i'm wrong.  what does this 'pen' actually say exactly? 

 

[ExFlyer]

47 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Such things are part of management culture, yes.
2. Self-defining what success means is a bad sign.
3. No, but 'success' has a meaning in the real world and it sounds like that isn't happening.
4. The point is his inability to understand the culture of organizations like ... the civil service, small business, banks, education... academia... these things are not understandable by his type.

1. The unfortunate things is there is no tolerance (from the public or legislature) for imagination. They bound and sworn  to do what they are directed, by the rule book.

2. Well, if doing what you are sworn and bound to do is success, then it is.

3. Michael, success is doing and accomplishing your end goal and that is to do what is expected.

4. Michael, there is no "culture of public service". They are servants by every definition of the word. Do as they are told by all, including you and officials.

[ExFlyer]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The problem that needs fixing is transparency and accountability. That could happen with a just a few principled strokes of a pen. 

The fishermen have had a chance and opportunity to help themselves but why...if (and when) they F**k up they have no one but themselves to whine about LOL

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

There is no left vs right. All governments govern to satisfy their electorate, regardless of which side of the fence they live on.

If that's the case I guess it's fair to say that conservatives will be as shit out of luck expecting greater transparency and accountability as anyone.

Quote

You forget , or are incapable of realizing, that the governed  get what they ask for....through their elected legislators. Bottom liner loser, is you get what you wanted. When will you get that the government is you....and your desire to be governed. LOL

I get it alright It's why we need a greater participation of the public in the process of transparency and accountability.

[ExFlyer]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

If that's the case I guess it's fair to say that conservatives will be as shit out of luck expecting greater transparency and accountability as anyone.

I get it alright It's why we need a greater participation of the public in the process of transparency and accountability.

Hey dudette, you get to vote.

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Yeah, when the government outsources work, it always costs more and adds to the bureaucracy. I cannot think of any departmental outsourcing that has saved time or money. The thing is, there are too many people, like to ones here on this forum, that demand to know everything that goes on all the time. With outsourcing, that means 2 places to monitor and explain.

All the collective public needs to know to make the system trustworthy is knowing that any of the multitude of publics society is composed of that are concerned about the equitable, fair, and above-board management and governance of their interests is allowed to be present at meetings and deliberations that affect them.  Process guardianship - public participation in the oversight of government - needs to be at a much higher level than some clerk responsible for shuffling the government's paper around.

Other than providing a couple of extra chairs around a meeting table process guardianship shouldn't have to cost the public anything, it's up to us to keep an eye on things.  This would certainly be in line with the reasoning that it's the public's fault things are broken because the price of trust is so expensive.

It's the public's fault ransparency and accountability are to expensive? That's probably the lamest excuse I've ever heard

[herbie]

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I also worked for the federal government and was appalled at the degree to which they do things to avoid getting in trouble.  The cure, though, is worse than the disease. 

Somewhat foolish to attribute that strictly to govt. ALL large companies do the same, endless layers of policy and procedure supposedly to serve you better but actually to protect their own asses. They will ALL line up shoulder to shoulder claiming how they followed procedure to a T no matter how wrong and harmful it was to the incident at hand.
And no political party is can "fix' it. All they can ever do is replace the ones at the top and fire the ones at the bottom which solves nothing; the Mandarins remain eternal. The smallest change takes generations.

We're currently running under policies from the Mulroney/Martin (run more like a business/ cost efficient) schemes of 'deny benefits first - bury them in paper so they'll give up and go away - minimize staffing, all the while dealing with population and demand growth - huge bloated salaries to keep managers close to business pay - and a disgruntled staff faced with the same inflationary and salary stagnation that's hit the rest of us.
Add to that the prevalent and loudly voiced opinion of many that a 'civil service' job is not as valuable or worthy as one in the private sector.

