FEATURE 26 / Canadian Government Executive / Spring 2025 space as the public sphere. A healthy public sphere would be one in which the agenda for deliberation is set by Canadians rather than foreigners, the agenda is sufficiently stable to allow a proper conversation, and deliberation is civil and well-informed. Constructing a public sphere that meets these requirements has always been a challenge in Canada. The population is relatively small, diffused across a vast territory, and divided by language. The national conversation has always been heavily influenced by debates in larger powers such as the United Kingdom and the United States. Throughout the twentieth century, Canadian governments wrestled constantly with the question of what should be done to create a space for conversation among Canadians about national priorities. The Canadian public sphere has deteriorated badly over the last thirty years. The digital revolution is a prime cause. Revenues of newspapers and broadcast media collapsed as advertising moved to online platforms, and the number of full-time journalists has declined as well. Social media has reconfigured the social networks of Canadian citizens to include a larger number of non-Canadians, and there is good evidence that it has degraded the quality of public conversation too. The walls of the Canadian public sphere have eroded, the agenda has been destabilized, and civility has declined. There are other challenges to the Canadian public sphere. One side-effect of continued immigration, amplified by the digital revolution, is the increased salience of diasporic politics. Problems in other countries now echo more loudly within Canada. Other governments also appear to be more actively engaged in efforts to disrupt Canadian politics through disinformation campaigns and other forms of covert influence. Meanwhile, observers continue to warn about low levels of civic and historical knowledge among Canadian citizens. Bureaucratic Sclerosis A political system can only be counted as adaptable if it is capable of translating plans into action. Shifts of national strategy inevitably require the construction of new public institutions and programs, and the dismantling of institutions and programs that are no longer needed. Much of this renovation work is done by bureaucrats. An adaptable system is one in which governmental bureaucracies can respond nimbly to the new requirements of strategy. Canada is properly credited for having high-quality bureaucracies at all levels of government. At the federal level, though, there are mounting concerns about the onset of bureaucratic sclerosis. Many informed observers have suggested that the federal public service has become less nimble, outside moments of crisis. Risk aversion, according to one senior executive, has become “a core feature of the system.” Sclerosis is the result of a decades-long accretion of controls over the public service. Some of these might be characterized as “model employer” controls. They are intended to ensure that departments and agencies respect important values such as respect for collective bargaining, official languages, employment equity, privacy and other human rights. In addition, there are probity and accountability controls, designed to reduce waste and deter misconduct. The Federal Accountability Act of 2006 is a prominent illustration of the move toward more stringent probity and accountability controls; but there are many other controls of this type as well. Many of these controls are overseen by independent watchdog offices, such as the Auditor General or Information Commissioner. Social media has reconfigured the social networks of Canadian citizens to include a larger number of nonCanadians, and there is good evidence that it has degraded the quality of public conversation too. The walls of the Canadian public sphere have eroded, the agenda has been destabilized, and civility has declined.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDI0Mzg=