Put Cabinet on a Diet

Post 77 | We need to structure government better

Seems we could see the writ drop on an election in March, though political self-interest may yet conspire against our democratic rights a while longer. Whenever and whichever, the resulting government will set a path for our country during a time of considerable turmoil.

When rhetoric and speechifying fall away, I still contend policy is what mostly should drive the bus - fiscal, domestic and foreign. To that I’ve lately been adding the importance of vision and tone, particularly in reflection of how that of our current PM has so shockingly impacted our country in short order.

But a third important factor will reveal itself at the outset of our next administration. It will help set tone, enable key policy and indicate the type of government we can expect.

And what is that you ask?

Size and structure of Cabinet. Aka Departments. Aka Ministries.

Our Constitution Act says little on the topic of government structure or department makeup, providing only broad constitutional framework along with delineation of Provincial domains. Ministries and their responsibilities have evolved over time through custom, practice, and legislation – in reflection of a maturing country and modernizing society. But they’ve also taken on more performative and striving attributes, causing unnecessary heft.

The smallest Canadian Cabinet was a mere eight, in Sir John A. Macdonald’s first 1867 government (Defence, Militia, Interior, Finance, Agriculture, Post Master, Public Works, and Post Office).

Fast forward to Brian Mulroney’s second term in1988 featuring a stuffed Cabinet of 40, after his initial term held only 30. Jean Chretien also began his 1993 term with a Cabinet of 30 which fattened to 39 by the end of his tenure. Stephen Harper’s 2006 government held 26 Ministries then ballooned to 39 by 2013. Justin Trudeau began with 30 Ministers and has grown to 38 overseeing a total of 42 departments.

In addition, we sport 207 federal government entities, 43 crown corporations and more than 120 federal agencies.

Supporting and administering this is a federal civil service of nearly 368,000, up 43% since 2015. We spent $69.5 billion on personnel in 2024 and 11% ($2.9B) of the last budget spending increase came from personnel alone. The larger and more complex the departmental structure - generally, the fatter becomes our civil service behind it all.

Within that is the Privy Council Office (PCO), the civil service advisory group tasked to support the PM and Cabinet, which has grown 77% from 727 employees in 2015 to 1288 currently.

Separate from that is the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) which has been steadily increasing in size and influence - a trend markedly accelerated during Harper’s government. Under Trudeau, however, this office of ~110 partisan appointees has wielded arguably more power over our elected officials than ever, with the Chief of Staff (Katie Telford) being the most senior and influential among them.

This whole structure is bloated, unwieldy, perpetually growing and in need of reform.

---

In related, I was recently witness to a miracle...

A Liberal said something I agreed with!

No, it wasn’t Chrystia Freeland’s proposal for Stalinist caps on grocery profits. Nor Kristina Gould declaring support for universal basic income.

Neither was it Mark Carney’s destructive new carbon tax plan including his statement that Canada must spend $2,000,000,000,000 (yes - those are trillions) on Net Zero by 2050; or his plans to balance the budget by, well, not balancing the budget.

Certainly not - though none of it shocked me.

Rather, it was Freeland’s declaration that a future government should be much smaller, with a department limit of 20. And that the PMO needed to be severely curtailed in size and influence to enable elected officials more control of the legislative agenda.

Hallelujah! This is Paul on the road to Damascus stuff, and I completely agree.

I’m doubtful it will happen under any new government, or for its paucity to long survive. But it still got me musing about what a slimmed Ministry list could be.

Each successive administration has an opportunity to organize themselves for a more efficient and empowered government. In recent decades we have generally seen a trend toward adding on institutions and structures, as though more is better. But more carries a lot of baggage.

What if we didn’t begin with Ministries institutionally structured to perpetuate regional economic favouritism through thinly disguised Economic Development Agencies - leaving such rife considerations to the legislative agenda?

What if we didn’t use Ministries to signal anything other than a commitment to manage key functions and responsibilities?

What if we asked two simple questions. What do we really want from a federal government? Where do we want their fingers out of the pie?

And, while it may seem unimportant, what if we named them so that everyone knew what the heck they did?

There are likely a hundred ways to go about this, and readers may disagree with my below strawman for reasons of principle, inclusions or omissions. Admittedly, there will be legislative and practical elements of which I’m unaware that could render some suggestions unworkable. And I’m aware eliminating some of the entrenched special interest departments would make a government likely unelectable. But it’s a starting point and worth discussion.

We should begin with listing our current 42 Ministries.

