Savoie knowledgeably weaves past public service reform attempts to explain and gain insight into contemporary situations. Applying private sector approaches to expenditure and people management (a theme of his 1994 book Thatcher, Reagan, and Mulroney: In Search of a New Bureaucracy) did not work in his view. “The wrong place to look” for solutions, he writes. Part of this is, most obviously, a fundamentally different role in providing public versus private goods and services. Government is not a corporation and shouldn’t necessarily behave like one. But Savoie persuasively argues that the true failure was an inability or unwillingness to adjust accountability instruments and processes to these approaches. “The inability to update accountability requirements has contributed to the degradation of the public service”, he concludes. (p. 221) At the heart of Savoie’s critique of the federal public service is accountability; the “unresolved issue”, he calls it. But in expounding on this, he underlines the importance of culture and values to explain behaviour within the public service. His most compelling allegory is of “Plato’s Cave”, what we would call alternative reality today. WINTER 2025 // Canadian Government Executive / 35 THE LEADER’S BOOKSHELF His most compelling allegory is of “Plato’s Cave”, what we would call alternative reality today. An escaping prisoner discovers a whole new world outside the confines of the cave but decides that life in the cave is actually more secure. This helps explain how public servants find comfort and refuge in what they know and do now – the Ottawa bubble - rather than encouraging fresh thinking on how to deliver better policies, programs, and services. An escaping prisoner discovers a whole new world outside the confines of the cave but decides that life in the cave is actually more secure. This helps explain how public servants find comfort and refuge in what they know and do now – the Ottawa bubble - rather than encouraging fresh thinking on how to deliver better policies, programs, and services. His example of “bolts of lightning” from political masters for expenditure and program and service reviews as a compelling example of how change really happens. It does not originate within the public service itself, despite them being accountable for the actual management of government. This political scientist is not afraid of speaking his own truth to power. He questions notably why it is that former Clerks, who are also Head of the Public Service, only seem to discover what is wrong with the public service after they retire. He doesn’t disagree with their analysis necessarily, but legitimately queries why (or if) they didn’t act to fix matters while they were in charge. It’s a reasonable question since if they can’t improve things while in power, who can? This leads to Savoie’s overriding question embedded in the book’s title. What do Canadians want in, and from, their federal public service, he asks. To answer this, Savoie proposes a royal commission on the famous Glassco Commission on Government Organization of the 1960s, on the role of the public service. He admits this is controversial for some, and perhaps historically dated as a solution, and surfs against contemporary Ottawa opinion, but argues reform will not occur if left to the public service and politicians themselves. Status quo incentives are too strong, he writes. But there are big and fundamental questions that need to be asked about how government is run and what can be done better. Outside perspectives are both needed and essential if any change is to happen. A royal commission would, in Savoie’s telling, “open the windows of government operations so that federal public servants can see out and other Canadians can see in.” There is little doubt Professor Savoie’s book will be received with open arms by official Ottawa, bureaucratic or political. Even though many inside government will concur with the diagnosis, few feel it can be acted upon. It’s too hard, won’t work, or not realistic given political realities, are all likely responses. Still, Savoie’s latest contribution to Canada’s public service understanding, as his career closes, he admits, may be his most compelling. By putting citizens first, Savoie effectively eliminates opposition arguments. After all, why would Canadians want this to be the norm for our public service? In doing so, he shines a light on both the problem and the barriers itself to change – the public service and politicians who work in it and benefit from it.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDI0Mzg=