Mind the Gap #nlpoli

There is no shortage of gaps in politics in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Regular readers will be familiar with the Credibility Gap.  That’s the space between what a politician says and what the politician does.

Marketers forget that when it comes to reputation and hence lasting, reliable political support, actions speak far louder than words. They talk about brands and branding.  If you spend any time digging into brands and branding you will find really vague definitions that quickly lead you to the revelation that brands are for marketing what dependency theory and neo-liberalism are for left-wing academics.

True in civilian marketing. 

Doubly true in political marketing.

The gap between words and actions may not turn up right away but it does have an impact.

So take a look at the end of four months of Andrew Furey’s premiership at the number of times he has talked about “big, bold ideas”.

Now looked at his actions.

Nothing big or bold about them.

And the ideas are very familiar.  Pour government money into this hole or that.  Hold a government-issue dog and pony show to watch the politicians pouring public money into the hole.

Rinse.  Repeat.

Paging Dr. Freud #nlpoli

Moya Greene, head of the Premier’s Economic Recovery Team, told municipal leaders last week that the provincial government spends almost $2.0 billion less on health care than it actually does.

Weird.

She said the government spent 25% of its budget on health care.  VOCM reported it: “Greene says healthcare is about 25 per cent of the province’s total expenditures, and that it is a conversation we have to have.”

The actual share in 2019 was 42% and the forecast share in 2020 in 37%. You can find the figures in the budget tabled in the House of Assembly at the end of September.

This is a really bizarro comment since Greene is already well into her job of sorting out both government overspending and re-organizing the economy.  She should have a handle on all numbers. 

After all, Greene and her provincial recovery team will deliver a preliminary report by the end of February. Sure she’s not due to have the whole thing finished until April, but the first deadline of February is really only about three months away, if you allow an interruption for Christmas.

But that’s not the only weirdness.

Building on our successes #nlpoli

"First and foremost, be totally honest with the electorate,”  former Premier Clyde Wells told Anthony Germain on CBC’s Sunday Edition last weekend.  He was giving some general advice to the next Premier on how to handle the provincial government’s enormous financial problems.

“Don't go sugar-coating anything. Fully disclose what you're doing [and] why you're doing it. Have a logical plan that will treat everybody fairly.”

Right after honesty,  came communication in Wells' approach.  Hes told Germain that he took every opportunity to explain what was going on and why it was happening to the public.  He made a couple of televised province-wide addresses to do just that.   

People didn’t like it at first.  The opposition parties and the unions criticised everything.  That’s what they are supposed to do.  But, as Wells, pointed out, “the people of the province come around. In my case, it was proven that they come around, because in the 1993 election, after four years of the most severe cutting, we had an increased majority.”

Few Premiers have done that in Newfoundland and Labrador since 1855 and none have done it since Wells.  In 2007, with bags of cash, great times, and no opposition to speak of, the governing Conservatives won more seats than they did in 2003 but they did it with fewer votes.  In 1993, the Liberals got *more* votes than they received in 1989.

But that doesn’t really tell the whole story.

What started in 1989 was a change in strategic direction for the provincial government and the province. 

The provincial government didn’t just cut spending and eliminate jobs in the public service.  Reforms to health care and education organization and governance were supposed to shift power out of the bureaucracy in St. John’s and hand it to people in the regions where they lived. 

Education reform was tied to improving economic performance and opportunities laid out in the Strategic Economic Plan.  The plan was the product of a two-year-long process spearheaded by the economic planning group, appointed by cabinet in the summer of 1990 under the chairmanship of the Premier's chief of staff, Edsel Bonnell.  The group brought together a diverse set of individuals with an equally diverse set of ideas. There were within the group contending ideas, as former chairman of the Economic Recovery Commission Doug House describes in his book Against the tide. 

