Principal’s Commission on the Future of Public
Policy at Queen’s University
INTERIM REPORT:
What We’ve Heard
May 5, 2017
Version corrrected May 15, 2017
______________________________________________________________________________
Table of Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Introduction and Background………………………………………………………………….
The Commission’s Approach…………………………………………………………………..
Lines of Enquiry………………………………………………………………………………………
Policy Studies and Public Administration…………………………………………………
What the Commission Heard…………………………………………………………………..
5.1 The Changing Public Policy Landscape in Canada………………….……………
5.2 The Changing Landscape of Public Policy: Demand-side Perspectives...
5.3 Implications for Public Policy Functions Within Government………………
5.4 Implications for Public Policy Education………………………………………………
5.5 Implications for Public Policy Advisors…………………………………………………
5.6 The Changing Landscape of Public Policy: Supply-side Perspectives…..
5.7 What Hasn’t Changed?............................................................................
5.8 What is Missing?......................................................................................
5.9 Different Formats for Interaction with Policymakers………………………….
5.10 Does Geography Matter?.......................................................................
5.11 Implications for Universities and Public Policy Schools……………………….
6. Public Policy at Queen’s University……………………………………………………………….
6.1 School of Policy Studies………………………………………………………………………..
6.2 Public Policy Across Campus…………………………………………………………………
6.3 Internal Audiences Seek Opportunity for Impact………………………………….
7. Next Steps for the Commission……………………………………………………………………
8. Appendices………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Page 1
2
2
4
4
5
5
6
9
9
10
11
14
15
16
16
16
18
18
19
19
20
22
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction and Background
In September 2016, Queen’s University Principal Daniel Woolf announced the formation of a
Principal’s Commission on the Future of Public Policy at Queen’s University. He charged the
Commission with a mandate to “conduct a broad review to determine how Queen’s can
modernize its approach to public policy to reflect changes in public policy-making and public
service as well as new learning requirements for policy leaders.” The Commission was asked
to make recommendations to the Principal focusing on “providing Queen’s with a forward
vision for revitalizing its presence in the public policy arena.”
The Commission is chaired by Michael Horgan, MA’79, a Queen’s alumnus and former deputy
Minister of Finance Canada with more than 35 years of public service experience. He is joined
on the Commission by Margaret Biggs (Vice-Chair), Kevin Costante, Artsci’78 and MPA’79,
Jeannie Dempster, Artsci’93 and MPA’01, Bridget O’Grady, Artsci’03 and MPA’05, Peter
Wallace, Bob Watts, and Cam Yung, Artsci’16.
The Commission began its work in the fall of 2016 – continuing through to the spring of 2017
– with research and consultations with leaders in public affairs in Canada, both inside and
outside of government; alumni, Queen’s faculty, adjuncts and staff; and current students. It
will deliver a final report to the Principal in the fall of 2017. This interim report summarizes
what the Commission has learned from research and consultations undertaken to date; it
does not draw any conclusions or offer any recommendations at this stage. The Commission
will provide recommendations for the Principal’s consideration in its final report in the fall of
2017. Additional information on the Commission can be found in Appendix A to this report.
2. The Commission’s Approach
Exploring the Evolving Landscape: At its initial meeting (October, 2016), the Commission
determined that its approach to fulfilling its mandate would begin with a broad --- but
certainly not comprehensive --- review of the evolving landscape of public policy in Canada,
focusing particularly on the academe-public sector relationship, including the challenges and
opportunities embedded within it. This interim report provides a distillation of that review
process, and serves as a contribution to the ongoing dialogue among public policy
stakeholders --- governments, institutions, non-governmental organizations and not-forprofit organizations, the private sector, and citizens with particular interest in public policy in
Canada. Given the accelerated pace of societal change and expectations for public sector --and educational institutions’ --- responsiveness, the Commission has no doubt that the
dialogue will continue. The phenomena described in this report face Queen’s University as
well as most other Canadian universities; as a result, this analysis is the foundation of the
Commission’s fulfillment of its mandate of providing concrete advice for Queen’s University.
Page 2
______________________________________________________________________________
This work is provided to the Principal of Queen’s University in the form of an interim report,
and will be at the centre of the Commission’s deliberations as it formulates strategic advice
for Queen’s, accompanied by appropriate recommendations.
The Commission’s approach to consultation has been a combination of:
 One-on-one, and group meetings
 Telephone conversations and email submissions
 Submissions to the Commission through the Queen’s University website.
Formal Consultation Sessions: The Commission held seven consultation sessions, with
multiple meetings and discussions in each session:
 January 11, January 25 and March 29, 2017 - consultations in Ottawa with senior decisionmakers within the federal government
 January 23 and March 1, 2017 - consultation in Kingston with faculty, adjunct professors
and fellows, and staff of the School of Policy Studies, as well as with current Queen’s
students, deans and vice-principals
 February 16-17, and April 11, 2017 - consultations in Toronto with senior decision-makers
in and outside of the Ontario government, as well as alumni from the School of Policy
Studies
In addition to significant time devoted to direct consultation with representative groups, the
Commission has reviewed additional documentation summarized in Appendix B. Additional
documents may be added to this list before the Report is complete.
Page 3
______________________________________________________________________________
3. Lines of Enquiry
To encourage stakeholders to step back from preoccupations of the moment and share
broader perspectives on public policy, as well as provide insights that will better prepare
students for broader participation in the public policy arena, the Commission formulated five
main lines of inquiry, that have guided its deliberations and consultations with stakeholders:





