by No cost-benefit calculations for any of the measures have ever been presented by both the Trudeau government (and provincial governments for that matter) — not even now, nearly a year and a half later from the appearance of COVID-19, at a time when the Federal and Provincial governments are again utilizing more rounds of lockdowns and home quarantines.
Auditor General NOT informed about Trudeau Government’s lack of Enterprise Risk Management in COVID-19 matters
Governments seem to forget that the process of “lock-down” IS NOT synonymous with the term “separation-the latter more “palatable” to Canadian citizens; also validated and expressed by numerous health professionals not only universally but in Canada also.
While the” cost” of lock-downs expressed in dollars and cents should not NOW be restricted as the propulsive remedy for mitigation of Covid-19, it would have been easily a rectifiable factor if the Federal government had applied pro-active risk mitigation in the first place.
PM Trudeau “excuses” should not be acceptable- not if he had sincerely paid attention to the extensively validated submission that you are about to read –and that he had in his possession since September 2020 and did nothing about it! At least there is absolutely NO evidence that he did.
The Federal government’s reactive “propaganda” expressed March 25, 2021 while focused on a specific issue does not address the real over-all issues of inadequate government proactive risk management lacking throughout the COVID-19 crisis.
Please note the ISSUES are an INTERNAL operational matter or STEWARDSHIP that was not adequately addressed in the AUDITOR GENERAL REPORT of March 25th 2021.
The subject validated submission to Prime Minister Trudeau unveils the real impotent risk management exercised by the government during the COVID-19 crisis.
As an example, in support of the lack of preparedness of COVID-19 by the government, the Auditor General did at least state that the Public Health Agency was unprepared, led to lacking early pandemic response, but there is much more of other issues in my submission to PM Trudeau to which you will have access as referenced in the attached submission to PM Trudeau and attachments -being conveyed to you.
Unfortunately as a taxpayer and citizen I am not allowed to access the Auditor General in government policy matters ; hence the need for your help in informing Canadians, the only avenue left to inform them.
1
Had the Federal Government precisely adopted the universal standard ISO 31000 Enterprise Risk Management (ERM domain and reviewed it in conjunction with the history of past epidemics including the “SARS” epidemic, it would have acted in a PROACTIVE manner to mitigate COVID-19 labor, financial, economic and health risks rather than the damaging REACTIVE response(s) it followed. Required review of previous “epidemics” omitted by the Federal Govt also observed in Auditor General’s report of March 25, 2021.
2
A “panel” of some 11 Federal departments/” agencies” (including several “Health” departments did a “review” of “risk management” in the Federal Government just several years ago-only to “rename” it in a confusing process in which only 1 department abided by this “reinvention of the wheel”.
(CRA) applied the “invention” but NONE of the other Departments represented on the “panel” did!! (An independent, “arms- length” audit firm “discredited” the CRA application of this “new TBS invention”!!!
3
The Enterprise Risk Management “paradigm” (ERM) is not new to government operations in Canada; The B.C. Government has had an effective ERM program established since the mid nineties! The program is administered by a special “risk agency” (department) NOT totally accountable to “Treasury” but the “stewardship” is done by the Auditor General who reports directly to the BC General Assembly.
The evidence shows that the Federal Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) is ultimately responsible for “risk management” at the Federal level and its record of management can by described as “dysfunctional”.
Premier Trudeau has been accorded volumes of evidence to this observation but has yet to respond to my VALIDATED observations submitted in September and again in November 2020. (It appears that Prime Minister Trudeau
acknowledgements of “receipt” constitutes a response to the issues!!)
4
Questionable lack of Federal Government reporting of health “pre-conditions” falsely attributed to COVID-19, while advised by the WHO to report such matters in March, 2020. England is at least one country that has abided. Why
hasn’t Canada?
5
Lastly, but not least- Why has not the Trudeau Government not supported its mammoth $spending under the chant, “COVID-19” made me do it” and the Official Opposition watch in glee the spending as the threat of PM Trudeau
calling an early election appears to have scared the “daylight” out of them?
The” magic formula” Debt to Gross Profit Ratio” utilized by the Trudeau finance minister is extremely shallow as Canada’s “slide rule” for funding COVID-19 financial and economic collateral damages.
Hasn’t PM Trudeau’s government heard about the measurement of the universal Cost-Benefit Ratio to determine the viability of “cash flows”?
Australia has and is using it successfully for determining its COVID-19 financial and economic damage. Isn’t time for the Trudeau Government to cease the chant, “COVID made me do it” with its outrageous spending that could also
have been avoided and planned properly by practicing ERM– Enterprise Risk Management?
Following is a copy of the subject issues (with attachments) referred to PM Trudeau in September 2020 and again in November 2020 to which he has never responded. The submission to PM Trudeau concludes with 11 substantive recommendations, and is validated (supported) with 25 “Exhibits” of evidence.