[ExFlyer]

30 minutes ago, eyeball said:

All the collective public needs to know to make the system trustworthy is knowing that any of the multitude of publics society is composed of that are concerned about the equitable, fair, and above-board management and governance of their interests is allowed to be present at meetings and deliberations that affect them.  Process guardianship - public participation in the oversight of government - needs to be at a much higher level than some clerk responsible for shuffling the government's paper around.

Other than providing a couple of extra chairs around a meeting table process guardianship shouldn't have to cost the public anything, it's up to us to keep an eye on things.  This would certainly be in line with the reasoning that it's the public's fault things are broken because the price of trust is so expensive.

It's the public's fault ransparency and accountability are to expensive? That's probably the lamest excuse I've ever heard

You are the worst kind of fool.

You make statements and demands not knowing what oyu are asking or why. Boo Hoo, no one tells me everything that is going on Boo Hoo. LOL

Know nothing but think you have some sort of right to know.

Well, loser, you lose.  You have no right to know, at all.

[Michael Hardner]

54 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. The unfortunate things is there is no tolerance (from the public or legislature) for imagination. They bound and sworn  to do what they are directed, by the rule book.

2. Well, if doing what you are sworn and bound to do is success, then it is.

3. Michael, success is doing and accomplishing your end goal and that is to do what is expected.

4. Michael, there is no "culture of public service". They are servants by every definition of the word. Do as they are told by all, including you and officials.

1. The public changes very quickly based on things like changing media, economy though.
2. 3. 4. Ok, well we are just talking past each other.

It's easy for me to imagine a change and there will be one IMO.  

[Army Guy]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Oh shut up.....

I've been pointing out mismanagement, incompetence, corruption and the uselessness of the Dept of Fisheries and Oceans for decades and you know it. I've even pointed out why economists look at the state of fisheries and communities that depend on them the way miners look at canaries.

Why is the right only now getting woke to this?  From where I'm sitting one of the main reasons things are so bad is because conservatives have been comatose for so long.

Thats right shout them down, thats been the way of the left for some time now, i mean shit they are in power right...WTF does any conservative know....I don't even recall mentioning your name in my post, what i did point out is the "left" seem nose blind to all the spending that has gone on. So much so they support even more spending.... you may be one of the few on the left that may have raised a red flag, but it seem your brothers in arms are not listening....And not even given a second thought to why everything else is broken...lets just add another department to the long list of broken shit, like dental care, or pharma care...

Liberals' continue to this day shout at the top of their lungs "Things are not broken"...and the NDP refuses to admit they are to blame for the continued support of this goat rodeo...So you can sit there and tell me to F8ck off all you want , but if you did vote for these guys you are to blame regardless of how much you complained...Votes are what keeps this ride going round and round...

 

 

 

[ExFlyer]

21 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. The public changes very quickly based on things like changing media, economy though.
2. 3. 4. Ok, well we are just talking past each other.

It's easy for me to imagine a change and there will be one IMO.  

Michael, as long as the public demands, the public will get.

We are where we are because that is what we asked for.

Will it change in the future "quickly based on things like changing media, economy though.", all we can do is wait and see.

I hope we are not talking past each other. I hope that our debate makes each of us  look at things slightly differently.

[eyeball]

32 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Michael, as long as the public demands, the public will get.

 

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

You have no right to know, at all.

So you're saying all the public has to do secure the right to transparency and accountability is to demand it?

Who knew?

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Thats a lie your repeat over and over to try to make yourself feel better about your own failings.

What accountability problem was there with harper and the atlantic fisheries.

The same thing that was wrong with the Pacific fisheries, a lack public oversight of DFO decision making.  If that's my fault it's your fault too, the difference being that I was speaking up about it.  You do believe that not speaking out about something is the same as supporting it right?  I remember going to a couple meetings with Atlantic coast fishermen trying to come to terms with the same issues at DFO over 30 years ago. 

Quote

 

Ok - tell me what the pen wrote.  What is this pen writing?

You know you're just making shit up again. But maybe i'm wrong.  what does this 'pen' actually say exactly? 