• Transport and Internal Trade

• Crown-Indigenous Relations

• Indigenous Services

• Northern Affairs & Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency

• Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario

• Citizens’ Services

• Official Languages

• National Defence

• National Revenue

• Innovation, Science and Industry

• Public Services and Procurement and Quebec Lieutenant

• Sport

• Prairies Economic Development Canada

• Housing, Infrastructure and Communities

• Veterans Affairs

• Environment and Climate Change

• Health

• International Development

• Rural Economic Development

• Atlantic Canada Opportunity Agency

• Foreign Affairs

• Diversity, Inclusion and Persons with Disabilities

• Finance and Intergovernmental Affairs

• Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard

• Agriculture and Agri-Food

• Employment, Workforce Development and Labour

• Public Safety

• Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

• Export Promotion, International Trade and Economic Development

• Treasury Board (President of)

• Democratic Institutions

• Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario

• Emergency Preparedness

• Pacific Economic Development Agency

• Mental Health and Addictions

• Canadian Heritage

• Families, Children and Social Development

• Seniors

• Small Business

• Justice and Attorney General

• Energy and Natural Resources

This weighty list includes duplications and overlaps aplenty, with at least eight having geographic focus to pork barrel money into select regions. Quite simply, this must stop. And several are based on identities. This also must end if we ever hope to get beyond identity politics and focus on unity versus what divides us.

Many are guided by very soft objectives focused on advocacy, promotion and communication versus legislative or administrative functions. And measurable targets are often in short supply. See for yourself and read through a few of the mandate letters guiding each department.

By way of example, last year I dug into Canadian Heritage.

Eliminate or Rethink the Department of Canadian Heritage

This powerful and influential department with a $3.2B budget and sweeping mandate is unknown to most Canadians, though responsible for our digital and media including the botched Online News Act and Broadcasting Act and for the floundering CBC. And it has played lead in our history’s destruction under the current government. It is meanwhile intertwined with six other Ministries - Diversity, Equity & Inclusion; Sport; Official Languages; Women, Gender Equality and Youth; Indigenous Services; and Crown-Indigenous Relations. And 11 Crown Corporations report in.

This analysis left me wanting a serious rethink and restructuring. And their proposal this week to double CBC’s budget under auspices of national security - effectively neutering independent media - removed any shreds of doubt.

---

Rather than just poke at what’s wrong or speak vaguely about what should be different, I’ll happily crawl out on a limb and propose a structure. My core group of Ministries is simple, clearly named and doesn’t weirdly package portfolios that seem designed mainly for appeasement. It clocks in at a slim 22.

• Finance: Budget, accounting. Coordinate with Revenue

• Revenue: CRA, tax collection and policy

• Defence & Border Security: Military, CBSA and Coast Guard

• Immigration & Citizenship: Per current IRCC, Coordinate with Border Security

• Energy: Oil, gas, minerals and alternative. Coordinate with infrastructure

• Infrastructure & Housing: Central dept for all infrastructure development

• Transportation: Manage ports, air, rail, roads. Coordinate with Infrastructure

• Agriculture & Fisheries: Combined

• Science & Technology: Coordinate with International Trade

• Communications: Media, telco mgmt. and regs, CBC. Coordinate with Culture

• Commerce: Enablement and regs for industry and small business. Coordinate with International Trade

• International Trade: Focus on trade diversification

• International Relations: aka Foreign Affairs

• Justice: Includes Attorney General

• Health: Canada Health Act, mental health, pharma

• Public Safety: Emergency preparedness, Corrections. Coordinate with Border Security

• Federal Social Services: Veterans, disabilities and seniors

• Indigenous Affairs: Re-combine with Crown-Indigenous Relations

• Environment: Water, forestry, Parks Canada

• Provincial Relations & Labour: Intergovernmental, OHSC, standards, union mgmt.

• Sport & Culture: Sports Canada, monuments, archives, museums, history

• Government Procurement: Procurement

Compared to other G7 countries, Canada’s 42 Ministries are excessive in absolute numbers and per capita (41 million pop.). Below data is not exact but reasonably representative.

• United States: 15 Executive Departments for 335 million

• United Kingdom: ~20 Ministries for 67 million

• Germany: ~16 Ministries for 83 million

• France: ~17 Ministries for 68 million

• Italy: ~16 core Ministries (plus 9 without portfolio) for 59 million

• Japan: ~14 core Ministries for 124 million

Are we really that different than everywhere else?

Seems we’re trying to do too much and have lost focus along the way. Choose your saying…

Jack of all trades, master of none

Too many irons in the fire

A man who chases two rabbits, catches neither

You get the point.

Canada will benefit from a more streamlined structure to improve efficiency, reduce overhead and budget, while returning more control to those we elect. Let’s hope our next administration takes a hard look at what departments we really need and makes some tough choices upfront, rather than perpetuate the bloat. It’s long overdue.

Stay tuned and stay pragmatic.