McKinsey contracts: just the tip of the contracting-out iceberg

On January 30, 2023 PIPSC President Jennifer Carr, accompanied by Jordan McAuley, our specialist on outsourcing, testified before the House of Common Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates (OGGO) about the now-infamous McKinsey contracts awarded by the federal  government.

This follows her appearance before the same Committee last October – proof positive that PIPSC is now recognized as the leading expert on outsourcing in the federal public service.

Over the past few years, we have consistently delivered the same message, backed up by very extensive research: contracted-out work impacts the security of the government's IT systems, results in higher costs and lower quality services for Canadians, less transparency, less accountability and the loss of institutional knowledge and skills. And it hurts the ability of the government to recruit the professionals it needs.

While the present government is in the hot seat on this issue, this is not a new problem. Previous governments of all stripes have invested ever-increasing amounts into contracting out. McKinsey is just the latest example.

Years of unchecked spending on consultants has resulted in a shadow public service operating alongside the government workforce. This shadow public service plays by an entirely different set of rules: consultants are not hired based on merit, representation, fairness or transparency; they are not subject to budget restraints or hiring freezes; and they are not accountable to the Canadian public.

Canadians should be aware of how their money is being spent and of the true costs of such short-sightedness. That’s the context in which McKinsey contracts should be looked at.

The government must update its staffing policies and make hiring quicker and more efficient. It needs to invest in in-house expertise. There is no doubt that it would be far better to invest in a fully funded, permanent public sector solution to delivering high quality, cost-effective services to Canadians.


6 October 2017
Radio-Canada and the CBC have reported this week that Phoenix was “doomed from the start.” The reason? The business case prepared in 2009 under the previous government “lacked proper risk analysis and was politically motivated.” In the words of former parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page, “You look at this business case, you can drive trucks through some of the holes under the risk analysis.”

3 October 2017
In light of the Phoenix fiasco and as part of a commitment made to bargaining agents to make it easier for their members to obtain information about their pay, Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSCPC) has just released its Pay Bulletin for September.

2 October 2017
The Institute has just filed two new policy grievances on Phoenix-related issues, accusing the Treasury Board of failing to implement the terms of the AV and SP Group collective agreements within the specified timeframe (120 and 90 days respectively).

29 September 2017
While much has been reported about the impact of the Phoenix pay system on current federal employees, comparatively little has been said about the harm done to retirees.

21 July 2017
Recently, I sent an opinion piece to the Globe and Mail about our members’ ongoing problems with the Phoenix pay system and what I consider to be one of the root causes of the debacle: outsourcing.

12 June 2017
The recent recommendations of yet another consultants’ report on Shared Services Canada (SSC) demonstrate that, when it comes to federal government outsourcing, there’s no shortage of private sector advice.