 

I've mentioned making changes to the Lobbying Act for years around here. It's where I'd start.

BTW why on Earth do we even need a Lobbying Act if the public doesn't have a right to know anything? 

[Army Guy]

8 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

I hate to say it but the way our government departments function is totally our fault.

Having worked within, I can say that most public servants follow the rules before them and the real unfortunate thing is the rules are set because of public demand.

Demand for transparency led to more rules and checks and balances and therefore added time and effort for every task.

Demand for accountability also led to more processes and procedures and therefore more personnel to do that work and that led to extra time and effort.

Demand for dental care will require a huge requirement for personnel, office space, procedures and processes and audit trails and...transparency and accountability and all that will entail.

The public demand for pharma care will be, well, you know the drill. Setting up a department ti manage such a huge undertaking will not be  easy or cheap.

The fact of the matter is, if you demand something and they cave in and give it to you, it cannot be cheap and certainly not be easy. The more you want from government at any level is going to cost you and increase bureaucracy. There is no other way.

So really, are departments broken or, are they so burdened with demanded rules and requirement and appeasements that they can barely breath?

It is easy to criticize but, if you or anyone has a better, more efficient, more open, cheaper way, please step forward.

 

 

I think the public should have an interest in how our government departments work, I also think it is the chain of commands reasonability to weed out the good idea fairy tales that some how grow and take a life of their own...In order to do that senior public officials should be checking in with those that actually use the system or process to see if these changes actually work...then report back up the chain with a educated reason why it would or would not work...Thats how it should work...

How it works today is elected government officials make the rules that drive policy regardless of how it effects the end product or service, take a look at sexual harassments in the CF, instead of looking at it as a national problem, they focused on DND and started laying the hammer down...thinking that it was just a DND problem and ignoring the rest of the country or departments...months later RCMP would be having the say issue but with a much different approach...no hammer...

In reality it is the senior public service workers that should be sitting down with ministers and their staff and advising them on how the department works and what is there arcs of fire....that does not happen, sometimes ministers are only there for a short period or the ministers think they know better and start making their own rules and policies...again it is the senior public service person to weed out the chaff...but in todays world most are looking after their own ass instead of the departments..  

Most of the time political ideas do not mix well with department running's, much like the procurement process, i think it it's current form it is designed to stall or make it so hard to get things done people actually give up on it all...Add in each elements chain of command also has effects on getting things done...like the Tac vest fiasco, that was start shortly after we got on the ground in Afghanistan, today this project is still on going troops have down and completed 3 separate trails...products were picked but no contracts signed...24 years later...in the mean time soldiers buy their kit to suit their needs...this has been an ongoing theme in the CF...

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

You are the worst kind of fool.

You make statements and demands not knowing what oyu are asking or why.

And you're the worst kind of lickspittle to maintaining the status quo. Because of your whining, as an insider no less, over the public demand for more transparency.

How does this hurt you personally again?

[Legato]

I hear the Liberals are having a management problem.

To fix this they will be creating a new Ministry of Ministries. Oversight will performed by the Ministry of Ministries oversight committee. Which in turn will be regulated by the Ministry of Ministries special dependency division. Who in turn will report to an expert body of acclaimed experts proficient in the field of expertise and expertism.

Requirement will be mandated for all staff involved in the Ministry and related bodies that they..

1. Must attend classes to become well versed in Liberal math.

2. Be able to demonstrate this knowledge by skilled use of a 3D abacus.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

 

So you're saying all the public has to do secure the right to transparency and accountability is to demand it?

Who knew?

Nope.

If you want change, they it is up to you to vote and tell your parliamentarian to do things your way.

Good luck wit that LOL

They can see a fool as easily as I can and you fit that category.

 

Posted 2 hours ago

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

All the collective public needs to know to make the system trustworthy is knowing that any of the multitude of publics society is composed of that are concerned about the equitable, fair, and above-board management and governance of their interests is allowed to be present at meetings and deliberations that affect them.  Process guardianship - public participation in the oversight of government - needs to be at a much higher level than some clerk responsible for shuffling the government's paper around.

