Thank you, chair and honourable senators, for your time. I’m honoured to be considered for the role of President of the Public Service Commission of Canada. I would like to begin by recognizing that we are gathered on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe people.

Canada has a world-class public service, but we cannot be complacent. It plays an important role in upholding democratic values and preserving trust in our institutions. I believe that the Public Service Commission must — more than ever — work to safeguard a merit-based, non-partisan and representative public service in collaboration with partners and stakeholders.

When I began my career, I was a young, unilingual graduate. Unemployment was high, and precarious employment was all but guaranteed.

For seven years, I worked in the community to improve women’s access to the job market. At the same time, I was pursuing my doctoral studies, which involved analyzing the obstacles that young people were facing when entering the workforce and developing better strategies to help them.

I then joined the federal public service to work from within, mainly on issues related to income security and socio-economic development.

For the past five years, at the Treasury Board Secretariat, I have led the creation and implementation of a total compensation approach aimed at attracting and retaining the most diverse talent. This approach is built on pillars such as the modernization of working conditions, the viability of pension and benefits plans, and the implementation of the Pay Equity Act.

As president, I would take the time to listen and seek advice, of course. Having said that, my priorities would include the full implementation of the 2021 amendments to the Public Service Employment Act, which strengthen diversity and inclusion. It now requires departments and agencies to evaluate methods of assessment used in staffing processes, looking for biases and barriers that disadvantage people belonging to equity-seeking groups — and removing them. They also expand the authority of the commission and deputy heads to investigate errors, omissions or improper conduct in that regard.

When I look at the data and the feedback received, we see that some continue to face systemic discrimination, such as persons with disabilities, Indigenous peoples and Black people. This is important not just for recruitment but also for retention. Every effort counts. For example, in partnership with bargaining agents, we were able to introduce a new type of leave for Indigenous traditional practices in the most recent collective agreements, which supports wellness and retention in the workplace. Every small piece of work counts.

This brings me to my second priority: consolidating our regional presence and improving service delivery in both official languages.

With over 10 years of experience in the regions, I believe that the federal public service can raise its profile through new alliances with industry clusters, community organizations, colleges and universities.

We also need to tap into the new pool of permanent residents. With more communities across Canada designated as bilingual, now more than ever, official languages are an indispensable qualification.

More innovation in staffing will therefore be required, with simplified hiring strategies, judicious use of technology and streamlined processes to fill positions more quickly. The commission’s new candidate evaluation platform for online second language testing is a good example.

I would finally mention that, if appointed, I see a clear responsibility — with the support of the two other commissioners and the management team — to carefully examine how taxpayer dollars are working to deliver better results for Canadians, but also with a view to avoid negative impacts on the recent gains in representation.

In closing, I want to thank the interim president, Stan Lee, and the former president, Patrick Borbey. They leave behind a solid foundation that I want to build upon.

Thank you. Meegwetch.

Welcome, Ms. Girard, and congratulations on your nomination. You, of course, are no stranger to the Senate, having appeared as a witness before our committees.

I would like you to briefly summarize for us the process by which you came to be before us today. Specifically, did you apply for this position, or were you asked to put your name forward? Why did you decide to seek this appointment? Whom did you interview with, and what testing did you undergo?

Thank you for your question, honourable senator. I did apply for this position. It was a competition under the supervision of the Privy Council Office. I brought forward my candidacy, and, after the first initial process of evaluation on file, I was asked to present myself for an interview, where there were two deputy ministers and administrative supports who conducted the interview.

Why was I interested in this position? I see it as a possibility for me to bring together my background, my education and my experience both outside and inside the government, as well as the networks that I have developed and built over the years with bargaining agents,with equity-seeking diversity networks and with deputies in the deputy minister community, and put it to the public service writ large.

Right now, I’m the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister of Employee Relations and Total Compensation. What I do right now is support and act in alliance with the mandate of the Public Service Commission. I think I could be independent and able to exercise my role without influence, but, at the same time, understand the challenges of the public service very well and work for its development in the future.

Thank you for that, Ms. Girard. You are taking on this new position, and you’ve already talked a little bit about what you plan on doing and how to ensure that everybody spends tax dollars wisely.

Just a few weeks after, Minister Freeland brought forward her Fall Economic Statement, which announced further spending cuts to the public service beyond what was promised in the federal budget in March. Just to refresh everyone’s memory, the Trudeau government promised in the spring to find $15 billion in public sector spending cuts. Last month, they said they would find another $345 million in cuts, and by 2025-26, almost $700 million per year onward.

