This week, the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer experienced a notable shift.
Back in February 2013, as the inaugural parliamentary budget officer’s term was concluding, the Official Opposition proposed a motion in the House of Commons aimed at strengthening the office’s independence and extending Kevin Page’s term until a successor could be nominated by the government.
“The Conservatives have consistently targeted Kevin Page’s credibility,” stated NDP’s Peggy Nash at that time. “The Official Opposition is highly concerned that the government may try to appoint a new PBO who will be more of a lapdog than a watchdog. That is not what Canadians require. We need a robust, independent parliamentary budget officer, not someone who merely echoes government talking points.”
While Stephen Harper’s Conservative government was responsible for the legislation establishing the PBO, they had criticized Page’s work and questioned his methods, all while disputing the office’s requests for information. With Page’s term about to end and the Harper government dragging its feet in appointing a successor, there was growing unease over the office’s future.
-
Liberals’ fiscal watchdog nominee vows to hold government’s ‘feet to the fire’
-
After a bumpy ride, federal budget watchdog steps down with some praise
-
Leading economists want less talk, more numbers from federal budget watchdog
However, the parliamentary budget officer persisted. In a twist, it is now the Conservatives, now in Opposition, who are expressing significant concern regarding the Liberal government’s choice for a new PBO.
“Now, they are FIRING the budget watchdog for uncovering the TRUTH,” the Conservative Party alerted its supporters in an email this week. “We’re raising the ALARM. The Liberals MUST restore the rightful budget watchdog.”
For the Conservatives, the “rightful” PBO—an adjective that carries a certain regal connotation—is Jason Jacques, who acted as the interim budget officer. Jacques attracted attention last fall for his controversial remarks regarding the government’s fiscal situation.
He has not been dismissed — in fact, he continues to work at the PBO. However, the government has nominated Annette Ryan to assume the position for a complete seven-year term.
The Conservatives appear to have no specific objections to Ryan, apart from the fact that she is not Jacques.
“This is not about the current nominee,” Conservative MP Sandra Cobena informed reporters this week.
It is quite likely that the Conservatives will abandon their concerns as soon as Ryan—who brings a rich and distinguished background—issues a report that could be unfavorable to the government. They might perceive the transition at the PBO as a chance to raise doubts about the Carney administration.
Ideally, the appointment of an independent parliamentary officer—whose function is crucial in holding the government accountable and shaping public discussion—would not devolve into political strife and partisan email campaigns.
Is there a better way to select a PBO?
If there is a silver lining to the ongoing conflict, it is that all political parties, at various times, have shown support for a robust and assertive PBO. Thirteen years ago, the Conservatives appeared to believe that Page was too forceful. Now they seem to embrace assertiveness as a mark of pride.
However, ensuring the institution’s credibility is a significant challenge, and any partisan disagreements could inflict enduring harm. Consequently, the recent incident may prompt a reconsideration of how the parliamentary budget officer is appointed.
During a discussion on the standing orders of the House last month, Conservative MP Michael Chong contended that the government should not hold the authority to make significant parliamentary appointments. Although the government cannot directly appoint the PBO—since both the House and Senate must ratify Ryan’s appointment—it is the government that interviews candidates and selects a nominee for Parliament’s consideration.
With MPs set to cast their vote on the Liberal budget next week, the interim parliamentary budget officer is suggesting there’s a less than 10 per cent chance it will stay within its deficit targets. Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre has criticized the government’s ‘phoney accounting.’
Last November, Conservative and Bloc Québécois members of the House committee on government operations approved a motion requesting the government provide a shortlist of PBO candidates for committee review. The motion was not binding, and it appears the committee has not received a response.
By that time, the Conservatives had already taken a stance on who should be the PBO—Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre publicly urged the prime minister in September to appoint Jacques for a full term. Delegating the matter to the committee in November may not have alleviated the political overtones surrounding the issue.
Nonetheless, there could be merit in transferring full responsibility to Parliament. In Ontario, the legislature’s financial accountability officer is selected by an all-party committee chaired by the Speaker, and the decision must be unanimous.
Implementing a similar framework for the PBO might not completely eliminate potential conflicts, but it would at least ensure that Parliament oversees what is fundamentally a parliamentary role.
Such a modification could lessen the likelihood of urgent emails alleging that the government is attempting to conceal something by “firing” the “rightful” PBO. However, it remains a change worth considering.