Other than providing a couple of extra chairs around a meeting table process guardianship shouldn't have to cost the public anything, it's up to us to keep an eye on things.  This would certainly be in line with the reasoning that it's the public's fault things are broken because the price of trust is so expensive.

It's the public's fault ransparency and accountability are to expensive? That's probably the lamest excuse I've ever heard

Expand  

You are the worst kind of fool.

You make statements and demands not knowing what you are asking or why. Boo Hoo, no one tells me everything that is going on Boo Hoo. So sad to be you LOL

Know nothing but think you have some sort of right to know.

Well, loser, you lose.  You have no right to know, at all.

 

 

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

And you're the worst kind of lickspittle to maintaining the status quo. Because of your whining, as an insider no less, over the public demand for more transparency.

How does this hurt you personally again?

Oh poor baby, you are a zero, a nobody, a fool that keeps on and on about the same thing and getting nowhere.

Einstein must have been speaking of you when he said "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”  LOL

Edited December 8, 2023 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

And you're the worst kind of lickspittle to maintaining the status quo. Because of your whining, as an insider no less, over the public demand for more transparency.

How does this hurt you personally again?

There is no public demand for more transparency.  THat's just you excusing your own inaction in the face of corruption.

The liberal supporters see the corruption in the liberal party every day and took no action for two elections. 

So once again - here's the quesiton you've never been able to answer - if the public won't take action on the corruption the see with the transparency we have now - whats' the point of more transparency?

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

The liberal supporters see the corruption in the liberal party every day and took no action for two elections. 

So once again - here's the quesiton you've never been able to answer - if the public won't take action on the corruption the see with the transparency we have now - whats' the point of more transparency?

I'm sorry but you'll have to ask a Liberal supporter - the question doesn't apply in my case.  For what it's worth I do think the Liberals are more corrupt than Conservatives - the Conservatives can only be accused of being a little bit pregnant in comparison.

[Army Guy]

I think the transparency is already built into most government departments, how they are run, policies, Standard operating procedures, etc...and there are lots of built in checks and balances to hold people to account. For the little people like public servants

Where all of this does not apply is federal elected MP's they can break rules and guide lines with ease and with very little penalty... for example i knew a Regimental Quartermaster ( head of Supply management) who was handing out small contracts less than 5000.00 to his favorite companies, he was not making any money or kick backs just had preferred suppliers that he trusted and had better products... his career was ended on that note... for not following the rules of contracting....how many times have you heard of Liberal MP handing contracts to friends and families...contracts worth multi thousands of dollars with no repercussions, and in some cases it has happen more than once again with no consequences....

Thats where i think we need more transparency and consequences...our elected officials....and if we could take the politics out of each department, that would be good as well....

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

1. Michael, as long as the public demands, the public will get. We are where we are because that is what we asked for.

2. Will it change in the future "quickly based on things like changing media, economy though.", all we can do is wait and see.

3. I hope we are not talking past each other. I hope that our debate makes each of us  look at things slightly differently.

1. Interesting but arguable.  We often end up places we didn't start out with as our destination.  
2. Agreed
3. Not much of a debate, I think we were just adding on to each others' thoughts.

[Army Guy]

9 hours ago, I am Groot said:

The one that sends out cheques to voters works pretty well.

I understand they're looking to screw that up with a new software system they're developing, though.

A few things you can't do in Canada, 

1. deciding not to air the Hockey games....

2. Screw with everyone's checks... 

3. Close the liquor store early...or running out of beer on game nights.

You just can't do them...and when they do happen all you here is that voice in your head and that tic toc music that says RUN....

 

[BeaverFever]

22 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Here's the thing. Services were cut back then because of spending cuts.  But this time - there have been massive spending increases.  Massive.  And despite INCREASED spending service levels crashed.