The changing public policy landscape in Canada, and changing needs for public policy
research and advice
Identification of the learning and skills requirements for graduates looking to work in the
public policy domain, and also mid-career professionals
Suggestions for the best ways to prepare students for successful careers in the public
policy realm, rooted in solid understanding of public policy processes as an integral part
of work in any domain
Suggestions for the best ways to stimulate interaction and exchange between public
policy professionals/senior decision-makers and university researchers and scholars, and
Commentary on the strengths, opportunities and challenges of Queen’s University in the
public policy space and suggestions about the roles that Queen’s might play, across the
institution as a whole and through the School of Policy Studies.
4. Policy Studies and Public Administration
Public Policy is thought of as actions taken by the executive branch of government, through
which the state seeks to address public interest issues and introduce solutions for the greater
good of society. Those solutions may be legislative, regulatory, programmatic, or operational
in nature (or a combination thereof).
In day-to-day practice, two other terms (policy studies and public administration) are used to
describe academic preparation for the practice of public policy-making (policy studies) and
the operational and management issues associated with implementing public policy (public
administration). Over time, public policy schools, practitioners and their workplace colleagues
tend to use these terms interchangeably, as they capture the full spectrum of inter-related
issues associated with designing and delivering public policy measures. For example, policy
decisions need to take into account how results will be achieved and resources utilized and
implementation strategies need to be clearly aligned with policy intent. Equally, individual’s
careers often shift between these various dimensions of public policy and public
management. For example, someone who starts out working in policy analysis often finds that
their ‘analysing/advising’ responsibilities broaden to include more ‘doing/managing’.
Page 4
______________________________________________________________________________
Similarly, some who begin working in technical or operational capacities may find that their
responsibilities broaden to include more advisory and strategy functions.
Interchangeable use of the terms public policy and public administration in degree programs
and schools in Canada is simply a reflection of this phenomenon, sometimes, but not always,
suggesting varying degrees of emphasis. Perhaps not surprisingly, stakeholders participating
in consultations also used these terms interchangeably and identified the need for both types
of expertise in the public policy realm. As is noted in a latter section of this report, the fluidity
of terminology --- and the skill sets they call for --- poses challenges for policy studies schools
and institutions as they adapt to the changing public policy landscape. Queen’s is no
exception to the pattern of interchangeable use of these terms given the Commission’s name
(Commission on the Future of Public Policy), the presence of a School of Policy Studies at
Queen’s, and the presence of Masters programs in Public Administration.
5. What the Commission Heard
In this section of the interim report, the Commission is providing a synopsis of the issues,
trends, insights and broad implications associated with the ongoing evolution of public policy
in Canada.
5.1 The Changing Public Policy Landscape in Canada
If there is one overarching observation that was consistently emphasized in the
Commission’s discussions, it is that the public policy landscape has changed markedly --in Canada and around the world. Stakeholders described a public policy world that might
be characterized as waves of ‘fast and furious’ change, often from multiple simultaneous
fronts. The public environment, politics, the practice of governance, and the issues
dominating the public agenda are all changing. Digital technologies shorten news cycles,
offer opportunities to deliver services in new ways, change skill sets, and create a much
larger tent for those wanting to be part of the conversation about public choices. Today,
politics is local and global simultaneously. A singular ‘public interest’ is increasingly
difficult to define in an atmosphere of segmentation and often polarization. Managing
complexity is ever more difficult from the centre, and a thoughtful approach to public
policy may get over-run by the need for issues management in an era where the next
campaign is already under way.
Hierarchies are also becoming flatter; information and ideas can be shared and support
garnered without formal sanctions; anyone can put forward a position and will expect it
to be heard and acknowledged. Further, the combination of Freedom of Information
legislation, expectations of transparency, open data, and dramatic increases in digital
connectivity and the availability of data processing power and tools, makes everyone a
Page 5
______________________________________________________________________________
potential analyst. As a result, modern public policy development, implementation and
evaluation takes place in a complex ecosystem, as a highly visible process with
contributions from intermediaries (associations, not for profits, businesses etc.) In
addition to conducting their own research, developing their own options and models,
intermediaries expect substantive engagement in government processes as well as
transparency and accountability in those processes. In addition, governments more
frequently consult with citizens directly. In short, the public policy arena has become
considerably more complex.
Despite the frenetic pace besetting the policy landscape, stakeholders were able to
describe what they felt were the greatest pressure points and how they expected to see
public service and public policy evolve in the years ahead. They were able to distinguish
between new requirements and those that endure. They described the landscape in the
context of governance structures or processes that are themselves under stress --expected to respond to a rapidly changing world while upholding the principles on which
representative democracy is based.
5.2 The Changing Landscape of Public Policy: Demand-side Perspectives
The Commission consulted with many stakeholders who could provide insight into the
"demand" side of the public policy ecosystem. Individuals participating in these
consultations represent government departments and other organizations (such as the
private sector or not-for-profit organizations) that:



may be seeking candidates for public, private or not-for-profit positions requiring
significant knowledge of public policy-making (e.g. policy analysts);
may see individuals within their own organizations with particular domain expertise
(e.g. health care, science and technology, economics) who need deeper
understanding of public policy processes to be effective in their roles; or
are grappling directly with public policy considerations associated with the most
challenging issues of our time, and are seeking third party counsel to frame the issue
and develop policy options for senior decision-makers’ consideration.
Page 6
______________________________________________________________________________
These individuals described an increasingly challenging public policy arena characterized
by:
 Changing public expectations reflected in demands for greater transparency, faster
governmental responses to emerging issues and crises, more opportunities for input
to and direct participation in public policy processes. These heightened expectations
are changing governmental approaches to public engagement and stakeholder
relations, data and information disclosure, communications and media relations, and
prompting the need for surge capacity within government as well as accelerated
response/turnaround times from the public sector.
 Need for innovation within governments, to help the public sector capitalize on new
tools; conceive and utilize more effective ways of understanding issues, needs, and
public policy impacts; and optimize service delivery. Successful implementation of
innovations will be achieved by an innovative public service, including regular
injections of young recruits and experienced migrants from other sectors such as notfor-profit, institutional and private sectors.
 Open policy development environments built on digital platforms such as social
media, cloud-based collaboration platforms, and crowdsourcing opportunities. These
tools provide many new ways --- beyond traditional consultation processes --- to
enter the public policy arena.
 Increased sensitivity to financial sustainability of programs, services and operations
of public institutions and governments as a whole. In the post-financial crisis era,
characterized by relatively slow global economic growth and tight fiscal frameworks,
the public sector is attuned to value-for-money considerations, especially in light of
sluggish growth in the Canadian economy, and in personal incomes, and given the
financial stress on taxpayers. As a result, public policy pays ever more attention to
cost-effective operations, service delivery, impacts on citizens of varied financial
means, and avoidance of high-cost, structural/locked in solutions.
 Focus on delivery and results. The Commission heard a lot about the importance of
delivery and managing for results. Having a good policy idea is no longer enough.
Policy advisors have to be able to describe how the idea could be implemented, what
results will be achieved, and how the policy/program will be managed to ensure those
results are achieved effectively and efficiently.
 Greater use of partnerships for service delivery: both the Province of Ontario and
Government of Canada make extensive use of partnerships with other organizations
to deliver services to Canadians (e.g. health care, education, infrastructure, workforce
development etc.); as a result, the impact of provincial and federal public policy
decisions go beyond the public service itself and these levels of government. Since
they often do not deal extensively with end-users directly, senior levels of
Page 7
______________________________________________________________________________



