Modern America as a Parliamentary Democracy?

[viper37]

So who is it that does the assigning? 

can't remember the exact title, but there is some sort of leader to the Deputy Ministers (and other high level bureaucrats).  That person is named by the PM.  He then choses the staff for the top level of each department (Deputy Minister and everyone having -minister in his title).  The Minister has nothing to say and he cannot fire anyone.  He can ask the Prime Minister Office, who will then ask the "chief of the Deputy Minister" to remove someone from his/her position and put him/her in a pool until the services are required elsehwere at an equivalent position and same wage.

For the Minister's political staff (chief of cabinet), they all are named by the Prime Minister or its office, and they owe loyalty to the party, as they are usually named there for services rendered, like attending an election in a riding known to be lost to the party at 99.9% certainty.

If we're talking board of directors for State sponsered agencies or corporations, then they are usually filled with union leaders (to achieve social peace), former politicians and funds collectors as reward to their services.  It's apparently technically legal for a member of a board of director to be a funds collector for the party and renting the building to the agency he sits on.

[crazy canuck]

So who is it that does the assigning? 

can't remember the exact title, but there is some sort of leader to the Deputy Ministers (and other high level bureaucrats).  That person is named by the PM.  He then choses the staff for the top level of each department (Deputy Minister and everyone having -minister in his title).  The Minister has nothing to say and he cannot fire anyone.  He can ask the Prime Minister Office, who will then ask the "chief of the Deputy Minister" to remove someone from his/her position and put him/her in a pool until the services are required elsehwere at an equivalent position and same wage.

For the Minister's political staff (chief of cabinet), they all are named by the Prime Minister or its office, and they owe loyalty to the party, as they are usually named there for services rendered, like attending an election in a riding known to be lost to the party at 99.9% certainty.

If we're talking board of directors for State sponsered agencies or corporations, then they are usually filled with union leaders (to achieve social peace), former politicians and funds collectors as reward to their services.  It's apparently technically legal for a member of a board of director to be a funds collector for the party and renting the building to the agency he sits on.

Ministers have a great deal of influence over who their DM and what their DM does.  Deputy Ministers have the most senior non political job in government.  Their role is to implement the Minister's directions in that ministry.  To suggest the Minister has no influence over who their DM is significantly mischaracterizes how our system works.

[mongers]

Surprising given the apparent piss-poor thread topic, why so many of your fuckers are posting about it. 

Not really.  A really bad car wreck will attract more attention than a minor fender bender, so it's no surprise a really stupid thread gets more attention than a typical dumb Timmay thread.

Instead of fucking moaning, if you're so dissatisfied why don't you start some of your own threads for a change? 

I should note four of the ten most recently commented on threads are ones I started, so I must be doing something right to keep this cesspool churning. 

[viper37]

So who is it that does the assigning? 

can't remember the exact title, but there is some sort of leader to the Deputy Ministers (and other high level bureaucrats).  That person is named by the PM.  He then choses the staff for the top level of each department (Deputy Minister and everyone having -minister in his title).  The Minister has nothing to say and he cannot fire anyone.  He can ask the Prime Minister Office, who will then ask the "chief of the Deputy Minister" to remove someone from his/her position and put him/her in a pool until the services are required elsehwere at an equivalent position and same wage.

For the Minister's political staff (chief of cabinet), they all are named by the Prime Minister or its office, and they owe loyalty to the party, as they are usually named there for services rendered, like attending an election in a riding known to be lost to the party at 99.9% certainty.

If we're talking board of directors for State sponsered agencies or corporations, then they are usually filled with union leaders (to achieve social peace), former politicians and funds collectors as reward to their services.  It's apparently technically legal for a member of a board of director to be a funds collector for the party and renting the building to the agency he sits on.

Ministers have a great deal of influence over who their DM and what their DM does.  Deputy Ministers have the most senior non political job in government.  Their role is to implement the Minister's directions in that ministry.  To suggest the Minister has no influence over who their DM is significantly mischaracterizes how our system works.

Let's say it depends on the minister.  If it's someone coming from the party, in good standing with the PM, yes, they can have influence over whom they're sent.  Otherwise, nada.  You get who you're assigned, that's it.