I cannot overemphasize the importance of the universally accepted “Enterprise Risk Management” (ERM) paradigm in proactively managing “risk” . As additional evidence I respectfully refer you to an important reference source described below:
One last (critically important) “validation” for the acceptance of the universally recognized Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)
Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada (CPA Canada) is one of the largest national accounting organizations in the world and is a respected voice in the business, government, education and non-profit sectors.
In 2019 CPA Canada (the professional organization) received the prestigious “Canada Awards for Excellence.”
CPA Canada‘s acceptance of “Enterprise Risk Management” (ERM) adds a high degree of credibility to this world renown methodology for managing risks in any organization, especially that of Government operations.
CPA Canada recently presented an education seminar on the subject of ERM for its members and executives of other organizations. The seminar included specific exercises that focused on COVID-19 through a risk lens!
I believe that my submission to Prime Minister Trudeau focuses extensively on this aspect and I respectfully suggest that the information contained in this memorandum forms part of any representations made regarding the matter of the Prime Minister’s government abrogating what should be a mandatory responsibility in administering a critical program addressing proactive risk management.
**********************
Copy of the submission to PM Trudeau submitted September 21st 2020
From: “Wilfred J Pelletier CPA CMA; FMA”
To: “Justin Trudeau Prime Minister” <pm@pm.gc.ca>
Cc: “Deputy Prime Minister Canada Chrystia Freeland” <chrystia.freeland@parl.gc.ca>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2020 4:18:24 PM
Subject: A better way to manage risks associated with COVID-19
Mr. Trudeau, Prime minister of Canada
A better way to manage the “wide spectrum” of risks associated with COVID-19
Introduction
Mr. Trudeau I am one of many in expressing gratitude for the dedication shown by health workers at all levels during the COVID-19 epidemic; dedications from doctors, nurses, support staff, maintenance, housekeeping staff, and first responders.
However, there is a critical level of achievement in ordinance missing; from government leaders at ALL levels, and in particular at the cabinet levels.
This issue is summarized as follows: ……….
Further to the highlighted “text” above is the fact that in Canada, many hospitals were struggling with overcrowding before the COVID-19 outbreak hit in earnest in March..and in any forthcoming epidemic that could have been addressed immediately following the previous noted “epidemics”. -WJP
Mental health aspects could have been predicted from previous experience. The Ebola Virus should have taught governments valuable lessons in this this aspect of risk management, but apparently was ignored before the COVID-19 occurrence. (Also relate this to the” isolation” controversies now rampant. – WJP)
The COVID-19 pandemic is a realized issue with the emphasis now on solving the immediate problems.
However, the present government’s objectives and strategies will also be influenced in the medium-to-long-term. That means looking ahead anddealing with theanticipated “second-wave” of the epidemic, that could easily occur, as reported by health officers.
If the COVID-19 pandemic has taught us anything, it is the need to be prepared for a wide range of scenarios. The pandemic has illustrated how corporate and government leaders and their risk management teams need to constantly review and enhance the fundamentals of the risk function and increase its connectivity and collaboration across the organization. (ERM does accomplish exactly that-WJP)
(In the case of governments, risk management teams are virtually non-existent in Canada. The exception is British Columbia– please refer to discussion in “Exhibit 9)
Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) provides that opportunity to do so now. (The present “risk” program crafted by the Treasury Board Secretariat(TBS) commenced before 2010,
continued into 2016 is still inefficient and unsuccessful. Pleaserefer to “Exhibit 1-ERM History”)
The ERM processes should include recurring opportunities to survey current conditions and future assumptions and adjust objectives and strategies as appropriate. The COVID-19 pandemic is certainly one of those opportunities.
Issuing government assistance money is one mitigation measure that has served the present. Regrettably future generations of Canadians may have to shoulder the debt burden.
Once an ERM system is put into place, a government department should examine known uncertainties and their treatment plans. It can also explore new uncertainties that could impact the revised objectives and strategies. Risk appetite statements and thresholds should also be reviewed; what was once considered to be important may not be as important now. Government departments should examine existing uncertainties in the light of new understanding. Impact assessments may change and may no longer meet the adjusted appetite thresholds.
New uncertainties that emerge from the altered future landscape must be examined against the updated risk appetite.
I am not about to jump on the “band-wagon” of those criticizing your government for spending too much money at this time. I do believe that you are correct in considering “people first” when such an epidemic occurs.
However, your government would be better served in avoiding opposition criticism from political parties, the media, and citizens if the extraneous disbursements were supported with “cost-benefit analyses” as discussed in Exhibit 35.