As they say, I’m from Missouri on this, Ms. Girard. I have my doubts about how or if they will achieve this, but that question is possibly better posed to Senator Gold than you.

Ms. Girard, how do you intend to guide the commission through these promised cuts to the public service?

Thank you, honourable senator, for your question.

It is, of course, for each deputy minister to manage their spending and to make determinations in their respective departments to ensure that they’re able to deliver on their mandates. At the same time, I understand that the Public Service Commission has been asked, like other federal institutions, to look at their current expenses, and in this initial endeavour, to look at travel costs and professional spending as well.

As I said, if appointed, I will look carefully at the proposals that have been brought forward. Right now, at the Public Service Commission, I do not have access to them, because they are cabinet confidences and they are being considered at this juncture. But that will be definitely one of my priorities, as well as making sure that we can continue to support the public service with the services and expertise that we have.

You may have seen a recent video, Ms. Girard, released by the Royal Canadian Navy, which lays out some pretty stark facts about the state of the navy today, particularly on its human resources side. Many occupations are experiencing shortages of 20% or higher.

The navy’s commander recently gave an interview to journalist Paul Wells in which he described this as a “generational challenge.” Vice-Admiral Topshee also said the most significant challenge the navy faces is that it is losing one marine technician every two days. These positions take 5 to 10 years of training, and we’re losing one every two days.

Ms. Girard, how do you think the Public Service Commission can help in significantly streamlining much-needed recruitment and retention, not just for the navy but for the air force and the army as well? How would this fit into your plan for your first 100 days?

Thank you again for the question. It is a vast one, and, indeed, it’s a reality at the navy.

Being responsible for the renewal of collective agreements throughout the public service and also supporting them separately, I understand that we are facing, like other employers, dire needs in several of our organizations and areas of expertise. It is a very tight labour market that we are operating on, and with the research team and the policy team at the Public Service Commission, I will continue to equip and support deputies in departments and agencies to widen their understanding of where the pools of recruits can be.

As I mentioned earlier in my presentation, we can widen our networks and partnerships in the labour market with, for example, industrial clusters, community organizations and colleges and technical institutions, which will help us bring in new candidates into the public service.

We also have a challenge in our communication with recruits. We need to modernize to know how they communicate, what they’re looking for, and the total compensation approach allows us to present ourselves as a competitive employer. I’m often surprised by how little some of our employees know about the value proposition that the federal government brings and, with all of the compensation levers, how competitive we are in the market versus others, in addition to the mobility that we offer.

With all of that work, I believe that we can present ourselves in a competitive way in the labour market and renew work on the renewal of our public service.

Just in the couple of minutes that I have left and in light of the two questions that I raised, which are fairly important to me, what key priorities will you focus on right away should your nomination be approved?

First, we need to complete the implementation of the modernization of the Public Service Employment Act, strengthen diversity and inclusion, remove or mitigate biases or barriers to access to the public service and make sure that we are fully representative of the Canadian population and that it has trust in our institutions.

I also believe that work needs to be done in addition to what we’re currently doing to support the coming into force of Bill C-13 with regard to official languages. We have more employees who will need to meet those requirements in the future, and that will be a collective effort that the Public Service Commission must contribute to by providing tools, testing and training. I will also look at our recruitment tools to make them faster, more agile, while being mindful not to compromise the integrity and the merit-based principles that we need to respect.

I will stop here for now, but those will be important priorities.

May I just say in my final comment that I hope you will, with that, also take the two issues that I brought forward, because they would be top priority for me, and I hope and trust that you will give them your every consideration.

Thank you, honourable senator. I took good note of them.

Thank you, Ms. Girard, for your attendance here today. My question concerns the Phoenix pay system.

Federal employees went unpaid for long periods of time, were paid less than expected or were overpaid, resulting in significant financial stress. The Senate National Finance Committee followed the issue of the Phoenix pay system in a number of reports, and I understand there has been progress. Nonetheless, there are aftershocks that remain when employees are affected in this way. Morale is affected, and highly qualified individuals seek other employment.

In your new capacity as the leader of the public service, do you have a plan to address the outstanding issues of low morale caused by Phoenix and to reinforce with the public service the value that Canadians place on their service?

Thank you for the question, honourable senator. You raise an important point that does play a role in our messages and how we can attract new people, but I also understand that sometimes it makes people who are already in the public service hesitant to move from one position to another. It hinders mobility within the public service.

Over the last couple of years, we’ve tried to improve the communications with employees in that regard. I understand that we’re very advanced in providing the compensation that was due to try to make up for the very negative impacts that the system has had. At the same time, we know that the Public Services and Procurement Canada, or PSPC, has introduced a principle in the way they conduct their affairs by not allowing a new case to get old.

