Return of P&P Cabinet Committee signals Carney’s ‘government by cabinet’ with an ‘inner circle,’ say strategists
Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Priorities and Planning Cabinet Committee—what strategists are calling his “sounding board” and “inner circle”—is under pressure to produce results and successfully orient cabinet to deliver on the Liberal leader’s campaign pledges in a minority Parliament.
Carney (Nepean, Ont.) is chairing two of the eight cabinet committees populated by his 28-member team: the Priorities, Planning and Strategy Committee—often called P&P—and the National Security Council Committee. He also chairs the Incident Response Group when it meets as needed.
The Priorities, Planning, and Strategy Committee, listed at the top of the cabinet’s priority list, is stocked with high-profile ministers, most of whom also serve as chairs or vice-chairs on other groups. The 12-member team will set “forward-looking strategic direction,” prioritize “government activity,” and track “implementation,” according to the Prime Minster’s Office.
Of the 11 ministers Carney has selected, seven have fiscal mandates, suggesting the prime minister will continue to favour an economic agenda, which has been his primary focus since the Liberal leadership debates where he first pitched himself as the candidate to build the Canadian economy in the face of precarity brought on by tariffs and threats from the United States.
Government House Leader Steven MacKinnon (Gatineau, Que.) is the committee’s vice-chair, joined by Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, N.B.), Energy and Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson (Markham-Thornhill, Ont.), National Defence Minister David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Ont.), Canadian Identity and Culture Minister Steven Guilbeault (Laurier-Sainte-Marie, Que.), and Treasury Board President Shafqat Ali (Brampton-Chinguacousy Park, Ont.)—all of whom chair other cabinet committees.
Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne (Saint-Maurice—Champlain, Que.) and Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand (Oakville-East, Ont.) are vice-chairs of other groups, while three ministers don’t have such posts: Industry Minister Mélanie Joly (Ahuntsic-Cartierville, Que.), Justice Minister Sean Fraser (Central Nova, N.S.), and Housing Minister Gregor Robertson (Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, B.C.).
‘Rowing in the same direction’
Brian Klunder, who served as a senior adviser to several ministers in the governments of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin, called the committee a “co-ordinating function” full of senior ministers that Carney will use to ensure that his cabinet is operating within his broader vision.
“You have this super senior group of cabinet ministers,” Klunder, senior counsel at the government and public relations firm Temple Scott Associates, told The Hill Times. “In other governments, they’ve called it an inner cabinet. … Maybe it’s too early to say that, but certainly there’s a suggestion that these ministers hold specific priority in ensuring the government’s primary objectives get accomplished.”
Marci Surkes, a former executive director of policy and cabinet affairs for then-prime minister Justin Trudeau, echoed Klunder’s assessment. In her estimation, it represents “the kitchen cabinet” of this government, set up by Carney as his “inner circle” and the “last post of decision making.”
Carney “has organized his cabinet committee structure in such a way that this is the central committee, the so-called kitchen cabinet,” Surkes said. “It is very clear that the prime minister has set up this table to be his committee.”
Klunder noted that Carney is a “very results-focused” leader, and said that, in order to get things done, it’s strategically important that “ministers that are working on your biggest priorities” are “fully aware” of the government’s priorities so that cabinet can effectively contribute to the government’s goals. This, he said, is why the Priorities, Planning and Strategy Committee is important: it keeps everyone not only “rowing in the same direction,” but “rowing fast and getting to the finish line.”
‘Results-focused’ PM brings back P&P committee
A P&P committee is by no means a new idea; previous prime ministers have chaired similar committees. The first was chaired by then-prime minister Lester B. Pearson in 1968. Since then, the committee has been a common fixture in cabinet structures, with former prime ministers Brian Mulroney, Martin, and Stephen Harper having chaired P&P committees in their respective cabinets.
However, some prime ministers have dropped the group—neither then-prime minister Joe Clark nor Chrétien chaired a P&P committee. In Chrétien’s case, his cabinet was still able to function “quite effectively” without one, said Stephen Azzi, a professor of political management at Carleton University who studies the history of cabinet governance.
