More from Alan Freeman available More fromavailable here

When the definitive history of the Harper era is written, the chapter on its systematic degradation of Canada’s public service will be one of the longest — and one of the more painful to read.

Its repeated attacks on public servants for partisan ends, its muzzling of government scientists, its willful dismissal of bureaucratic evidence and advice — the indictment list should be familiar by now. The Harper government’s defeat was greeted by a collective sigh of relief in the federal public service.

Behind all that euphoria (which included cringe-worthy scenes of bureaucrats mobbing Justin Trudeau as if he were the lead singer in a boy band) a more disturbing picture has emerged — of a coterie of senior bureaucrats who were willing collaborators in some of the worst excesses of the Harper government.

In an excellent recent piece of reporting, iPolitics’ Elizabeth Thompson confirmed that in its final months of office, the Harper government made dozens of future appointments to government agencies and commissions — some of which were not to take effect for up to a year, well beyond the end of Harper’s mandate.

The 49 appointments, including renewals and new appointments, have effectively blocked the newly-elected government from determining the future course of key agencies like the National Energy Board. In one remarkable case of chutzpah, the government renewed in advance the term of Canada Post’s CEO, Deepak Chopra, until 2021 — even though Chopra was the architect of the Crown corporation’s decision to kill door-to-door mail delivery, a policy opposed by both the Liberals and the NDP. (In this case, the Liberals may be able to undo the appointment because it was made “at pleasure”. Others won’t be so easy.)

These appointments, if not actually illegal, were clearly in contravention of the understanding that an outgoing government should not bind a new government. But where was the Clerk of the Privy Council when these outrageous orders-in-council were made? Likely hiding in her office, as she was when the government issued some of the 26 secret orders-in-council that the Harper government slipped through during its decade in power — a maneuver of which Vladimir Putin would be proud.

It’s clear that many deputy ministers, each holding their jobs at the pleasure of the PM and reporting to a Privy Council clerk equally beholden to Harper, have spent a decade conveniently ignoring their duty to serve the government and people of Canada. Many may now be at a loss when actually asked for real advice. It’s clear that many deputy ministers, each holding their jobs at the pleasure of the PM and reporting to a Privy Council clerk equally beholden to Harper, have spent a decade conveniently ignoring their duty to serve the government and people of Canada. Many may now be at a loss when actually asked for real advice.

What’s particularly curious about the future appointments is that several of them came down just days before Harper called the federal election in early August, at which point the so-called “caretaker convention” came into effect. That convention calls on the outgoing government to show restraint in its exercise of power during an election campaign, and to not do anything controversial. Knowing that the convention was about to come into effect, the government rushed ahead regardless with its future appointments — surely knowing that it could do it with a wink and a nod from its top bureaucrats.

For deputy ministers during the Harper era, accommodation was the key to survival. If you wanted to get ahead, you accommodated the wishes of your minister and, above all, the PMO — no questions asked. For the careerists, it was a sweet time. No need to worry about policy, about seeking out the best advice from your bureaucrats or about consulting provinces and stakeholders. If you pleased the minister, you were golden.

Few top bureaucrats objected to the new way of doing things. Those who did — like Munir Sheikh at Statistics Canada and nuclear regulator Linda Keen — were soon gone.

When the Conservatives ordered the Government of Canada renamed the “Harper Government” in all official news releases — a clear violation of the government’s own Federal Identity Program — not a single DM said boo and PCO bowed and scraped as usual. The only objection apparently came from the Canadian International Development Agency, which pleaded that nobody in Bangladesh or Tanzania had a clue what a “Harper Government” was.

Inspired by their leaders, rank and file bureaucrats took the “accommodate” message to heart. When the office of Jason Kenney wanted to set up a fake citizenship ceremony to help a Sun News crew too lazy to go and cover a real event, Citizenship and Immigration gladly provided public servants to serve as bogus new citizens, in true North Korean style.

The use of government resources for partisan purposes became routine, from the millions of dollars in Economic Action Plan TV ads for non-existent programs to those awful 24/7 videos produced with taxpayer funds and posted on the prime minister’s web page — including a fawning profile of Laureen Harper, an individual with no role in the government of Canada.

It’s clear that many deputy ministers, each holding their jobs at the pleasure of the PM and reporting to a Privy Council clerk equally beholden to Harper, have spent a decade conveniently ignoring their duty to serve the government and people of Canada. Many have known no other government and may now suddenly find themselves a loss when actually asked for real advice, let alone being forced to speak “truth to power”.

Is there a solution that will result in a senior public service with some backbone? Ralph Heintzman, a respected former senior public servant and adjunct research professor at University of Ottawa, has suggested making deputy ministers less the direct pawns of the government in power by mandating the Public Service Commission to hold competitions for these jobs and to make recommendations for appointments to the prime minister. Some object that this could make deputies — already small potentates in their departments — even less accountable. But it’s certainly worth a look.

If nothing is done, we may be in for bigger and nastier surprises. If senior bureaucrats were willing to do whatever it took to please a government they largely despised, imagine what they’ll be willing to do for a government they’re in love with.

Alan Freeman is a Senior Fellow at the University of Ottawa’s Graduate School of Public and International Affairs. He came to the U of O from the Department of Finance, where he served as assistant deputy minister of consultations and communications. Alan joined the public service in 2008 after a distinguished career in journalism as a parliamentary reporter and business journalist for The Canadian Press, The Wall Street Journal and The Globe and Mail. At the Globe, he spent more than 10 years as a foreign correspondent based in Berlin, London and Washington.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.