|
FI NEWS : January 2002
President's Message
The release of the Report of the Independent Review Panel on Modernization of Comptrollership in the Government of Canada in 1997 was welcomed by the Association for the promise and hope for the future that it offered for members of our professional financial community. The Report clearly recognized that:
"The impact of the new view of comptrollership on the financial specialists is profound and they recognize it to be so. Financial specialists will need different skills - and even higher professionalism and integrity - to balance their support for managers with their concern for the integrity of the system with significantly more room for judgement." (Page 72)
One of the biggest challenges highlighted, however, was what to do about sustaining an appropriate level of professionalism in the financial community. Having recently met with you across the country it is clear from feedback received that you are also questioning what is being done on the employer's part to develop, promote and sustain professionalism in the financial community both from a compensation and a community development perspective.
Professionalism was a concern raised by members at every meeting. Common issues raised were the employer's abuse of the classification system and the increased use of the PSC 310 test for university equivalency. With respect to the use of the 310, newer members who largely possess university degrees find it particularly annoying and unfair that someone, in one day, can be considered an equivalent to what it has taken them years to achieve with the resulting personal debt load. The selection standard of 1987 was supposed to be the beginning of a new era for the financial management community. Some transition measures were needed to support the group in its development such as "grand fathering" and the use of the 310. Some fourteen years later this transition should now have been concluded and the highest standards should now be in place. If management had remained true to the objectives of the 1987 reforms, which are even more valid today, we would be there. Unfortunately through neglect, the objectives have only been partly achieved and this is an issue which had serious implications for the changing role of financial professionals and the promise of true comptrollership in the management of public funds. The Government can put all the emphasis they want on e-government and the computer programming community but they will achieve nothing without the involvement of employees who possess financial expertise and detailed knowledge of how programs operate. The informatics community seems to have no problem being allocated money and staff for professional development. Apparently, some feel that the financial management community has had its turn in the past and now it is the turn for another community. Is the Treasury Board only capable of keeping one ball in the air at a time? We have seen the Treasury Board drop the ball for professional development for our community and watch it roll down the street. The Association intends to pick it up before it rolls into the gutter. Proper management of tax dollars requires constant support and attention. Why is the emphasis on professional development for our community less than before? I think that the Government is leading Canadians to believe that financial management is a government priority. I do not think that Canadians would be happy to learn otherwise.
Members bring to the Association's attention financial management positions in Departments which are mis-classified and often occupied by individuals, who through no fault of their own, do not possess the required skills and educational requirements to satisfy the FI selection standard. After a number of challenges before the Public Service Staff Relations Board and a review of a number of departments, the Deputy Comptroller General in September 2000 requested all Departments to ensure that positions falling within the Financial Management (FI) Group definition are properly classified as FI. While some Departments such as HRDC, Agriculture and National Defense are in the process of reviewing or have concluded this review and have consulted with the Association, it is evident from discussions with some departments that there is some confusion as to whether finance or personnel should have taken the lead on this issue and who is ultimately responsible for ensuring its completion. To our knowledge the Treasury Board Secretariat has taken no action to follow up on this September 2000 request and to determine what, if any, action has been taken by departments to deal with mis-classified positions and unqualified incumbents of these positions. The Association is making it very clear to departments that we expect action and that we will use every means possible to hold them accountable for the fair and proper use of the classification system. It is a sad state of affairs when this Association must utilize its resources to do management's work. In the absence of strong visible and effective leadership for the financial community this responsibility has fallen to the Association. This same issue was raised by your Association in its presentation to the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in its review of HRDC Grants and Contributions. In its final report, the Committee specifically recommended that:
"HRDC should expect that it has that necessary expertise to administer grant and contribution programs and that the department allocates more resources to hiring and training financial administrators with appropriate educational and professional qualifications." (Page 4)
The mis-classification of financial positions does little but undermine the professionalism of our community, calls into question the Government of Canada's commitment to accountability for public funds and their proper use, and ultimately renders hollow this employer's support of ethics and values in public administration.
The lack of understanding of our profession is very evident when it is assumed that a two-week course will develop the judgement necessary to make the decision required by accrual accounting. The Association believes that the credibility of financial statements will be affected if it is shown that the staff preparing them lack the necessary professional qualifications. Our Association is now preparing to become publically vocal if the employer continues to fill financial management functions with unqualified individuals and this includes positions at the EX level. Leaders without the necessary professional qualifications cannot possibly hope to gain the respect of our member that they are expected to lead. Not many major corporations in Canada have executives leading their financial management functions who do not have specialized knowledge gained by way of a professional accounting designation (CMA, CGA, or CA), MBA or a university business degree. Is it a case of using private sector best practices only when it is convenient?
The introduction of the Financial Information Strategy (FIS) remains important to Government. It modernizes government accounting practices and makes them more consistent with those of the private sector. However, it also makes our skills more portable. This portability will only increase the challenges faced by Government in retaining qualified financial managers. Without a serious effort to address these professional issues, Government runs the risk of becoming little more than a finishing school for private sector financial managers. The Employer's own documents indicate that "for the next three to four years, key financial expertise at the mid-management levels (FI-03/FI-04) will be lost due to a substantial turnover (60-70%)".
I am at a loss to understand why the Government continues to demoralize and under value the work of the FI community at a time when strong financial managers are needed most. The challenges of FIS and modern comptrollership implementation cannot be achieved without the support of our community. Without modern comptrollership the delivery of Government services electronically could be plagued by questions of accountability and further erode the public's confidence in the Government. It is imperative that steps be taken to retain the best and brightest in the FI community to ensure a smooth and efficient transition. I think that the time has come for our Association to try to hold management accountable in the court of public opinion for their management of the financial management function. Perhaps no one will listen, but it will not be because we did not hire the best public relations firm we could afford. We may deplete many of our resources, but at least we will have the satisfaction of knowing we did what we thought was right to defend our profession and members. I am tired of the empty talk about values, ethics, accountability and partnership. One of the first steps I intend to take is to issue our first annual report on the state of financial management in the Federal Public Service. An appropriate theme for the first report could be to express our opinion on Treasury Board's implementation of the Report of the Independent Review Panel on Modernization of Comptrollership in the Government of Canada. In closing, the biggest issue facing our community which may ultimately ensure its inability to achieve the promise of comptrollership and true professional recognition is the fact that the Comptroller General as our champion are also the Employer. Unlike other professional communities who have strong advocates and champions to underline recruitment and retention issues and the need for better compensation levels, the Association alone seems to be the voice of the community and the only champion pushing for greater recognition of our members' professionalism. Why is it that financial professionals in the Public Service have no mention of generally accepted accounting principles in their group definition? It has become increasingly evident to the Association that the Treasury Board is not going to or is incapable of providing the leadership our community is desperately seeking. I cannot sit idly by as our financial management community, which was once the envy of others, further falls apart before our eyes. I will use our Association and what remains of the pride that we feel in this vital function that we preform for our country to lead us to achieve our professional aims. Perhaps management does not want a forceful financial management community that believes in prudence and probity in the use of public funds. I am determined to do everything in my power to reach ever higher levels of excellence in the proper management of public funds. I know that the intimidation to stray from our high professional standards will still be there and perhaps stronger because we are taking a stand. We will not fail because we know that Members of Parliament and the citizens of Canada are counting on you - the Financial Management Professionals in the Public Service of Canada.
Wishing you and your family
a very prosperous and healthy 2002,
Merdon Hosking
President
|