As of now, errors — which happened even before Phoenix because we’re such a large enterprise — as soon as an employee flags to their manager that there is an error in their pay, it is handled immediately and not put at the end of the queue to be handled later on so that the errors multiply and accumulate with the passage of time.

That has helped reduce errors, but we understand that colleagues are working hard to develop the mitigation plan to deal with the backlog, as well as looking at other solutions to help provide us with a more permanent solution.

As for my responsibilities right now, I can assure you that through the renewal of the collective agreements that we’re working on right now, we’re putting in great effort to try to standardize and harmonize the terms and conditions of employment found in many collective agreements in order to simplify them and to reduce the burden on the system and any future system.

Thank you for that response. I’m sharing my time with Senator Omidvar.

Thank you. Congratulations, Ms. Girard, on your appointment, and thank you for being here with us today.

You made a point in your opening statement about the importance of the Public Service Commission: Its mandate is to safeguard a merit-based, non-partisan and representative public service. However, Black federal public employees have filed a class-action lawsuit against the Government of Canada for decades of alleged systemic discrimination.

What is your response? If you are appointed to this position, how would you deal with the presence of systemic discrimination — not just against Black employees, but other groups as well?

Thank you, honourable senator. It is an absolute priority because I believe it depends on the trust that Canadians put in us. As we’ve seen in recent years, when complex situations arise, the population turns to us more than ever for guidance and services that will meet their needs. It’s essential that we harness and improve on that front.

I will ensure that we implement all of the amendments that have been introduced in the act. We are currently working with the deputy minister communities to identify the biases — conscious or unconscious — and barriers that are in our systems and processes. Once they’ve been identified, we ensure to remove or mitigate them.

This is done in collaboration with the Privy Council Office, with ourselves and with the Canada School of Public Service that provides training. As the President of the Public Service Commission, I also have the authority to investigate. The new amendments give us the authority to investigate and address omissions, errors or negative conduct during those processes or through management activities, and ensure that we work with the deputy ministers to put in place the corrective measures. They can take different forms. It can be training, but it can also be through discipline.

It’s by ensuring that we are a model and that we work together as leaders — throughout the enterprise — that we will be able to actually change the culture. Training will be important as well. Growing the number of employees in the public service who reflect the composition of Canadian society will bring that bottom-up culture change as well.

Ms. Girard, the Senate Human Rights Committee has just published their seventh report entitled Anti-Black Racism, Sexism and Systemic Discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Commission. That is the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and not the Public Service Commission of Canada, but we heard testimony — that crossed over into your mandate — from employees who talked about the discrimination they had experienced. On questioning, we were able to determine that public servants who were discriminating against others were simply shuffled out into other positions in the public service.

I’d like to know what you would have done in that position if there were, let’s say, a few bad apples and you addressed their behaviour. Would you move them out, or would you move them sideways or upward? What would you do?

Thank you for your question. It is a delicate one because I’m not in that position. I think that anyone you speak to would tell you that I’m a diligent manager — one who listens, but also one who takes measures and makes sure that principles and rules are applied. It’s a question of fairness for these individuals, but also for the rest of the team who observes these behaviours.

Having said that, on a generic level, I’m very grateful to the committee for releasing this report. I will, if appointed, ensure that I sit down with the team and the commissioners to more carefully analyze the various recommendations that I read last night after its release.

I can say that, from the get-go, I fully support the introduction of Black people and the 2SLGBTQI+ community as equity‑seeking groups. We need a broad view on things, and it will serve us better. Thank you.

Welcome to the Senate. I was pleased to hear your comments about diversity and inclusion because, as you know, medically released members of the Canadian Armed Forces who have been injured in the service of Canada are placed on a priority list for federal government jobs for which they are qualified. They maintain that priority status for five years.

However, between January 1, 2005, and November 30, 2021, 800 medically released Canadian Forces members saw their priority entitlement expire before receiving any job offers. Almost 800 former Canadian Forces members who were injured serving our country — either in conflicts, like the corporal I met who lost limbs in Afghanistan, or on peacekeeping missions, or through accidents while on duty — wanted to work for the Government of Canada, but did not get that opportunity.

As it stands now, some departments and agencies of the government appear to be doing much more to hire medically released veterans and others, but, overall, I think the placement is pathetic.

Of the departments and agencies identified as having made these priority hires between 2005 and 2021, Veterans Affairs Canada hired 68, which was fewer than Employment and Social Development Canada, which hired 126. Correctional Service Canada hired 99; Transport Canada hired 28; and Environment Canada hired 15. For its part, the Public Service Commission only hired a handful: between 5 and 7.

