An interesting thing hap-pened on Parliament Hill just a few hours after Finance Minister Jim Flaherty delivered his ill-fated economic update to the nation in late November 2008.

Even before the remarkable parliamentary crisis of confidence that arose from that update, the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper was having trouble getting people to work as ministerial aides. So, the Prime Minister’s Office booked a large reception room in the West Block on the evening of the update to hold an invitation-only job fair to recruit people to work for ministers.

Known as “exempt staff’’ because they are not part of the civil service and have very disposable status, ministerial aides are an unseen but vitally important part of any government. The pay is not great, the hours are terrible and there is no job security.

But being chief of staff or policy adviser to a cabinet minister looks great on your resumé and normally there is an abundance of people, usually young party loyalists, eager to be at the centre of power for at least a brief part of their careers.

Certainly, no past government has had the trouble this one is having in finding enough loyalists and ambitious young zealots to fill the offices of its ministers. In some cases, this government has rehired people it fired just a few months ago. Two months after the Oct. 14 election, many ministers did not have senior aides, such as communications directors.

The Tories may have come out of the coalition crisis with high support in public opinion polls. But to knowing eyes around Parliament Hill, the continuing staffing problems are just one more crack in its hold on power.

A major reason for the labour shortage is the very first bill the Harper government passed after taking office in 2006. The Federal Accountability Act bans most ministerial staffers — but not MPs — from working in the government relations field for five years after leaving office.

There is a well known case of a lobbyist who was recruited in 2007 by a then-rising minister from a major trade association, only to be abruptly fired and left unemployable in his field. After months of unemployment, this person went to work for another Conservative minister after the election.

So, watch for this government to find an excuse to wiggle out of yet another of its own policy initiatives, just as it has with an elected Senate or fixed election terms.

The government also has a well-deserved reputation for firing people and running a repressive work place. It should be noted this government has plenty of good, stable ministers — Jim Prentice, Stockwell Day, Lawrence Cannon and Chuck Strahl to name just a few. The problem is that all decision-making, from the mundane to materially important, is done in the PMO.

Staffers get memos telling them how to dress in their off hours. They are also hauled in for “loyalty” interviews. Ministers themselves are reprimanded, over the phone, by line staffers in the PMO.

Compared to the coalition crisis or the economy, the government’s human resources problems may seem like “inside baseball” to most Canadians. This government has shown itself to be particularly good at turning public issues to its advantage. But you have to ask: how sustainable is an administration that is long on messaging but short on day-to-day governing?

During the listeriosis crisis of this past summer and fall, the government announced there would be an investigation. However, terms of reference or even when such an investigation will be held seem to have fallen through cracks in the system.

Considering this was a widespread public health crisis in which more than 20, mostly vulnerable, people died, some might think the government is insensitive. The real reason is probably that, with a weakened infrastructure, this government takes an inordinately long time to get things done that require detailed planning.

Indeed, this government has seemed to be too busy campaigning and bashing the Opposition to care much about policy or governance. How else do you explain an economic statement that didn’t really deal much with the actual economy?

Perhaps this is because there has not been an effective Opposition to keep the government on its toes. Another reason might be that the Parliamentary press gallery has been too busy calling a horse race to worry about quality of governance.

@page_break@It is no secret that Harper rules his caucus with fear, which helps to explain why no Conservative has dared to publicly question his leadership, or even management. Up to the 2008 election, there wasn’t much private grumbling, even among Tories. There is now.

Many in the media are starting to speculate that Harper may take his leave before the next election, while his standing in the polls is still high. If he does, he will be remembered as the skilled power broker who united this country’s competing conservative movements into a potent political party but left good policy and governance to someone else. IE