The process the SEP team used overcame those differences and built a consensus on a future direction found on three fundamental changes, as laid out in the introduction to the plan:

• A change within people. There is a need for a renewed sense of pride, self-reliance, and entrepreneurship. We must be outward-looking, enterprising, and innovative, and to help bring about this change in attitude we will have to be better educated. During the consultation process, most people agreed that education is essential to our economic development.
• A change within governments. Governments (both politicians and the bureaucracy) must focus on long-term economic development and planning, while still responding to short-term problems and needs. Government programs and services must place a greater emphasis on the quality of the services provided and on the client. Changes in education, taxation and income security systems are also considered critical to our economic development.
• A change in relationships. To facilitate the necessary changes in the economy, new partnerships must be formed among governments, business, labour, academia, and community groups. In particular, better co-ordination between the federal and provincial governments in the delivery of business and economic development programs is needed to eliminate duplication and to prevent confusion for those who use them.

What happened in 2003 abandoned that strategic approach in favour of (once again) using provincial spending as a substitute for economically and environmentally sustainable private sector development. Megaprojects were all the rage and economic development became basically an exercise in handing out cheques.  Changes to education and health care governance put power back in the hands of the central bureaucracy and minimised the connection between schools or hospitals and the communities they served.

In every respect, the current financial and organizational mess of the provincial government is the result of the strategic change of direction after 2003.   Dwight Ball’s “Way Forward” stays within all the same strategic premises. Not surprisingly, it hasn’t fixed the problems.

Any proposal from any political party that doesn’t change the strategic direction of the province won’t succeed in fixing the current financial problems the provincial government faces.  That doesn’t mean going back to the 1992 strategic plan, which was designed for a different situation. 

It means using the same integrated approach, though, starting with the understanding that only a strategic shift will work.  The process is important as:  strategic change is only possible with a consensus across the province. A strategic consensus is essential because making strategic changes will require a commitment that will last beyond one four-year administration.

That consensus will only come with a lot of public discussion and debate. There will be differences of opinion.  There needs to be a lot of disagreement to make sure we explore all the options before setting on a new strategic plan made up of elements that can work.  

The new strategic plan must shift the focus of economic development from government to the private sector.  Government needs to create the environment in which the private sector can succeed while protecting the public interest through proper regulation.

The plan needs to focus not on specific topics – like substituting “tech” for the current obsession with oil – but on creating an environment in which the private sector can respond to market forces.  We cannot know what will be important in the future.  Instead, we need to create the economy that can best respond to shifts.

The lesson from the 1990s is that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians can solve their own economic and financial problems. Wells’ interview this past weekend is the first he’s given in almost 30 years and it is a reminder of what happened here, not in Saskatchewan or Iceland. 

We’ve been ignoring what happened in the 1990s in Newfoundland and Labrador.  People are casting about for some easy answers to their current problems that don’t involve actually changing anything. Unfortunately for them, more of the same simply isn’t an option.  

Well, the answers are right in front of use.  We just have to decide to build on our past successes rather than continue with tales of doom and gloom that get us nowhere. After all, it’s not like we haven’t faced bigger problems than the ones we have today and solved them ourselves.

-srbp-

Guiding Principles for Economic Development

from the

1992 Strategic Economic Plan

1. The Province must focus on strategic industries. With increasing competition in world markets and limits to growth in primary- resource industries, the Province must target high-value-added activities in which we have, or can develop, a competitive advantage.
2. Our education and training system must adapt to the changing labour market demands for a highly skilled, innovative, and adaptable workforce. In an increasingly knowledge-based economy, it is critical that governments, business, and labour work together to improve the level and quality of education, training, and re-training.
3. Newfoundland and Labrador must be competitive both at home and in world markets. To improve our prospects for economic growth and  development, and to maintain and expand local and export markets, the province must diversify its economic base by producing goods and services that are internationally competitive in price, quality, and service.
4. The private sector must be the engine of growth. While it is the role of government to create an economic and social environment that promotes competitiveness, it is the enterprising spirit of the private sector that will stimulate lasting economic growth.
5. Industry must be innovative and technologically progressive to enhance productivity and competitiveness. A competitive advantage can be created by integrating advanced technologies in the workplace with the innovation, skills, and creativity of our people.
6. To achieve economic prosperity, there must be a consensus about the need for change and a commitment from governments, business, labour, academia, and others to work together in building a competitive economy.
7. Government policies and actions must have a developmental focus where the client comes first. The structure of government must be streamlined, efficient and responsive to public needs and to changes in the economy.
8. The principle of environment must be managed to ensure that development can be sustained [economically and environmentally] over the long term.  