If there is an “under performance” it points to the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) which has been at the process of formulating an appropriate “risk program” for more than two decades without positive results. (Please refer to “Exhibit 1 ERM History”).
There are solutions for future risk management by looking at what is going on in the “health care” field, and in other jurisdictions right at the moment! (Mr. Trudeau I am providing you with extensive reference material in this submission that should inform your government as to what needs to be done about “risk” in health care …. if it has the willingness and desire to improve its risk management.
I have likened my task of representation of priorities to you, Mr. Trudeau, as a project comparable to the construction of a large office complex building tower.
An imaginary consideration might be to determine what “expertise” is required for its construction.
Some may say “the architect” as the design is paramount not in terms of cost to build but rather the utilization advantages of the building and its ultimate purpose. Others may list the service of mechanical and electrical engineers for structural capacity and utilization. Still speculating, others would consider the carpentry, finishing interior decorators, etc. And the list goes on!
With this “fictional” example I have to ask a question: In the final designation what usually gets built first? The answer would be “the basement” and “foundation”.
In respect to this “scenario” it is very clear that the “foundation” and its elements would be an excellent starting point to replicate the task(s) of dealing with COVID-19 risk in going forward.
My representations to you Mr. Trudeau will be of the “foundational” type illustration of explaining the value of “Enterprise Risk Management” (ERM) in going forward in financial and economic terms,
I have provided, a large number of “exhibits” to not only facilitate more understanding of topic subjects, but also to eliminate misunderstanding in general explanations that often arise in “introductions” such as this.
(Please note that there are “gaps” in the numbering of “exhibits” – I have simply eliminated some exhibits no longer required!)
Is the World Health Organization (WHO) in a state of “conflict of interest?
To begin with Canada is a member country of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD.
It’s reasonable to believe that Canada is a co-operative country that follows the guidelines of the OECD. Accordingly, it should not only be aware of the “guidelines” of membership but also should abide by its pronouncements.
The “Conflict of Interest Act, S.C. 2006, c. 9, s.2 Assented to 2006- 12-12- of the OECD constitution dictates the elements of apparent conflict of interest of an official. (By implication the principle applies to organizations connected/acting in the same manner)
Serving the public interest is the fundamental mission of governments and public institutions. Citizens expect individual public officials to perform their duties with integrity, in a fair and unbiased way.
According to the OECD Guidelines, inappropriately managed or resolved conflicts of interest have the potential to undermine the proper functioning of democratic governments by:
- Weakening adherence by public officials to the ideals of legitimacy, impartiality, and fairness in public decision-making, and
- Distorting the rule of law, the development and application of policy, the functioning of markets, and the allocation of public resource
(Please scroll to bottom to Exhibit #14 for conflict of interest details- WHO and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation)
Having illustrated the possible “conflict of interest” between the World Health Organization and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, WHO’s weak attempt in advising about ERM (Exhibit 11), the USA ceasing its funding to WHO, a 200,000 member petition signed by Italian citizens to OECD countries to cease funding to the WHO for lack of performance, and Canada already not abiding by its direction in reporting health “pre-conditions” of COVID-19 deaths isn’t it time for Canada to totally ignore WHO directives and access the OECD for reference purposes instead, particularly in vaccination matters?
There are also other benefits accruing to Canada from membership in the OECD:
Through its country surveys and comparable statistical and economic data, the OECD provides its member countries tools with which to analyse and monitor their economic, social and environmental policies. Countries can draw on the OECD‘s reservoir of expertise, including peer reviews, and they can access all of the research and analysis conducted by the Secretariat.
Covering the full economic and social spectrum, this work could not be carried out by any one country alone.
In addition to its economic intelligence functions, the OECD is above all a forum within which countries discuss and share national experience, identify best practices and find solutions to common problems. The OECD having working relationships with over 100 non-member economies, members benefit from dialogue and consultations with all players on the world scene, in a context of increased interdependence that demands global rules of the game.
Last but certainly not the least, OECD has recently issued a directive with much more credibility than any from the WHO (and its an apparent conflict of interest situation just described) “Treatments and a vaccine for COVID-19: The need for coordinating policies on R & D, manufacturing and access” dated May 29, 2020 at this link.
There is more: OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (Covid-19):
“Supporting businesses in financial distress to avoid insolvency during the COVID-19 crisis” May 27, 2020
Conclusion to this submission:
Can the concept of “Enterprise Risk Management” help in preparing for an event similar to COVID-19 happening in the future?
The historic and widespread practice of ERM indicates strongly that it can, unfortunately it was overlooked in this occurrence of COVID-19.
However, there is a “caveat” to successful adoption of ERM:
A Government’s success will be impacted by the following factors:
2 thoughts on “Trudeau Government “Reactive” Risk Management Steps to Economic, Financial and Health Collateral Damages COVID-19”