Running head: THE POLITICS OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 1

The Politics of Public Management: The HRDC Audit of Grants and Contributions

Book Review

Charmaine Barton

Dr. Collette Oseen

August 15, 2014

THE POLITICS OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 2

The Politics of Public Management: The HRDC Audit of Grants and Contributions

By: David A. Good

Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003

Pp. xviii, 240. $34.95

0 8020 8587 3

In The Politics of Public Management, David A. Good, academic and public

administrator of thirty years, skillfully describes the sphere of the “Billion Dollar Boondoggle”

scandal that plagued Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) in 2000. Though more

than ten years has passed since the audit, this case study is still relevant as the author describes

how the public service (PS) works and the relationships between the PS, government, opposition,

media and the public. The overarching theme is that of “balance.” Good achieves his own

balance within the book by not casting it as an apologia for himself (Assistant Deputy Minister

in charge of grants and contributions during the audit) or the department; instead he positions

himself, and thus the reader, at various locations in the sphere of the HRDC audit and “looks” all

over the place to define and challenge the “truth” of what is represented by that location. The

book achieves the result of focusing on “the roles and relations among the players” (p. xvi) and

explains in clear language how and where balance could have been better achieved.

By “Looking Underneath,” Good introduces the reader to the general workings of the PS

and how, on any given day, PS employees must juggle competing priorities that, normally, seem

contradictory. Then in “Looking Back” at the history of PS reform Good describes how the

HRDC department was created, manned and functioned in the 1990s leading up to the internal

audit release in January 2000.

Good then repositions so as to be on the “Outside Looking In,” like the national media,

who informed and framed the public’s opinion. The author explains the “distorted mirror theory”

(p. 61) and how an aggressive and competitive media (electronic and print), not only reported the

THE POLITICS OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 3

news, but in some cases appeared to create the news that became the lasting impression of the

public. Without “naming names” Good follows the media from the “bang” of “One Billion

Dollars Lost” (p. 64) to the “dying whimper” of overpayments of $85, 000. From twenty second

sound bites to 750 word articles the media, who had set themselves up as “the Official

Opposition” (p. 162), used the billion dollars as a starting point and then appeared to go on a

“witch hunt” that Good follows and describes for the reader.

From the “Inside Looking Out,” Good describes how the internal (file review) audit was

created; who knew what when; and how the department planned to respond. For everyone in the

department, the decision by the Minister to publicly release an internal audit was considered

“business as usual.” The sudden and precipitous fall into “crisis” mode is clearly described and

the “good, bad and the ugly” of the situation are described in language that is easily understood.

Good further describes “the pendulum” swing from decentralized decision-making authority

(based on service quality and less red tape, a characteristic of new public management [NPM])

violently back to bureaucratic “command and control” paperwork (1,800 data boxes on 24 forms,

where some of the data boxes linked to multi-page reports) (p. 117).

In “Looking Closer” at the audit and the resultant crisis, Good walks the reader through

the “Billion Dollar Job Fund” that never existed. He explains the workings of the“Transitional

Job Fund” and the “Canada Job Fund,” as well as public-private partnerships, devolution of

authority to the provinces, the “advisory role” of Members of Parliament, and the program

architecture (framework). The notion of “accountability,” is quickly discussed because as Good

states “[i]n short, accountability was confused and accountability looked confused” (p. 148).

Good then floats through the sphere while “Looking Around” at the impact of the

“Canadian model” of NPM and its effects on accountability in greater depth. Like the Savoie/

THE POLITICS OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 4

Borins debate of the early 1990s, accountability became the central and pivotal point of the

HRDC audit scandal. The “Canadian model” of NPM has not down-played or ousted the

traditional Westminster style of accountability to, from, or by the Minister, instead NPM “has

made accountability increasingly more complex and more confusing” (p. 163).

Finally, in “Looking Forward” Good calls for “[m]odest changes and adjustments by

everyone [that] can lead to important improvements for all” (p. 207). Balance must be achieved

between all of the players in the audit scandal: the PS, government, opposition, media and

public. It is at this time that the secondary theme of “education,” that is skillfully and subtly

woven into the background, becomes more explicit. Each player must learn more about the other

sectors so they can mutually support, defend and “look out for the interests of [the] others” (p.

183). Specifically, Good addresses the “language barrier” that started the whole scandal: audit.

An audit, is an audit, is not necessarily a bookkeeping exercise. The language of the PS must

become more publicly known so that everyone, including the PS itself realizes that it cannot

fulfill one hundred per cent of the expectations of the other parties involved all the time (p. 197).

Though not a space opera “romp through the stars,” Good’s travel through the sphere of

the HRDC audit, and his central theme of balance, kept injecting pictures of team rhythmic

gymnastics into my mind. The delicate turn of a wrist that sends meters of ribbon into

convoluted contortions; synchronistic volleyball bumps that purposefully sends three balls into

wild gyrations; and the possible tragedy if ball and ribbon intersect. Like a rhythmic gymnastics

team during competition, the PS is watched by the coach and choreographer (government and

Minister), the judges (academics), the sports media (political reporters) and the audience

(public). During most routines things are … routine. But what happens when the ribbon is not

twisted enough, or a ball is bumped to hard? The team receives a “failing” mark from the judges.

THE POLITICS OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 5

The coach and choreographer are stunned and scramble to “fix things.” The sports media swoops

in to ask “what happened,” “who’s accountable,” and “will heads roll?” The audience rushes

home to get their understanding of how the routine turned into disaster from a twenty second

sound bite. In the end, it all comes down to a lack of balance and lack of practice (education); not

very different from the HRDC scandal.

Good’s prose does an admirable job of describing how the “routine” became a “crisis.”

Yet, I was left wondering, as I do after seeing a gymnastics disaster; “why don’t they ask the

gymnast what happened?” Good stated on page xvii that he had received many comments and

critiques on the book “from current public servants ranging from front-line employees, middle

managers …” and others. But in reading the book and notes, I could not find one citation that

was specifically attributed to a front-line employee. I have mixed feelings on this lack of

information. Part of me believes that is a case of a senior government executive who believes

that his point of view is shared by all levels of the department; whether that is true or not is

another question. Another part believes that this lack is because of the structure of the case study

and a lack of “word space” to include these findings. Yet another part believes that the lack of

front-line employee information is “okay” since it would not add to the knowledge base for

“serious” academics. Being a federal PS employee, I cannot say which “feeling” is correct; but I

do feel this lack is a weakness.

Despite any perceived weakness, The Politics of Public Management is a strong case

study that is still as relevant today as it was in 2003 when it was published. I would recommend

that students and practitioners of public administration/management, and budding politicians,

read the entire book. As well, students and practitioners of journalism, accounting, auditing, as

well as private-sector partners with government should read the Introduction, Chapters One and

THE POLITICS OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 6

Two and then their respective chapters (detailed Contents page) a read, at a minimum. For

general readers, my advice would be to read the entire book. Why? If Team Canada wants to try

and win a “gold medal for governance” we need to have national conversations at Timmy’s,

Robin’s, Husky’s, Irving’s and at the water cooler. This book provides many thoughtful

questions that need to be answered before we can go for the gold in the twenty-first century.