## Notes from 16 December 2025 [[2025-12-15|← Previous note]] ┃ [[2025-12-17|Next note →]] The report from [Canada's Working Group on Public Service Productivity](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/government-wide-reporting-spending-operations/committees-task-forces/working-group-public-service-productivity-overview.html) was released this week, and it's worth paying attention to. The group was commissioned under the Trudeau government, held its first meeting in December 2024, and finalized recommendations through summer 2025. Members included [Trevor Tombe](https://www.trevortombe.com/) (University of Calgary economist), [Benoît Robidoux](https://policyoptions.irpp.org/authors/benoit-robidoux/) (economist and former deputy minister), Laura Dawson ([Future Borders Coalition](https://www.futureborderscoalition.org/)), [Neil Yeates](https://www.trudeaufoundation.ca/repertoire/neil-yeates/) (former deputy minister), Shingai Manjengwa ([Mila AI Institute](https://mila.quebec/en)), and [Wendy Carroll](https://www.linkedin.com/in/wendyrcarrollphd/) (Saint Mary's University). The 19 recommendations cover familiar territory for anyone following civil service reform debates: measuring productivity properly (interesting caveat: with a possible role for Statistics Canada using direct output approaches, as the UK's ONS has attempted - though I'm not sure how successful that's been?), performance management for underperformers, leveraging AI, reducing administrative burden, and increasing permeability between public and private sectors. The suggestion to publish annual data on dismissed employees and those identified as underperforming would be unusual transparency for most civil services. I wrote a report for República.org this year touching on this, and finding comparable data was really hard. What's interesting is the government's mixed response. The Treasury Board accepted recommendations aligned with existing plans—AI adoption, the new Office of Digital Transformation, the "[[Build Canada Exchange]]" program to bring in 50 external leaders. But it declined key proposals: no senior official dedicated to civil service reform, no expanded role for Statistics Canada in productivity measurement, no commitment to performance transparency measures. I think that's a real missed opportunity. [[Michael Wernick]], former Clerk of the Privy Council, told CBC that the bar for dismissing underperformers remains too high and that no government has had the appetite to change the law given union opposition - a dynamic familiar to anyone who has watched similar debates basically anywhere. This matters beyond Canada. Public service productivity is a global concern right now: the UK set a [2% productivity target for the NHS](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/nhs-recovery-continues-with-above-target-productivity-growth) in its recent budget; the US is grappling with workforce questions under very different political conditions. The challenge everywhere is the same: how do you measure output in services that don't have market prices? How do you balance accountability with protections against politicization? How do you build a culture of innovation inside risk-averse bureaucracies? I'm genuinely curious about where the Carney government goes from here. The November budget signaled serious intent - 40,000 job cuts over three years, AI adoption at scale, external talent integration. But as Wernick noted, structural reform requires political champions willing to change legislation and invest resources. The gap between rhetoric and implementation is where most reform agendas die.