government must work through these partnerships to ensure ongoing understanding
of citizens’ perspectives and expectations, as well as ongoing operational costs (often
funded by multiple levels of government). The partnership model therefore makes
the public policy arena even more open and complex.
Importance of trans-boundary issues such as energy, environmental sustainability
and climate change, trade relations and agreements, international finance and tax
policy, immigration, refugees and international conflict. Many public policy issues are
now discussed and negotiated on the international stage as well as at home
(examples: COP21 agreement on climate change, Canada-European Union
Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, international collaboration on
offshore tax evasion). Those working on public policy issues must be able to navigate
both international and domestic landscapes.
The impact of digital technology usage, whether by citizens, private organizations
or government, is reshaping the public policy landscape. These technologies are
changing consumer expectations of organizational responsiveness, access to
information, and consultation/engagement opportunities. These technologies also
offer opportunities (and risks) to deliver services in new ways with different business
models, gather transactional data for program evaluation purposes, and manage
public resources. It is clear that significant new public policy requirements will emerge
in lockstep with the advancement of technology (e.g. autonomous vehicles). New
tools such as big data, analytics, crowdsourcing, and the application of behavioural
sciences are likely to see increasing deployment.
The orientation, tools and language of public policy are changing. As the public
policy arena becomes more complex and even more multi-disciplinary than in the
past, practitioners are challenged to address these policy challenges in new ways.
Public policy practitioners must now incorporate a broader set of considerations into
the policy development process (e.g. societal digitization, internationalization,
expectations for greater openness, transparency and public engagement). There are
new analytical tools available to support analysis, formulation of options, and
implementation (e.g. behavioural insights, big data analytics, design thinking) and
new ways of engaging citizens and stakeholders (e.g. crowdsourcing, hackathons).
The nature of contemporary public policy has introduced new language into
practitioners’ lexicon (e.g. open government, digital democracy, multi-stakeholder
collaboration). To enhance their success as practitioners, academic programs must
expose students to the increased complexity of contemporary public policy; advisors
to organizations in the public policy sphere must have the intellectual dexterity to
incorporate (or utilize directly) the new language and tools of public policy.
Page 8
______________________________________________________________________________
5.3 Implications for Public Policy Functions within Government
In the face of this newly emergent public policy ecosystem, and the factors driving it,
stakeholders noted challenges to traditional structures and methods of operating
(examples: the need for surge capacity and fast-turnaround policy advice). The
accelerated news cycle and speed-to-audience of social media puts additional pressure
on the ability to communicate policy decisions clearly and quickly. However, these
challenges also open up opportunity for non-traditional career development, lateral
movement within the public service, and more movement between the public, private
and not-for profit sectors.
5.4 Implications for Public Policy Learning: Across the consultations, stakeholders articulated
the opportunity for institutions of higher education to reshape their approaches, to
respond to the following trends:
a) The need for workers in all functional areas to have policy analysis and engagement
skills. Whether in designated public policy positions or more operational roles within
or outside of government --- individuals need foundational knowledge on public
policy processes, and new skill sets to navigate not just the more complex public
policy arena, but also the increased complexity of contemporary issues themselves.
At the same time, stakeholders offered encouragement to enhance students’ public
policy skill sets across a wide range of disciplines, including at the undergraduate
level.
b) In particular, stakeholders strongly underscored the value of experiential learning
whether in the form of co-op assignments, practicums, or internships, by taking a
hands-on approach to public policy development, or hearing directly from
practitioners who have worked “on the inside” and undertaken public policy
processes themselves.
c) Stakeholders also emphasized that learning does not end at students’ graduation,
underscoring the need for continuous learning and professional development. While
some capabilities are needed on ’Day One’ (e.g. critical thinking skills; the ability to
distill and interpret large amounts of varied, disparate information; communications
skills, particularly the ability to write well), other more specialized skills may be
acquired along the way (e.g. financial management, human resources management,
information technology, data analytics, and risk management), as individuals advance
along a career path.
Page 9
______________________________________________________________________________
d) The value of enhanced understanding of public policy among intermediaries and other
stakeholders, including those working in municipalities; governmental agencies,
boards, and commissions; business, professional, trade or labour associations; and
not-for-profits. There was a sense that institutions of higher education are no longer
educating public policy/public administration students just for government. Public
policy decisions shape the agendas and work environments of many other
organizations, particularly if intermediaries are delivery agents for provincial or
federal levels of government, or are subject to government regulation. Intermediaries
want to know how to contribute to governmental policy formulation, decisionmaking, and implementation processes. Along with the opportunity to provide
students from multiple disciplines with some expertise in public policy, stakeholders
suggested that institutions of higher education offer more extensive professional
development programming for practitioners already working in the field.
5.5 Implications for External Experts and Policy Advisors: Based on the increasingly complex,
inter-disciplinary and inter-jurisdictional nature of the contemporary public policy arena,
stakeholders noted senior decision makers’ interest in access to external experts, who can:
 Bring forward the latest, relevant research findings from their own work as well as from
others, and interpret the significance of new knowledge and robust research findings for
their jurisdiction.
 Identify cross sectoral, inter-jurisdictional, and inter-disciplinary aspects of particular
public policy issues, to support governmental cross departmental approaches.
 Undertake specific assignments (based on their particular expertise) to help elucidate
public policy options, their evaluation, and provide guidance on implementation
strategies.
 Provide foresight analysis related to trends and potential developments that are currently
on the horizon but have not yet been incorporated into public policy discussions and
decision-making.
 Create venues or fora through which specific public policy issues could be addressed in a
workshop or “hackathon” format, with direct participation by responsible public servants.
Some stakeholders suggested that institutions of higher education consider interinstitutional partnerships or collaborations with private sector firms to ensure that all
necessary expertise is available for these undertakings. It was further suggested that a
mix of academic and practitioner expertise would be invaluable for these assignments.
Page 10
______________________________________________________________________________
Some stakeholders indicated difficulty in navigating university structures and/or the
absence of services to help the senior decision-makers find faculty or adjuncts who might
be able to provide public policy advice. Addressing this matter could be important to any
school or university seeking to improve awareness of expertise in particular areas of
public policy.
5.6 The Changing Landscape of Public Policy: Supply-side Perspectives
The Commission’s consultations included Queen’s students, faculty and alumni from the
Queen’s School of Policy Studies; senior administrators from Queen’s University; graduates
and faculty from other public policy schools; representatives of educational and other
associations; and individuals from management consulting firms that provide consulting and
advisory services. These individuals offered the following insights on the “supply side” of the
public policy ecosystem:
 The public policy education and advisory landscape is now more crowded. There are
now at least 29 schools of public policy in Canada, and many more in US and
internationally. Moreover, the public policy field is increasingly global in nature. More and
more issues have global dimensions and many students are looking to attend a top
international school. As a result, Queen’s, like other Canadian institutions, is facing
increased competition. This competition is emerging in the form of competition for
students to attend the schools, emergence of a ’buyers market’ for students graduating
from the schools or practitioners pursuing professional development, or a smaller share
of advisory assignments for some or all Canadian schools. When governments or other
organizations are seeking public policy guidance, they also may not always approach a
school of policy studies. Guided by the particular domain expertise required, governments
may choose to approach particular faculties or departments with well-established
expertise, or search out individuals with that expertise, regardless of institutional
affiliation. Business schools, in particular, were cited as finding opportunity in provision
of public policy counsel to governments.
Beyond schools and public policy there are additional contributors to public policy
discussions: think tanks, private consulting firms, polling firms, and other political
advisers.
Differentiation and brand: While stakeholders articulated an ongoing need for
foundational knowledge in policy, a background review of schools of policy studies/public
administration suggests some degree of differentiation among the schools, on top of
foundational knowledge. While the institutional impact of this differentiation is unclear,
observers noted that institutions without a clearly defined --- and communicated--Page 11
______________________________________________________________________________
position in the public policy landscape, could be overlooked by students seeking public
policy education and/or organizations seeking graduates or counsel from faculty
associated with those institutions. In this sense, differentiation can become part of an
institution’s and program’s brand.
A background review of schools of policy studies/public administration suggests that
differentiation can be based on one or more of the following domains:
 Scope (e.g. the focus on government as compared to the full breadth of actors in the
public policy space)
 Jurisdictional Horizon (e.g. local, provincial, national, international)
 Sectoral expertise (e.g., economic policy, politics and governance, healthcare,
education, science and innovation, indigenous affairs, environment, etc.)
 Functional expertise (e.g. regulatory, taxation, privacy and security, program design,
social impact etc.)
 Breadth of engagement on the policy spectrum (e.g. public engagement, research and
analytics, options development, negotiations, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation)
If a differentiation strategy is adopted, it is typically reflected in program design and
curriculum, student recruitment and post-graduation support, faculty recruitment and
retention, approaches to outreach, and provision of advisory/consulting services. It was
observed that to be successful, any differentiation strategy must be credible, ownable,
and relevant to the institution’s target audiences.
Stakeholders were able to name institutions of higher education that are perceived to
have expertise in particular areas of public policy, but just as often noted that
relationships and reputations are as much individually-based as institutionally driven.