What can you do — as the head of the Public Service Commission — to encourage more departments and agencies to hire medically released veterans so that hundreds more do not fall off the priority list?

Thank you. First of all, I would like to say that I fully support your comments regarding the importance of the service that our veterans have given to our country, as well as the skills and the experience that they bring. In most of the positions that I’ve occupied in the last 15 years, I have benefited from the expertise of veterans, or previous National Defence military and Canadian Armed Forces members. They are helping us right now, for example, in the negotiations of the terms and conditions of employment at the Department of National Defence, and they bring a wealth of knowledge with them.

Having said that, we do need to better promote those candidates with the various deputy ministers because I don’t think that the way we present their candidacy highlights — to the employer — what they bring to the table. I’m not sure that the system right now optimizes the matches that are there.

There are two types of priorities, statutory and regulatory, so it is those who have been released through medical service or not through medical service. We have a number of accommodations that we can offer now that in the past were perhaps not as well known by departments and hiring managers.

There is another variable in the equation, which is hybrid work and recruiting in the regions. That’s a new variable. Before the pandemic, perhaps those veterans were located in regions or rural areas and were not ready or mobile after their discharge to come to work in the departments across the country. That might not be as much as of a factor as it was.

We know it fluctuates because every year, depending on the demography and where they are, we see that the rate of their entering the public service varies. I definitely believe that with hybrid work, we have an additional value proposition for both managers and veterans.

Speaking of hybrid work, as you know, traditionally the federal public service had one third of the positions in Ottawa and two thirds across the country. Recently, however, the employment has grown to 47% of all federal government employees in the National Capital Region. In fact, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, since 2016, the number of federal employees has increased by over 82,000, an increase of 24%, and most of those are in the national capital. That’s less and less people in the regions.

Part of the mandate of your commission is diversity, inclusion and, as they say on your website, “. . . talented people from coast to coast to coast.” What will you do to make sure that employment returns to the regions of Canada? If you need an example of that, you just have to look at the national headquarters of Veterans Affairs — the only national headquarters outside the National Capital Region — which is located in Charlottetown. It has employees of 1,600 and a payroll of $140 million. That prosperity should be spread across the country to other regions. What will you do to make that happen?

Thank you, honourable senator. I spent more than 10 years at Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions and worked in the regions for a number of years myself. I can certainly relate to that.

You are right. Not only does it offer possibilities for our veterans, but also earlier, we were talking about the navy and the critical need to renew our public service with specialized employees or skills. I think the skills strategy that we’re working on together with the Treasury Board Secretariat will need to factor in this new reality. It will be part of the value proposition that the federal government can bring as the largest employer in the country.

Thank you, Ms. Girard. I noted that your opening remarks spoke of equity-seeking groups. The language of “equity seeking” suggests that historically marginalized groups of people must be the ones to actively seek equity. Other language such as “equity deserving” shifts the focus to the fact that historically marginalized groups are, in fact, deserving of equity.

Intentional leadership is essential for culture change. It has been said that diversity is being invited to the party; inclusion is being asked to dance.

Should you become president of the Public Service Commission of Canada, can you please share your thoughts with us on how to achieve culture change and inclusion?

First of all, thank you for that remark. I fully appreciate the nuance, which is not a nuance in day-to-day life, about seeking and deserving.

Of course, the goal here is that there is no need for those measures, but we know that culture change takes time. It is an industrial sociologist who says it, but we know it doesn’t happen on its own either. Without the leadership and the measures, we cannot rely on just day-to-day activities, pressures and all of that. It is important that we are deliberate in our work to do it, removing the biases that I talked about, removing the barriers, introducing new approaches to staff to manage that will abolish and hopefully one day won’t be necessary.

That’s why we also investigate. I was happy to hear that the Public Service Commission — although not in the organization at this point — has started two audits already to make sure that we have a continuous learning cycle and that we don’t keep doing the same kind of work over and over again.

I will want to see progress and that we don’t have the same conversations for seven years, that our conversations evolve and narrow down and we can take the progress that has been made, share it with others and tackle new or more complex issues as we go — but not repeat the same discussion for seven years. We need to measure and, hopefully, I will be very glad in my capacity in reporting to Parliament to provide you with a picture of that progress.

Thank you, Ms. Girard. Coming last, I know some of my questions have already been asked. I want to take some of those further. I noticed in your opening remarks you referenced the Pay Equity Act and the Public Service Employment Act, but you did not mention the Employment Equity Act. I was surprised by that, especially given the report of the task force that was released yesterday that speaks to the title, A Transformative Framework to Achieve and Sustain Employment Equity.