“He was just very on top of things,” Azzi told The Hill Times. “He made sure he had staff on those committees. Ministers were expected to brief the prime minister before they went to committee, so he knew what was going on, and if he thought there was a problem, he would intervene.”
Azzi said that, while not “essential,” most prime ministers have had a P&P committee, regardless of its title, but added that the key to successful cabinet management is for a prime minister to “be in touch with his own management style, and come up with a system that suits that.”
The P&P moniker has been absent from cabinet for the last decade under then-prime minister Justin Trudeau. Instead, Trudeau chose to chair a committee called Agenda, Results, and Communications—often called ARC—which performed a similar function in addressing and tracking “the strategic agenda of the government.”
But strategists say that Carney’s committee will likely differ from ARC, as the former banker’s leadership style and priorities differ from his predecessor’s.
Geoff Norquay, who served as a senior adviser to Mulroney and as director of communications for Harper when he was leader of the opposition, told The Hill Times that Carney’s committee will differ in more than just title, as “Trudeau’s results committee never produced results.”
“Carney is aware of that,” Norquay said. “The Canadian people are aware of that. … So, yeah, the … committee that Mr. Carney has set up is different—is intended to be different—and will be, I expect, much more effective, largely due to the personality and priorities of Mr. Carney.”
Surkes said Trudeau’s ARC committee was not quite the same as previous P&P committees—or as what Carney’s version is likely to be—as Trudeau “didn’t conduct his cabinet business quite the same way,” despite bringing big issues to the table as needed.
Surkes explained that Carney is likely to attend the committee frequently, and use it as a “sounding board” in a move that she said feels like a return “to a previous era where there was one committee that the prime minister attended frequently, that had regional representation [and] the prime minister’s most trusted allies,” with prime ministers typically meeting with their P&P committee once a week.
Even though Carney’s cabinet is leaner than Trudeau’s, 28 ministers “is still a lot of people to have around a table if you are truly hashing out a debate,” said Surkes, who is the chief strategy officer and managing director at Compass Rose. “This is designed to give the PM a tool—a forum—for his own deliberation.”
“We don’t often think of the prime minister as the chair of cabinet, but, in fact, he is,” she said. “And as chair of cabinet, sometimes you need a space where you can deal with issues before they come to the table for a final decision.”
A ‘government by cabinet’?
Norquay, like Klunder, said Carney has a drive to deliver results that differentiates him from Trudeau. Norquay pointed to Carney’s mandate letter, which unlike his predecessor’s multiple “laundry list” ministry-specific mandate letters, listed only seven broad priorities, which were addressed to all ministers. Norquay said the mandate letter change is a “good thing,” and “made it clear to ministers that he expects them … to bring issues forward.”
“There’s been … a significant amount of evidence [of this] already,” he said, speaking about Carney’s approach to leading his cabinet. “He has made it clear that ministers … are to stick to their mandates, but they are also expected to be creative in interpreting their mandates.”
Klunder called this approach “empowering,” noting that “any organization” has a “senior team” responsible for “overseeing [and] making sure that the objectives are being met”—and that this is what is needed for Carney’s cabinet to function smoothly.
He also emphasized that Trudeau’s and Carney’s approaches to managing their cabinets is “very much” different, and that how Carney is positioning his leadership and management “suggests that it’s a government by cabinet.” However, Klunder said “the proof will be in the pudding,” as it remains early days for Carney, whose cabinet was sworn in less than a month ago on May 13.
“I think … cabinet committees are going to matter in this government, and perhaps to a greater extent than we saw under the Trudeau government,” Klunder observed.
“You can see that in the mandate letter. You can see that in the Throne Speech,” Klunder continued. “And this committee is about ensuring the government meets its objectives. … It makes sure that those commitments that cabinet has approved actually happen.”
ewand@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
LICENSING
PODCAST
ALERTS