Opportunity for program segmentation: Internal and external audiences see
opportunities --- and an appetite --- for internal segmentation across a university’s
offerings and within schools of public policy, in order to meet the different needs for
public policy education and/or professional development. Examples of these
opportunities include:
 Direct entry to Masters level education via undergraduate programs;
 Certificate or diploma programs to meet practitioners’ professional development/
continuous learning needs;
 Public policy modules focused on specific specialist skills (e.g. analytics, public
finance, information technology applications);
 A specialization (group of courses) that could be chosen by undergraduate students
in a range of departments, providing them with some exposure to public policy as
Page 12
______________________________________________________________________________
part of a degree program (e.g. foundations in public policy, stakeholder engagement,
standard public policy documentation and/or briefing notes).

Importance of experiential learning: Stakeholders emphasized the provision of
opportunities for ’hands-on’ experiences, including placements, practicums, co-op
assignments or internships. Experiential learning could also be incorporated directly into
the curriculum and course work. This was an area in which adjuncts were seen to be
making a particularly significant contribution to public policy education.

Opportunity to support ongoing professional development and lifelong learning: Many
of those consulted noted that the pace of change in the public policy sphere has made
continuous learning mandatory, and that institutions of higher education offering public
policy education and/or professional development (even if segmented as described
earlier) will need to adjust those offerings – – – both content and format – – – on a regular
basis. It was suggested that schools of public policy would be well advised to borrow from
business schools in terms of their ability to design, and redesign, their programs and
courses to address changing needs and their marketplace.

Undergraduate student interest in public policy linked to post-graduation prospects:
The Commission met with a cross-section of undergraduate Queen’s student leaders from
multiple disciplines to gain a deeper understanding of their potential interest in and
perceptions of the field of policy studies. These discussions confirmed a widespread
interest in societal impact after graduation (regardless of field of study), tempered by the
need to earn a decent living and address debt loads, both of which drive employment
choices. Over the past several decades, the attractiveness of public (versus private and
not-for-profit) sector employment may have waned; if so, this could influence public
policy schools’ ability to attract students, and governments’ ability to attract top-notch
candidates for their positions. Some of the differentiation and segmentation options
could be helpful in deepening students understanding of work in the public policy sector.
5.7 What Hasn’t Changed?
Despite the dramatic changes that have taken place in the public policy sphere, stakeholders
noted the continuing need for:

Foundational knowledge, including education and professional development on
governance, institutions, public policy processes, and core skills associated with work in
the public policy domain.

Critical thinking, problem-solving and communication skills (e.g. the ability to distill
information to its essence, present it in public policy terms, develop multiple public policy
Page 13
______________________________________________________________________________
options, and make the case for a preferred option, particularly in a dynamic environment.
These problem-solving skills are essential in any public policy environment and are
therefore transferable from one issue, and one job, to the next. That said, there is also
issue-specific knowledge and specialized skill sets that must be acquired or sourced in
each public policy domain.

Communications skills, both written and verbal, and able to be used in both internal and
external settings. The ability to craft useful and succinct briefing notes for senior decisionmakers such as deputy ministers is viewed as an essential skill.

A balance between academic and professional (practitioner-focused) education. Good
public policy needs to be informed by evidence (including but not limited to rigorous
academic research), requiring research skills and the opportunity to evaluate reports,
studies and documentation from home and other jurisdictions. Knowledge of different
governance models and how public policy is promulgated in those systems is also
important. However, it is also vital for practitioners to understand how governments work
on a day-to-day basis, the influences on political decision-making beyond the
conventional public policy development process, and how public policy is implemented
through public sector operations and service delivery mechanisms.

Academic Incentives: The governance structures, budget development, and systems of
rewards and recognition found in institutions of higher education pose significant
challenges for universities seeking to address the expectations of both:
 a traditional academic model (research, teaching/education, discovery and
dissemination of new knowledge), and
 service to broader society (advice, professional development, public education, and
specialized assignments undertaken on behalf of other non-academic organizations).
In its consultations, the Commission heard on numerous occasions that virtually all of the
signals of success in the academy--- from appointments and tenure, to compensation
adjustments and research support --- are either individually or departmentally-focused,
and are based on excellence in teaching, research, publications in peer-reviewed journals,
patents, and to a limited degree, community service. Work that is more collaborative in
nature or more ‘applied’ (which is quite common in the sphere of public policy) is usually
an awkward fit. At the same time, it was noted that academics are keen to have their
research read and used.
Page 14
______________________________________________________________________________
5.8 What is Missing?
Beyond the articulation of the factors influencing the public policy environment today, and
the general public policy needs of governments and intermediaries, the consultations
generated some needs that senior decision-makers say are currently unmet:




New “technical” skill sets (e.g. expertise in data analytics, behavioural sciences,
technology design and deployment, communications related to public policy for natural
sciences);
Foresight expertise (e.g. ability to see emerging issues as a result of changing public policy
landscape, ability to frame and execute research to probe those issues);
Organizational design skills (e.g. the ability to help public bodies --- particularly
government --- reorganize for more effective recognition of emerging needs and
associated public policy development processes; reshape program and service delivery
systems to align with new policy decisions and expectations; and guide implementation,
while upholding accountability requirements associated with governance in a liberal
democracy.
Implementation skills (e.g. ability to move from public policy decisions through to
implementation. This involves a solid understanding of and ability to work closely with
service delivery arms of government or external partners, as well as project management
skills, human resource management, and internal and external communications).
5.9 Different formats for interaction with policymakers: Stakeholders also expressed interest in
developing different ways of interacting with the academy including issue-specific workshops
and/or “hackathons”, events with significant networking components, and fast-turnaround
RFP-type projects. There is an expectation of bringing a wider range of knowledge and
expertise to public policy discussions, and an expectation of more group interaction in
addition to one-on-one advisory sessions and reports/recommendations. Embedded in the
call for a wider range of knowledge and expertise is an expectation that the academy’s
contributions will draw on a robust --- often inter-disciplinary --- research agenda and an
ability to articulate the significance of findings for public policy discussions.
5.10 Does geography matter? For some stakeholders, institutions of higher education that are
in, or are very close to capital cities, such as Ottawa or Toronto, may have an advantage in
playing a stronger role in advising governments and building stronger relationships that will
benefit students and graduates. (This is similar to the argument made on the advantages to
start-ups if they are geographically close to venture capital firms.) However, others believe
that this ‘proximity advantage can be mitigated or countered by use of technology-enhanced
outreach to ensure that decision-makers know what an institution has to offer on the public
policy front, as well as differentiation, specialization, and segmentation strategies.
Page 15
______________________________________________________________________________
5.11 Implications for Universities and Public Policy Schools:
In the course of the Commission’s consultations it became clear that any organization seeking
to contribute to addressing the country’s public policy needs --- whether through graduates
working in the public service directly or in an organization seeking to contribute to these
processes, through research, consulting or advisory roles --- must be prepared for the
following hallmarks of contemporary public policy work:
 Presence - remaining engaged on the most challenging issues confronting the public
sector today; spending time with and developing a deep-seated understanding of the
nuance of these issues.
 Excellence - setting and maintaining the performance bar at a high-level; reviewing and
recalibrating contributions to public policy as that landscape changes, and issues come
and go.
 Innovation - continually looking for new ways to address public policy issues, especially
through contemporary means such as digital transformation, new business models, and
the application of new tools and analytical lenses (e.g. data analytics, developments in
behavioural sciences).
 Sustainability – Being able to sustain an ongoing presence and track record in the public
policy realm.
 Practicality - being able to translate research insights, observations, and creative ideas
into implementable solutions for the ‘real world’. The boundaries of public policy no
longer stop at options definition and recommendations.
 Relevance - activity (from curriculum, teaching modalities, program design, and research,
to advisory services, public education, and engagement in public policy communities of
practice) must be focused on real-world issues and on the agendas of governments, nongovernmental organizations, citizens, and others with a stake in these issues.
 Strategic - institutions and schools need to be intentional and strategic in their
engagement in the public policy arena. Success in this field is not typically achieved or
maintained through serendipity, uncoordinated efforts, or intermittent support. Further,
the strategic choice to engage on the public policy front should ripple through all aspects
of the academy’s endeavour --- from teaching and research, to knowledge generation and
stimulation of public discourse on the issues of our time.
Page 16
______________________________________________________________________________
In addition to the demands of a dynamic and complex public policy ecosystem, there are
also some long-standing questions related to the academy’s ability to fulfill its role in
society in a comprehensive way:
 Where are the boundaries of preparatory responsibility for universities and
employers taking on graduates? What is the foundational knowledge base and suite
of skills that a graduate must have upon leaving University and how does the
employer add to that base through on-the-job training, developmental assignments
in the workplace, and professional development?
 What is the nature of the relationship between universities and government (or
other stakeholders making public policy decisions?) How do they work together? As
partners or collaborators? In a client-supplier relationship? As coaches or informal
advisors? As co-principal investigators?
 Are there generally agreed-upon boundaries distinguishing public policy from other
aspects of public management or administration such as human resource
management and development, financial management, data analysis, IT services,
communications and public engagement, performance tracking, evaluation?
The Commission’s consultations generated widely varying perspectives on these
questions, and senior decision-makers touched upon virtually every aspect of the
preceding questions as they articulated their most pressing needs. In large measure, the
consultations and validated the Principal’s description of Canada’s public policy landscape
as “evolving”.
Page 17
______________________________________________________________________________
6. Public Policy at Queens University
6.1 Queen’s School of Policy Studies Today
Created in 1987, the Queen’s School of Policy Studies offers two masters programs (Master
of Public Administration and Professional Master of
Mission:
Public Administration) as well as an MPA Juris Doctor
Through high quality interactive
program in conjunction with the Faculty of Law.
teaching and integrated
The MPA is a one-year, three-term multidisciplinary
learning, we enhance leadership
program for full-time students seeking preparation for
in public policy by providing
entry level roles in public service and policy-making. students the inspiration, skills,
The one-year aspect of the program is offered by few
competencies and connections
other schools. The PMPA is a part-time (designed to be
to become better contributors to
completed in 28 months), multidisciplinary program
the public good.
designed for policy professionals with a minimum of
five years of experience in the public sector or other public or non-profit sectors.
While the Commission has been undertaking its consultation work, the School has been
pursuing curriculum redesign to reflect the Province of Ontario’s emphasis on specific core
skills (applicable to all educational institutions) and to increase the depth of experiential
learning.
Building on the University’s strong tradition of service to the nation, Queen’s School of Policy
Studies continues to contribute to public policy through knowledge creation; dissemination
of research and support for learning; and convening thought leaders on important public
policy issues, thereby making important contributions to the public good within Canada and
internationally. The School has five core faculty and 23 associate and adjunct faculty. (See
Appendix C for a more detailed description of the School’s pursuits.)
Page 18
______________________________________________________________________________
6.2 Public Policy Across the Campus
Beyond the School of Public Policy, Queen’s University has a legacy of contribution to national
and provincial affairs, particularly on issues such as federalism, intergovernmental relations,
and constitutional matters; economic and social policy, education and healthcare policy; and
natural resource policy. These contributions have emanated from all levels and faculties, from
the Principal’s Office to student leaders. The forms of contribution include but go beyond
individual scholarship, encompassing participation in interdisciplinary teams and active policy
research networks, as well as convening and/or conferences and workshops, often with direct
participation by senior public policymakers.
During the course of the Commission’s consultations, it has become clear that public policy
remains an area of keen campus-wide interest. It is also clear that in addition to the School of
Policy Studies, Queen’s University has multiple strengths and assets --- and interested faculty
--- that could contribute to a revitalization of the University’s role and recognition in the field
of public policy. The Commission observed that there is a much wider range of scholars and
activities across the University contributing to public policy issues than had been identified
heretofore --- and in areas that may not have been considered as areas of emphasis for
Queen’s in past.
The Commission also observed that whether known to potential students, faculty or senior
public policy decision-makers through institutional reputation or the work of individual
members of faculty, the University’s full public policy potential is not well-known --- on or off
campus. As a result, it is almost certainly under-leveraged and not well-connected, to the
possible detriment of the individuals involved, the University as a whole, and the nation
Queen’s seeks to serve.
Both on and off campus, there is a sense that for a forward-looking campus-wide vision for
public policy to be successful at Queen’s, a central coordinating core/hub is needed.
Stakeholders are not confident that an amorphous network approach would work;
stimulation of participation and curation of connections are needed.
6.3 Internal Audiences Seek Opportunity for Impact
Faculty and adjuncts across the University and within the School of Policy Studies have a good
understanding of the “seismic shift” that has taken place in the public policy landscape in
recent years. They understand the new --- often multi-disciplinary --- issues that governments
and other public sector organizations must address, and believe that universities in general,
and Queen’s University in particular, can and should contribute to the solutions. They
identified academic disciplines with significant public policy implications and potential,
because of their relationship to contemporary policy challenges (e.g. environment,
Page 19
______________________________________________________________________________
healthcare/medicine, natural sciences and natural resources, First Nations inclusion, income
disparity, innovation, as well as issues related to organizational or departmental ownership
of public policy issues).
The Queen’s community also expressed the belief that Queen’s is capable of making best-inclass contributions to public policy in Canada if the University develops a clear, pan-University
strategy, provides a strong central hub to anchor and catalyze the Queen’s eco-system, and
assembles a strong business case that would justify and attract financial support.
7. Next Steps for the Commission
Following the completion of its consultations, the Commission will move on to analysing the
implications of all that it has heard for the future of public policy at Queen’s University. This
will almost certainly involve discussions concerning, and recommendations about: the overall
role to which Queen’s aspires in the public policy sphere within Canada and abroad; the
aspects of public policy that Queen’s could make a cornerstone of its institutional strategy in
the years ahead; and the focus and extent of Queen’s academic programs, whether contained
within a School of Policy Studies or reaching into other schools, departments or faculties.
The Commission has identified the following questions as central to its deliberations through
the summer and fall of 2017.
1. Given the rapidly changing public policy landscape described in this Interim Report, what
are the top five to seven major questions the Commission should address in advising the
Principal on modernizing the University’s approach to contributing to public policy?
2. How can Queen’s University most effectively contribute to major public policy issues?
a) If Queen’s University aspires to a continuing strong presence in the public policy field
in Canada, what role could each of the following play in establishing and maintaining
that presence: research, student learning, professional development, advisory
services to public policy decision-makers, and participation in public education/
outreach?
b) In what areas does Queen’s University have particular institutional strength and
comparative advantage (e.g. research, teaching/learning, engagement and service)
that can be leveraged for public policy impact?
c) How could Queen’s University best capitalize on its assets (people, physical,
intellectual property, financial, relationships) within the School of Policy Studies,
across the entire University, and beyond campus?
Page 20
______________________________________________________________________________
3. How could the University’s public policy goals be integrated into the University’s strategic
plans with respect to research prominence, student learning, internationalization, faculty
renewal, and branding?
a) How important is a prominent public policy role to Queen’s University’s reputation
and its ability to attract top-notch students and faculty?
4. How might Queen’s University modernize its educational offerings to respond to new
demands and a rapidly changing public policy environment?
5. How could Queen’s University further stimulate and support multi-disciplinary and crosssectoral research and dialogue that is central to addressing public policy challenges?
6. How could Queen’s University develop new sources of funding to support an enhanced
role in the public policy realm?
It is anticipated that this work will be completed, and a final report submitted to the Principal,
in the fall of 2017.
Page 21
______________________________________________________________________________
8. Appendix A
Backgrounder – Principal’s Commission on the Future of Public Policy at Queen’s University
The Commission
In September 2016, Queen’s University Principal Daniel Woolf announced the formation of a
Principal’s Commission on the Future of Public Policy at Queen’s University. He charged the
Commission with a mandate to “conduct a broad review to determine how Queen’s can
modernize its approach to public policy to reflect changes in public policy-making and public
service as well as new learning requirements for policy leaders.” The Commission was asked to
make recommendations to the Principal focusing on “providing Queens with a forward vision for
revitalizing its presence in the public policy arena.”
In making his announcement, Principal Woolf noted that “while Queen’s is still highly regarded in
the field of public policy, we face an evolving landscape.” The Principal said that Queen’s “aims to
be an important contributor to public policy” in Canada, linking this contribution to enhanced
research prominence, improved learning environments, and extension of the University’s reach
and reputation.
Over the past 50 years, Queen’s University built deep connections with government, with
numerous principals, professors and fellows advising Canadian policymakers. Research conducted
at the University has informed public policy at all levels of government, while graduates of
programs offered by the School of Policy Studies and other faculties across the University have
progressed to leadership positions in the public service as well as the private and not-for-profit
sectors.