Some research has highlighted the fact that, up to now, the Employment Equity Act has helped White women shatter the glass ceiling. Black people, other racialized people, Indigenous people and persons with disabilities have faced concrete ceilings.

Ms. Girard, in your first 90 days in the role, what specific actions do you envision that you would take to remove biases and barriers that are rooted in systemic racism and discrimination?

Thank you for your question, honourable senator. I did look at those numbers, and I extracted the delta between the difference for men and women, visible minorities, non-visible, Indigenous people and so forth to see what the difference is.

The report of the task force was just released, and I will look more closely at each of the recommendations but will take on to implement those that fall under the purview of the Public Service Commission.

Immediately, by widening the equity-deserving group, it means that the measures we have started to implement with regard to removing biases and barriers, we will also apply to the two new communities that they have identified, that they suggest we have. Then it means that the surveillance — the reporting and the research that we do — is also inclusive and builds on the recommendations of the report.

At this point, the report was just released and I am not at the commission yet. I would like to consult and look at the data. Certainly, what falls under the mandate of the commission will be taken extremely seriously and approached diligently.

We know that leadership and language matter. I’m sure there are several equity-deserving group members that are anxiously waiting to hear what new ideas you will bring to the Public Service Commission to make a difference, because people have been waiting a long time for things to change.

We now have a number of initiatives that have collectively been put in place and are aimed at shattering the ceiling you’re talking about. We have the Mosaic program. From last year’s cohort, 50% of the participants are now in new positions in the public service.

We have the Mentorship Plus program. I have been a mentor and participated in Mosaic myself. Through the work of the commission, we have made and improved the tools to assess and make official languages more accessible. It’s through those efforts that we’re seeing, for example, more executives — people at the working level who are now achieving their goals to occupy executive positions and are moving into all sectors and areas of the public service.

More efforts will need to be made. Looking at the data and feedback from the diversity networks that we work closely with, persons with disabilities, Indigenous peoples and Black people are not achieving the same results with what we have done so far, so we need to work harder at it and find different, adapted ways to go about it.

Ms. Girard, building on Senator Bernard’s theme, I have a question about adopting a broader vision to prepare the public service for the future.

Perhaps this is a good closing question regarding creating a public service for the future. We talked about diversity. You talked about culture change. I will remind you that the Employment Equity Act is almost 40 years old; that culture is not yet changing very quickly. We need a public service that is more bilingual and technologically able to better use IT to serve Canadians, and all of this in a scarce new world where it’s hard to find people in the public and private sectors — and you have a shrinking budget. How do you get all of this in, work some magic out of this and make it a better public service to serve Canadians?

Thank you for your question, honourable senator.

It is a big mandate, but it is one that we will tackle and succeed at by working together. It’s a collective effort. It requires the work of colleagues who are deputies in the system, but also the School of Public Service and the Privy Council Office, or PCO. We have the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat as the employer. By each doing our part in this, we will make a difference.

There are several challenges but, at the same time, opportunities to attract talent. Yes, there is a competitive labour market, but it is one that is better trained, brings new skills and is more diversified than ever. It is our job to reach out and be more attractive in our value proposition and adapt ourselves to the realities of today.

At the same time, when we hire, we have — I would say this is not new, but we can see that it’s more real than ever — an obligation to remind those who join the public service of the merit-based, non-partisan aspect of working here, and make sure we communicate those values in a clear fashion and give meaning to the work that we do; that is different from what other employers out there offer.

The public service needs to deliver services at a speed and of a complexity that is unheard of. We have seen in recent years how service delivery has become more complex. We need to work — again, all together — to find the right technology and bring in people who have the digital skills and operational knowledge of the needs of Canadians in order to achieve that mission.

By making the tools simpler and ensuring we share more data within the group of organizations that are responsible for each of those levers — being more efficient at doing it and mindful of the taxpayers’ dollars — that’s how we will remain credible, attractive and deliver the services we need to deliver to Canadians.

Thank you. I will say, when we see many public servants who come before us as witnesses, I am struck by the lack of diversity. There are an increasing number of women but few visible minorities and I don’t recall having seen an Indigenous person outside an Indigenous Affairs portfolio. I encourage you to make sure that diversity rises through the service.

Also, I find there are not many people who speak both official languages. Not enough people speak French in the senior public service. I encourage you to meet all those challenges that are on your plate and wish you the best of luck in this position.

Thank you.

Honourable senators, the sitting of the Senate is resumed.