How the hell do you circle THAT square?

But to Army’s point spending increases appear to be mostly new program spending as opposed to fixing the old programs and departments that have been cut to the bone.  
 

Furthermore hat we don’t see are commitments to stable long term funding so that departments can make long-term plans and strategic investments . They’re like someone living paycheque to paycheque. Will they get same budget as last year? A lot more?  A lot less? Who knows? Not them!  And for the funding they do get, a lot of it is special purpose funding, one-time funding, strings-attached funding, etc but less of the kind of funding that allows them to make those long term plans and investments or is simply free for them to allocate wherever they may decide its needed.

The fiscal austerity we’ve lived under for the past 30-40 years is insidious, the wounds are deep and don’t magically heal overnight, they have multigenerational effect. The military is a perfect example, it’s real easy to create a critical shortage of 16,000 personnel in the CAF overnight with the stroke of a pen, but it will take years to fill those vacancies with skilled and trained personnel if/when the funding is even ever restored. Even as underfunded as our military is, it often can’t spend all of the money it does receive in a year because of those same personnel shortages. There are simply not enough people to move these projects forward in a timely manner, among other problems. It’s like a person who’s been starved for so long they no longer have the strength to feed themselves even when some food is occasionally offered  

Edited December 8, 2023 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

Just now, BeaverFever said:

Quote

But to Army’s point spending increases appear to be mostly new program spending as opposed to fixing the old programs and departments that have been cut to the bone.  

 

I'm not sure you're going to be able to demonstrate that.  The military is about the only department cut to the bone, the rest have all recieved increased spending since justin took over and worked better before they did. I mean - which department has been 'cut to the bone'? Abolutely none (other than military).  The number of civil servants right now is at an all time high, and very high per capita.

Quote

Furthermore hat we don’t see are commitments to stable long term funding so that departments can make long-term plans and strategic investments . They’re like someone living paycheque to paycheque. Will they get same budget as last year? A lot more?  A lot less? Who knows? Not them!  And for the funding they do get, a lot of it is special purpose funding, one-time funding, strings-attached funding, etc but less of the kind of funding that allows them to make those long term plans and investments or is simply free for them to allocate wherever they may decide its needed.

I feel like you might be conflating transfers to the provinces - the federal program spending has been fairly stable. 

 

Quote

The fiscal austerity we’ve lived under for the past 30-40 years is insidious, the wounds are deep and don’t magically heal overnight, they have multigenerational effect. The military is a perfect example, it’s real easy to create 16,000 unfilled positions in the CAF overnight with the stroke of a pen but it will take years to fill those vacancies with skilled and trained personnel if/when the funding is even ever restored. Even as underfunded as our military is, it often can’t spend all of the money it does receive. It’s like a person who’s been starved for so long they no longer have the strength to feed themselves even when some food is offered  

You are patently insane if you feel there's been any 'austerity' over the last 30-40 years. Martin and chretien downloaded some costs onto the provinces but very little actually got cut.  If anything there's  been more and more spending per capita.

The military is the ONLY example. Everyone else gets increased budgets AND we get new programs on top of it.  Trudeau literally just TRIPLED our national debt - borrowing 2 dollars for every single dollar EVER borrowed before him, and the vast majority had nothing to do with covid - and you feel we're living in 'austerity'?  Please.

If anything we need to dramatically cut services and spending and invest in automation for gov't services. Simplified online applications and forms, fewer rules and regulations requiring less enforcement efforts, trimming away useless services that a provided by the market such as the cbc, etc etc.

We've had 30 years of spending more than we should. A little fiscal responsibility is what's in order - not more bloat.

[August1991]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

I think the transparency is already built into most government departments, how they are run, policies, Standard operating procedures, etc...and there are lots of built in checks and balances to hold people to account. For the little people like public servants.

 

I fear far worse.

Since the pandemic, federal Canada bureaucrats are becoming like the Greek civil service, or Chinese and the iron rice bowl.