Establishment of the Commission followed Principal Woolf’s appointment of Dr. David Walker (in
June of 2016) as interim executive director of the School of Policy Studies and associate Dean. In
this role, as well as servicing as an advisor to the Commission, Dr. Walker is playing an important
role in determining how the University’s contribution to public policy can be reinvigorated both
within the School of Policy Studies and in concert with other academic units at Queen’s. Dr.
Walker has noted that “there exists within the School and across the University very significant
expertise in a wide range of policy areas that are of great importance to society.”
The Commission is chaired by Michael Horgan, MA’79, at Queen’s alumnus and former deputy
Minister of Finance Canada with more than 30 years of public service experience. He is joined on
the commission by Margaret Biggs (Vice-Chair), Kevin Costante, Artsci’78 and MPA’79, Jeannie
Dempster, Artsci’93 and MPA’01, Bridget O’Grady, Artsci’03 and MPA’05, Peter Wallace, Bob
Page 22
______________________________________________________________________________
Watts, and Cam Yung, Artsci’16. Additional information on Commission members’ backgrounds
can be found in the appendix to this report.
The Commission began its work in the fall of 2016 – continuing through to the spring of 2017 –
with research and consultations with leaders in public affairs in Canada, both inside and outside
of government, alumni, Queen’s faculty, adjuncts and staff, and current students. It will deliver a
final report to the Principal in the fall of 2017.
Chair
Michael Horgan is a senior advisor with the law firm Bennett Jones LLP, where he advises clients
on a range of economic, financial sector, energy, and environment issues. Before joining Bennett
Jones, Mr. Horgan enjoyed a 36-year career in the public service of Canada, where he served as
deputy minister of four departments, including the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Indian
and Northern Affairs, and Environment Canada. He retired from the public service in April 2014
after five years as deputy minister of finance.
As deputy minister of finance, Mr. Horgan led the department responsible for federal fiscal and
tax policy, the legislation and regulation of the financial sector, tariff policy, international
economic and financial relations, and major transfers to Canada’s provinces. He provided strategic
advice to the government on a wide range of economic and financial issues, and he led the
preparation of six federal budgets.
Much of Mr. Horgan’s career has been spent on energy and environment issues for successive
governments. Over the years, he has had extensive dealings with the oil and gas sector, and he
was the federal government’s chief negotiator for the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline. As deputy
minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, Mr. Horgan helped negotiate the Kelowna Accord and
worked on such issues as First Nations education, residential school reconciliation, treaty rights
and land claims, and Aboriginal economic development.
Mr. Horgan has also held the positions of G7/G20 finance deputy for Canada and executive
director for Canada, Ireland and the Caribbean on the board of the International Monetary Fund.
He has served on a number of Crown corporation boards, including those of the Bank of Canada,
the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation,
Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation, and Export Development Canada.
In addition to his position with Bennett Jones, Mr. Horgan sits on the boards of a number of notfor-profit organizations, including the Canadian Ditchley Foundation, the Centre for Studies in
Living Standards, the Gairdner Foundation, the International Institute for Environment and
Development, the Ontario Brain Institute, and the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics. He
Page 23
______________________________________________________________________________
is a recipient of the Prime Minister’s Outstanding Achievement Award and the Queen’s Diamond
Jubilee Medal.
Commissioners
Margaret Biggs (Vice-Chair)
Margaret Biggs is currently chairperson of the Board of Governors for the International
Development Research Centre (IDRC) and Matthews Fellow in Global Public Policy at Queen’s
University. Ms. Biggs served as the president of the Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA) from 2008-2013 and was responsible for overseeing Canada's international development
and humanitarian assistance efforts worldwide. Previously, Ms. Biggs served as deputy secretary
to the cabinet, and assistant secretary, priorities and planning, in the Privy Council Office
(Government of Canada).
Ms. Biggs has represented Canada in numerous international fora and served as Canada’s
alternate governor to the World Bank, international executive co-chair of the China Council on
International Cooperation on Environment and Development. Ms. Biggs is chair of the
International Advisory Committee of United Nation University’s Institute on Water, Environment
and Health, and on the board of World University Services Canada.
Ms. Biggs is a graduate of the University of British Columbia and the Norman Patterson School of
International Affairs at Carleton University.
Kevin Costante, Artsci’78, MPA’79
Having retired after 35 years with the Ontario and Saskatchewan public services, Kevin Costante
joined Queen’s School of Policy Studies in November 2014, as an adjunct professor. Prior to joining
the School of Policy Studies, Mr. Costante had served for two years as deputy minister of
government services, associate secretary of the cabinet, secretary of management board, and
chair of the Public Service Commission in the Ontario Public Service. From 2009 to 2012, Mr.
Costante was Ontario’s deputy minister of education.
First appointed a deputy minister in 1999, Mr. Costante also served in that role in the Ministry of
Northern Development and Mines, Cabinet Office (Policy), the Ministry of Community and Social
Services, and the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities. Prior to joining the Ontario Public
Service in 1988, he worked nine years in the Saskatchewan Public Service in the Department of
Education, the Department of Advanced Education, and the Department of Finance (Treasury
Board).
Mr. Costante attended Queen’s University and has a BA (Honours) degree and a Master of Public
Administration degree (1979). Mr. Costante is currently chair of the Government of Ontario
Page 24
______________________________________________________________________________
Corporate Audit Committee and is a member of the Board of Directors of the Ontario Public
Service Pension Plan. He lives in Toronto and is also on the board of directors of several not-forprofit organizations.
Jeannie Dempster, Artsci’93, MPA’01
Ms. Dempster possesses more than 20 years of federal government experience, including advisory
positions in all three primary central agencies and in ministers’ offices. In her role as a director at
the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, amongst other achievements, she led the policy
team responsible for the creation of the Investment in Affordable Housing, a multilateral, multiyear policy and funding agreement between federal and provincial/territorial governments. More
recently at the Public Policy Forum, she has led several projects spanning public policy issues as
varied as cybersecurity, cross-sector career mobility, and social innovation. Her focus on projects
promoting good governance practices have included, for example, health-care governance and
Crown corporation governance.
Ms. Dempster has both a BA (Honours) degree and a Master of Public Administration degree from
Queen’s University. Her wide-ranging experiences to date have included significant work in policy
development and analysis, as well as honing skills in leadership, strategic planning, and project
management. Ms. Dempster is currently on an interchange assignment with the federal
government, as executive director of the Canadian Science Review Secretariat.
Bridget O’Grady, Artsci’03, MPA’05
Since graduating from Queen’s School of Policy Studies with a Master of Public Administration
degree in 2005, Bridget O’Grady has enjoyed a rewarding public sector career spanning the
federal, territorial, and international spheres. Ms. O’Grady currently works as a manager within
the Office of the Comptroller General at the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat in Ottawa. Prior
to that, she held a number of positions over a decade-long career at the Office of the Auditor
General of Canada, where she was responsible for conducting and managing performance audits
across a variety of sectors, ranging from national security to health care to Canada’s North. During
that time, Ms. O’Grady spent two years living and working in Whitehorse, Yukon, where she
contributed to advancing a culture of accountability in her role as a manager in the internal audit
function. She also served as Canada’s representative at the Australian National Audit Office,
where she worked to share best practices and support collaboration between those jurisdictions.
Ms. O’Grady is strongly committed to lifelong learning, as evidenced most recently by her
participation in the Comptrollership Leadership Development Program (Government of Canada,
2016); other in-house development programs spanning her career to date; as well as the
Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research at the University of Michigan (2008).
Page 25
______________________________________________________________________________
A current member of Queen’s University Council, R.S. McLaughlin Fellowship recipient (2003),
Gold Medal recipient (Bachelor of Arts Honours, History, 2003), and Chernoff Family Award
recipient (1999-2003), Ms. O’Grady is a proud alumnus whose ties and sense of service to Queen’s
University runs deep. She credits her career progression and professional success in large part to
her Queen’s University education, and is aiming to bring her personal and professional
perspectives to bear on the work of the commission, in order to ensure the continued success of
the School of Policy Studies at Queen’s University and its place as a training ground for leaders of
today and tomorrow.
Peter Wallace
Peter Wallace is currently the city manager for the City of Toronto, Canada’s largest city and the
sixth largest government in the country. As the city manager, Mr. Wallace has overall
responsibility for more than 53,000 staff, an operating budget of about $12 billion, and a 2015-24
capital plan of $32 billion.
Mr. Wallace’s career in the public service spans over more than 30 years. He became secretary of
the cabinet, head of the Ontario Public Service, and clerk of the executive council on December
17, 2011. Before his appointment as secretary of the cabinet, Mr. Wallace was deputy minister of
finance for three years. He also served as deputy minister of energy. Earlier, he was deputy
minister and associate secretary of the cabinet with responsibility for policy in cabinet office.
Mr. Wallace began his public service career in 1981 after completing a BA (Honours) in Political
Economy and a Master of Public Administration from the University of Toronto.
Bob Watts
Bob Watts has been involved in many major Indigenous issues in Canada over the past 20 years
and led the process, with support from across Canada and internationally, to establish Canada’s
Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which examined and made recommendations regarding
the Indian Residential School era and its legacy. He was interim executive director of the
commission and was a member of the team that negotiated the historic Indian Residential Schools
Settlement Agreement.
His current activities include working with Mediate BC to recommend ways for Aboriginal
communities to respond to changes to the Canadian Human Rights Act and working on the Siting
Process with the Nuclear Waste Management Organization. He is an adjunct professor and fellow
in Queen’s School of Policy Studies and a frequent speaker on Aboriginal issues.
Mr. Watts is also a former CEO of the Assembly of First Nations, served as the chief of staff to the
Assembly of First Nations’ National Chief Phil Fontaine, and is a former assistant deputy minister
for the Government of Canada. He is a graduate of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at
Page 26
______________________________________________________________________________
Harvard University and fellow at the Harvard Law School. Mr. Watts is from Mohawk and Ojibway
ancestry and is a member of the Six Nations Reserve.
Cam Yung, Artsci’16
Cam Yung is currently the Rector at Queen’s University. Mr. Yung was born and raised in Calgary,
Alberta. He is currently completing his studies in biology. Before being elected rector, Mr. Yung
focused his efforts in Queen’s residences, serving as a floor representative, a Residence
Facilitator, the Vice-President of Judicial Affairs for the Residence Society, and as a Residence Don.
This year, Mr. Yung is also volunteering his time for the Alma Mater Society's FoodBank as the
Sustainability Coordinator.
Ex-officio members
Michael Fraser
Michael Fraser, Vice-Principal (University Relations), joined Queen’s in May 2013 after more than
20 years of experience in the public affairs and communications field, including a variety of
positions in both the federal and provincial governments. He has served as a chief of staff and
senior communications advisor to federal cabinet ministers, members of parliament, and a
provincial premier, and has a wealth of experience in developing and executing strategic
communications and issues management, stakeholder engagement, and policy development. His
portfolios have spanned government, public and media relations, and internal and external
communications.
As VP (University Relations), Mr. Fraser oversees the Communications, Marketing and
Government and Institutional Relations departments at Queen’s. This portfolio works to enhance
the overall reputation of the university and supports its vision and academic mission in a variety
of ways. It tells Queen’s stories through the Queen’s Alumni Review and the Queen’s Gazette,
serves as a resource for members of the media, and strives to build Queen’s profile both nationally
and internationally. The portfolio is also tasked with developing Queen’s name and reputation
through the stewardship of relations with governments at all three levels, higher learning
institutions, which includes a special emphasis on improving relations with the Kingston
community.
Mr. Fraser holds a degree in Economics from Glendon College and a Master of Business
Administration degree from the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto,
where he was also a junior fellow of Massey College.
Page 27
______________________________________________________________________________
David M C Walker, Meds’71, MD, FRCPC
David Walker is currently Stauffer-Dunning Chair and Executive Director of the Queen’s School of
Policy Studies. He is professor in the departments of Emergency Medicine and Family Medicine in
the School of Medicine and professor in Queen’s School of Policy Studies.
A native of Great Britain, Dr. Walker attended Harrow School then immigrated to Canada in 1965.
He graduated MD from Queen's University in Kingston in 1971, was certified in internal medicine
and was awarded fellowship in the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons in 1975.
A career in academic emergency medicine at Queen’s, Kingston General and Hotel Dieu Hospitals
led to roles as associate, vice-dean, and, from 1999-2010, dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences,
and CEO of the Southeast Academic Medical Organization (SEAMO).
Dr. Walker has been president of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, president of
the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, and chair of the Council of Ontario Faculties of
Medicine. He has served government (by order in council) as chair of the Expert Panel on SARS
and Infectious Disease Control, as inaugural board chair of the Ontario Agency for Health
Promotion and Protection, and as advisor to ministers of health in Ontario on policy areas
concerning public health and aging.
At Queen’s Dr. Walker chaired the Principal’s Commission on Mental Health and the coordination
and planning for the university’s 175th anniversary.
Page 28
______________________________________________________________________________
Appendix B
List of Documents Reviewed by the Commission
In addition to materials submitted by presenters and those providing input online, the commission
considered materials from:














Washington Post – The traditional think tank is withering. In its place? Bankers and
consultants.
In Due Course – L’affaire Potter
National Post – Big Data and analytics taking off at Brock’s Goodman School of Business
The Guardian – How statistics lost their power and why we should fear what comes next
Canada’s Public Policy Forum – Time for a Reboot: Nine Ways to Restore Trust in Canada’s
Public Institutions
Queen’s Gazette – Towards an Institute for Policy Studies at Queen’s University
Smart Management – How Academia is Failing Government
Policy Options – Linking academic research with the public and policy-makers
Education Advisory Board – University Policy Institutes; Developing, Implementing, and
Measuring the Impact of University Policy Institutes at UK Institutions
Education Advisory Board – Structure, Operations, and Programming of Public Policy
Institutes
Mowat Centre - Creating a High-Performing Canadian Civil Service Against a Backdrop of
Disruptive Change
Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario – Public Policy on Public Policy Schools
Inside Higher ED – Two public universities put new emphasis on public affairs schools
University of Toronto – Task Force on Public Policy Studies
Page 29
______________________________________________________________________________
Appendix C
Description of the Queen’s School of Policy Studies Today
Queen’s University established the School of Policy Studies in 1987 to provide a focus for the
university’s traditional strength in public policy. In 1994, the former School of Public
Administration merged with the School of Policy Studies and now offers two master’s programs
(Master of Public Administration and Professional Master of Public Administration) as well as an
MPA Juris Doctor program in conjunction with the Faculty of Law.
Academic Programs:
The Queen’s Master of Public Administration (MPA) is a one-year, three term, multidisciplinary
program for full-time students seeking preparation for entry level roles in public service and
policy-making. The curriculum includes core courses in economics, policy analysis, governance,
management and quantitative methods. The program is structured to provide opportunities for
students to apply their skills to analysis and resolution of real-world policy and management
problems. They also participate in experiential learning through study tours that help them
understand the collaborations required across public, private and voluntary sectors, for effective
policy interventions. The one-year aspect of the program is offered by few other schools. The
Queen’s program is noted for its international study opportunities with Fudan University in
Shanghai and the University of Ghana (Accra).
The Professional Master Public Administration (PMPA) is a part-time (designed to be completed
in 28 months), multidisciplinary program designed for policy analysts and managers with a
minimum of five years of experience in the public sector or other public or non-profit sectors.
Newly revised in 2016, the curriculum includes courses in leadership, governance, economics,
research methods, policy analysis, management and quantitative methods. In a final “capstone”
group project, students apply leadership skills to analysis, development and implementation of a
policy response to real-world problems, in concert with policy leaders.
Both programs emphasize the acquisition of foundational public policy skill sets, as well as an
appreciation for the social, economic, and political context within which public organizations
operate. SPS classes are typically quite diverse with 20 or more academic fields and varied career
goals represented. Recent data suggests that 75% of MPA graduates find employment in their
fields and quickly, most within four months of completion. PMPA graduates earn advancement in
their careers often during their studies or upon graduation.
Page 30
______________________________________________________________________________
While the Commission has been undertaking its consultation work, the School has been pursuing
curriculum redesign to reflect the Province of Ontario’s emphasis on specific core skills (applicable
to all educational institutions) and to increase the depth of experiential learning.
Contributions to Public Policy Beyond Teaching: Building on a strong tradition of service to the
nation, Queen’s School of Policy Studies continues to contribute to public policy through
knowledge creation; dissemination of research and support for learning; and convening thought
leaders on important public policy issues, thereby making important contributions to the public
good within Canada and internationally.
The School has five core faculty and 23 associate and adjunct faculty. The School benefits from
the input and advice of Distinguished Fellows who have had outstanding careers in the field of
public policy and public management.
The School also benefits from the contributions of many cognate disciplines across campus. As is
described in the following section, many other faculties and departments have expertise, and are
engaged in, public policy discussions as an integral part of research and advisory roles related to
their disciplines.
Research Interests and Knowledge Creation: The research interests of current faculty align with
many of the issues of central concern to the contemporary public policy realm:
 Aboriginal Affairs: Aboriginal governance, comparative Canada-U.S. Aboriginal governance and
policies.
 Economics and trade: Canadian foreign and defence policy, Canadian-American relations,
Australian foreign and defence policy, World Trade Organization, trade policy, Canada and
international macro-economic institutions and policies, experimental economics and empirical
microeconomics.
 Education: economics of education, education policy.
 Energy and environment: renewable energy (bioenergy and energy from forests), policy and
technology related to environment and energy, environmental policy, ocean and coastal
management.
 Healthcare: health economics, mental health and addictions, social determinants of health,
facilitated by the recent creation of a Health Policy Council.
 Northern Development: northern development, Arctic ocean, Arctic and northern policy.
 Public sector governance: public policy in Canada and other western nations, intergovernmental relations, state-voluntary-private sector relations in Canada.
Page 31
______________________________________________________________________________

