AUTUMN 2012
FMI
*
IGF JOURNAL
25
Common Administrative
Systems in the Canadian
Federal Government
Will One Common System Do The Job?
What Are Some Alternate Development & Delivery Mechanisms?
What Could The Government Do Differently?
Eight public sector senior executives and managers submit their responses.
Edited by Tom Ritchie
Introduction
The Canadian federal government has
more than 90 departments and agencies
which require administrative systems. In-
cluding telecommunications, these systems
(such as finance, personnel, assets and real
property) cost the government approxi-
mately $1 billion annually to develop and
operate. In the financial domain alone
there are at least 22 different financial sys-
tems. Some senior government executives
have put forth the argument that one fi-
nancial system would adequately satisfy the
collective requirements of all departments.
Going from potentially 90-plus finan-
cial systems to approximately 22 systems
has accomplished a good degree of cost-
effectiveness to date. In fact, nine systems
process the majority (78 departments) of
the government’s financial transactions.
More cost-effectiveness, however, can and
should be gained. Perhaps the government
can further reduce the number of financial
systems.
Is it realistic and possible for
all departments in the government of
Canada to operate using one common
administrative system?
In this era of diminishing resources, the
federal government’s senior executives are
seeking more creative and innovative ways
to develop and deliver administrative sys-
tems.
Are there any alternative develop-
ment and delivery mechanisms?
As in any large organization, there is
room for improvement.
What are some
improvements that might be considered
by the government’s senior executives?
These and other related questions were
posed to eight senior managers in the
Canadian federal government.
Mr. David Holmes,
Senior Project
Officer, Information Technology
Management, Treasury Board Secretariat;
Mr. Steve Rollwage,
Director,
Acquisitions 2000 Project, SSC;
Mr. Bernie Gorman,
Deputy
Comptroller General, Financial
Management Information and Systems
Branch, Office of the Comptroller
General of Canada;
Mr. Jim Westover,
Director General,
Information Systems Branch,
Employment and Immigration Canada;
Mr. Art Silverman,
Senior Assistant
Deputy Minister, Corporate Management,
Fisheries and Oceans;
Mr. Peter Janega,
Assistant Deputy
Minister, Information Management
Sector, Supply and Services Canada;
Mr. Robert Giroux,
Assistant Deputy
Minister, Corporate Management Branch,
Public Works Canada; and,
Rear Admiral P.C. Martin,
Associate
Assistant Deputy Minister (Finance),
National Defence.
The questions asked of these gentlemen and
their responses follow:
Question 1:
Is it realistic and possible for all depart-
ments in the government of Canada
to operate using one common admin-
istrative system (e.g. one in each of
the finance, personnel, assets and real
property functions)? Why or why not?
David Holmes:
It is realistic, practical or desirable for all
departments to operate using one common
system for each of the major administrative
functions for a number of reasons. How-
ever, it is possible to have greatly increased
Co-Editor’s Note:
The first article
dates back to a time when Supply and
Services and Public Works were still
two different departments (in 1992).
It provides a summary of opinions ex-
pressed by senior officers of the federal
government regarding the possibility
of having all departments use a com-
mon administrative system and if it
would be desirable to do so.
In the second article, Doug Lloyd
comments on the opinions expressed
in 1992 and provides an update on
the progress made towards a common
financial system and configuration.
He also shares with us his thoughts
on what the future holds for us in the
financial management field.
The opinions expressed in this
article are not necessarily those of
the editor nor the fmi
*
igf journal.
The
Past
Past
vs.
Present
#2: Common Administrative Systems
C
o
u
r
t
e
s
y
:
C
a
n
a
d
a
P
o
s
t
1
9
9
2
C
a
n
a
d
a
’
s
F
i
r
s
t
W
o
m
a
n
i
n
S
p
a
c
e
,
1
9
9
2