In a once famous case, miss "Post-It", because her previous job was to stamp post-it with the political affiliation of a job candidate on its cv before forwarding it to the PM, was named as assistant deputy minister to health & social services:
La nomination de Chantal Landray fait jaser

Directrice adjointe au cabinet de Jean Charest, Mme Landry a été nommée, mercredi, sous-ministre adjointe au ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux.

Vice director to Jean Charest's office, Miss Landry was nominated, wednesday, to assistant deputy minister to Departement of Health and Social services.

Now, considering this was done at the request of Charest (PLQ), just before he left office to be replace by Pauline Marois (PQ), these are political appointment, and there is no way a PQ cabinet minister requested that lady to serve under him.

[Jacob]

Instead of fucking moaning, if you're so dissatisfied why don't you start some of your own threads for a change? 

[Eddie Teach]

Surprising given the apparent piss-poor thread topic, why so many of your fuckers are posting about it. 

Not really.  A really bad car wreck will attract more attention than a minor fender bender, so it's no surprise a really stupid thread gets more attention than a typical dumb Timmay thread.

Instead of fucking moaning, if you're so dissatisfied why don't you start some of your own threads for a change? 

I should note four of the ten most recently commented on threads are ones I started, so I must be doing something right to keep this cesspool churning. 

You must admit though, of those four threads, this one has the dumbest thesis.

[DGuller]

You must admit though, of those four threads, this one has the dumbest thesis.

Why exactly?      It seems like the dumbest things in this thread have been said by people saying what a dumb thread this is.  US is the oldest version of modern democracy, but one with potentially serious systemic weaknesses that are getting exposed now.  It seems entirely non-dumb to compare and contrast the merits of other modern democratic systems.

[Eddie Teach]

Ok, maybe use the word silly instead of dumb. Most of us tired of alt history as teenagers.

[Razgovory]

So who is it that does the assigning? 

can't remember the exact title, but there is some sort of leader to the Deputy Ministers (and other high level bureaucrats).  That person is named by the PM.  He then choses the staff for the top level of each department (Deputy Minister and everyone having -minister in his title).  The Minister has nothing to say and he cannot fire anyone.  He can ask the Prime Minister Office, who will then ask the "chief of the Deputy Minister" to remove someone from his/her position and put him/her in a pool until the services are required elsehwere at an equivalent position and same wage.

For the Minister's political staff (chief of cabinet), they all are named by the Prime Minister or its office, and they owe loyalty to the party, as they are usually named there for services rendered, like attending an election in a riding known to be lost to the party at 99.9% certainty.

If we're talking board of directors for State sponsered agencies or corporations, then they are usually filled with union leaders (to achieve social peace), former politicians and funds collectors as reward to their services.  It's apparently technically legal for a member of a board of director to be a funds collector for the party and renting the building to the agency he sits on.

Ministers have a great deal of influence over who their DM and what their DM does.  Deputy Ministers have the most senior non political job in government.  Their role is to implement the Minister's directions in that ministry.  To suggest the Minister has no influence over who their DM is significantly mischaracterizes how our system works.

You would accuse gentle viper of misrepresenting the Canadian government?

[crazy canuck]

So who is it that does the assigning? 

can't remember the exact title, but there is some sort of leader to the Deputy Ministers (and other high level bureaucrats).  That person is named by the PM.  He then choses the staff for the top level of each department (Deputy Minister and everyone having -minister in his title).  The Minister has nothing to say and he cannot fire anyone.  He can ask the Prime Minister Office, who will then ask the "chief of the Deputy Minister" to remove someone from his/her position and put him/her in a pool until the services are required elsehwere at an equivalent position and same wage.

For the Minister's political staff (chief of cabinet), they all are named by the Prime Minister or its office, and they owe loyalty to the party, as they are usually named there for services rendered, like attending an election in a riding known to be lost to the party at 99.9% certainty.

If we're talking board of directors for State sponsered agencies or corporations, then they are usually filled with union leaders (to achieve social peace), former politicians and funds collectors as reward to their services.  It's apparently technically legal for a member of a board of director to be a funds collector for the party and renting the building to the agency he sits on.

