In this instance, we learn that the PMO ordered Canadian immigration officials to stop processing one of the most vulnerable classes of Syrian refugee this spring and directed that all UN-referred refugees would require the approval of Stephen Harper. These actions were not disclosed to the public and it is not clear when the redirection in processing was stopped. Quite apart from the inappropriateness of transferring the review of applications from trained staff in the Citizenship and Immigration Ministry to political appointees in the PMO with very little background in refugee matters, this shift resulted in longer waits for families judged by the United Nations to be in need of resettlement and trying to come to Canada.
Is There Still a Role for Ministers and Their Departments?
One wonders why we need a Minister of Citizenship and Immigration if the Prime Minister and his appointees in the PMO are going to make immigration policy on their own. Did Chris Alexander raise any objection to this usurpation of his role as Minister? It is interesting to recall the response of Conservative Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Michael Chong in 2006, when Stephen Harper did not consult with him before introducing a bill that declared Quebec to be a nation within a united Canada. Displaying an integrity that has been all too scarce in recent years, Chong resigned his cabinet position so that he could vote against the bill.
One also wonders why we even need a Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration if the PMO can arbitrarily assume a government department’s responsibilities when it suits the Prime Minister’s political agenda. Indeed, is there any point in having public servants at all, since they are no longer encouraged to fulfil their fundamental mandate of “speaking truth to power,” but instead are expected to toe the party line or otherwise remain silent?
Wouldn’t One Large PMO be a more efficient structure?
Surely it would be much more efficient – and reduce needless duplication (an objective often praised) – if we simply abolished the cabinet and the public service and increased the size of the PMO. We would then have in place the perfect structure to facilitate the complete centralization of decision making in Stephen Harper.
Do You Really Want to Re-elect an Authoritarian Government?
Canadians who find such a spectre unsettling would be wise to look beyond the niqab and the debate over which party has the best plan for the economy and consider instead whether they wish to continue in office a government and a Prime Minister so authoritarian in their approach to decision making.