Minister to Appoint Stats Agency Director

Summary#

• This bill makes a simple governance change to New Brunswick’s Statistics Act.

• It shifts who appoints the Director of the New Brunswick Statistics Agency from Cabinet to the Minister in charge. It also includes a small wording update in the French text and keeps the current Director in place.

• Key changes:

  • The Minister, not Cabinet, will designate the Agency’s Director.
  • The current Director stays on and is treated as having been appointed by the Minister.
  • A minor French-language wording fix that does not change the meaning.
  • No changes to the Agency’s duties, programs, or public services.

What it means for you#

• General public

  • No change to how statistics are collected, published, or shared with the public.
  • Reports, dashboards, and data releases should continue as before.

• Businesses, researchers, and community groups

  • Data access and schedules should remain the same.
  • Leadership is now directly accountable to the Minister rather than Cabinet, which may make decisions faster when a Director needs to be named.

• Government employees

  • The chain of appointment is simpler: the Minister designates the Director.
  • The current Director’s role continues without interruption.

Expenses#

• Estimated fiscal impact: no direct cost; administrative change only.
• The bill does not create new programs, staff, or fees.
• No new spending is authorized. Any costs would be limited to routine administrative updates.

Proponents' View#

• Streamlines government by removing a step (Cabinet approval) and letting the Minister appoint the Director directly.
• Can speed up leadership changes when needed, reducing delays.
• Clarifies accountability: one Minister is clearly responsible for the Agency’s leadership.
• Keeps continuity by confirming the current Director remains in place.
• Aligns with how some other agencies handle internal appointments.

Opponents' View#

• Concentrates appointment power in a single Minister, reducing checks that come with Cabinet approval.
• Could raise concerns about politicization of an agency that should be seen as neutral and data-driven.
• Less transparency if fewer people are involved in the appointment decision.
• Offers no clear evidence that the current process was causing problems that needed this change.