Ministers have a great deal of influence over who their DM and what their DM does.  Deputy Ministers have the most senior non political job in government.  Their role is to implement the Minister's directions in that ministry.  To suggest the Minister has no influence over who their DM is significantly mischaracterizes how our system works.

Let's say it depends on the minister.  If it's someone coming from the party, in good standing with the PM, yes, they can have influence over whom they're sent.  Otherwise, nada.  You get who you're assigned, that's it.

In a once famous case, miss "Post-It", because her previous job was to stamp post-it with the political affiliation of a job candidate on its cv before forwarding it to the PM, was named as assistant deputy minister to health & social services:
La nomination de Chantal Landray fait jaser

Directrice adjointe au cabinet de Jean Charest, Mme Landry a été nommée, mercredi, sous-ministre adjointe au ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux.

Vice director to Jean Charest's office, Miss Landry was nominated, wednesday, to assistant deputy minister to Departement of Health and Social services.

Now, considering this was done at the request of Charest (PLQ), just before he left office to be replace by Pauline Marois (PQ), these are political appointment, and there is no way a PQ cabinet minister requested that lady to serve under him.

The difficulty is you have confused an ADM with a DM.  Those are very different roles.

[viper37]

Dominique Savoie was DM to the Departement of transportation (Quebec).

She wasn't chosen by the Minister at the time, and subsequent minister lived with her.  She could not be fired after being accused of lying to the Parliament.  She could not be fired after being accused and proven guilty of mismanagement of her department.  She was put into a pool to be reassigned later.  So far, she is still receiving her wages, 211k$/year.


http://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/782474/sous-ministre-patron-patron-regles

Je ne pense pas qu'entre un ministre et un sous-ministre, on parle d'ordres.
    Dominique Savoie, devant la commission parlementaire, le 18 mai 2016

May 18th, 2016: "I don't think that, between a Minister and a Deputy Minister, we talk of orders".

Meaning: I do what I want to do when I want to do it.  He can go fuck himself if he doesn't like me.

By tradition, DM will carry the political will of the minister to carry one his vision, but if they refuse to do it, as in this case, were alleged irregularities were found in this department and she actively obstructed the work of an independant investigator sent by the Minister, there's nothing the Minister can do about it.

Before joining this department, she was Social services department, first as director, then as ADM, then as DM.

And there is no big differences between the DM and the ADM.  The ADM has the same powers and responsibilities as the DM, albeit for only a part of the department (ex: ADM to Forestry in the Department of Agriculture, Forest and Fisheries).

[Barrister]

And there is no big differences between the DM and the ADM.  The ADM has the same powers and responsibilities as the DM, albeit for only a part of the department (ex: ADM to Forestry in the Department of Agriculture, Forest and Fisheries).

The DM is a political pick.  DMs will change when the government changes.  They are not career civil servants.

ADMs are not political picks.  They do not change when the government changes.  They are career civil servants.

[mongers]

Yet Another Canadian hijack. 

[viper37]

The DM is a political pick.  DMs will change when the government changes.  They are not career civil servants.

Yes and no.

ADMs are not political picks.  They do not change when the government changes.  They are career civil servants.

yes and no.

In both cases, you can get to ADM and then to DM by carreer advancement.  You start at some management level, get to be a director, then an ADM in one department, then either DM in this department, or ADM elsewhere and finally DM.

Case in point: Dominique Savoie.  A carreer bureaucrat, started in Social services, graduated up to ADM, then switch to transportation for the same job and then became DM.

Other case, political appointment: In his final days, Jean Charest nominated his personal assitant (Miss Post-It) to the job of ADM to Healthcare & Social Services.  Had she remained, she could have become DM.

In the Department of Finance, Treasury, Justice, they tend to advance to the ranks, it's rarely a political appointment.

In others: it varies a lot.  But most often, they are political appointments, at some point.  They may be appointed ADM and later become DM, but there is no specific rules.  Even if you're a carreer bureaucrat, outside of a few departments, you rarely get to this level without political connections.
The Premier (and likely some PMs too) personally review each appointment and asks to know their political allegiance.  Despite promises, a blind CV still isn't a thing.

[crazy canuck]

Viper, either the system of government is incredibly messed up in Quebec, or you are not describing it entirely accurately.