Social Policy: social policy and fiscal federalism, poverty reduction, income inequality,
immigration and refugee policy.
Institutes: The School is home to three policy-specific centres and institutes, that serve as hubs
for academic attention to specific areas of public policy – including research, teaching/learning
and advisory roles:



Institute for Intergovernmental Relations (IIGR)
Centre for International and Defence Policy (CIDP)
Queen’s Institute for Energy and Environmental Policy (QIEEP)
Dissemination of Research and Support for Learning: The School publishes the Queen’s Policy
Studies Series, in association with McGill-Queen’s University Press, which ensures that important
works related to public policy are disseminated across campus and beyond. It is the only unit of
its type at Queen’s and is unique amongst Canadian policy schools.

Convening Thought Leaders: Over the past decade, the School has offered a wide range of
events bringing thought leaders together and connecting current students to the latest
thinking on major issues of our time:
 Lectures including:










The Policy Speakers Series
The Donald Gow Memorial Lecture
The Matthews Lecture
The J. Douglas Gibson Lecture
The Plunket Lecture
The Tom Courchene Distinguished Speaker Series (offered weekly throughout the
academic cycle)
W. Edmund Clark Distinguished Lecture Series in Public Policy
Duncan G. Sinclair Lectureship.
Professional Development/Policy Conferences including:
 Queen’s International Institute on Social Policy (QIISP)
 Queen’s Trade Policy Institute
 Kingston conference on International Security (KSIS)
 State of the Federation Conference
 Workshops such as the Defence and Security Economics Workshop.
 Ad hoc Events to honour former faculty members, mark anniversaries and special events,
or address specific topics (e.g. health economics or the U.S. election).
Page 32