 

The facts of the case #nlpoli

From the start of the pandemic, the provincial government  took decisions for political reasons, not medical ones.  It continues to do so.  It is clear that the provincial government has maintained very tight restrictions on the public far longer than necessary and that far more extensive efforts to control the public since 30 April are not based on evidence and medical necessity.

This is fundamental mismanagement that is harming the province and its people. 

The root of the problem is the political divisions in cabinet. The prospect of a new Premier to replace Dwight Ball brings with it the chance to sort out the problems and get the province ready to deal with COVID-19 for as long as necessary.  

The current situation is unconscionable.

Whatever it takes

The government's own advisors give evidence
that contradicts government's decision.

The Chief Medical Officer disclosed the first case of COVID-19 detected in Newfoundland and Labrador on 14 March.  The woman had recently returned from a cruise in the Caribbean.  Public health officials had tested 114 people half of whom had tested negative for the disease.  They and another eight besides were quarantined at home as a precaution.

The government’s first action attributed to COVID-19 came two days later.  At a news conference, Premier Dwight Ball, health minister John Haggie, education minister Brian Warr, and chief medical officer Dr. Janice Fitzgerald sat literally shoulder to shoulder behind a long desk.

We are “in uncharted waters” Ball told reporters.

Effective immediately, Ball and Warr announced, they had closed the province’s schools and daycares as well as College of the North Atlantic.  The move sent 74,000 children home along with thousands of adults across the province from the post-secondary college.

Haggie told reporters that effective immediately, the province’s health system had stopped all elective, diagnostic and surgical procedures. 

Ball said that public servants were also going to work from home, effective immediately.

“We will do whatever it takes, when necessary, to ensure your safety,” Ball said.

Asked about the impact of public cries to close schools as other provinces had done, Ball said "You always listen to people. We want to do what's best."

Ball and his ministers made the decisions to close schools, hospitals, and the provincial government that Monday morning.  There was a single case of COVID-19 in the province.

The Emergency Response Disaster #nlpoli

Communities on the northeast Avalon recovered relatively quickly from the worst blizzard in the province’s recorded history. However, the recovery in the City of St. John’s was slower than that of the neighbouring municipalities.  Both the mayor and one media commentator have placed responsibility for this on the provincial government and out-of-date legislation.  However, the actual problems in the recovery in St. John’s stemmed from the City’s approach to recovery operations. Other issues that have not gained significant public notice persisted because of the province’s failure to intervene.

The General Situation

Residents of the northeast Avalon came through the largest blizzard in the province’s recorded history with relatively few fatalities and virtually no reported incidents of significant damage to property or infrastructure.  That is remarkable in itself given the storm and a smaller snowfall that followed on its dropped more than  100 centimetres on parts of the region and wind gusts hit between 1305 and 150 kilometres an hour during the peak of the blizzard. 

Of the roughly 250,000 affected by the storm, only about 10% - 27,000  - lost power during the storm and the bulk of those had their power restored within 48 hours of the last snow flake. This contrasts with 2014 when a series of events knocked out power to a significant portion of the island for several days. 

Two avalanches reported publicly damaged houses and caused people to leave their homes but without injury.  This is in contrast to a relatively minor blizzard in 1959 that caused an avalanche that The Battery in St John’s that killed nine people.

Municipalities in the region had cleared at least passable cuts on all streets within 48 to 72 hours after the storm subsided on Saturday and by Tuesday all major municipalities had begun to lift their states of emergency to one degree or another. The provincial government had also cleared the major highways to the city within two days of the storm.

The importance of what we care about #nlpoli

When we do not talk about the most vulnerable people in our society – sex workers and people in homeless shelters to name just two groups – we tell the world that our community does not care about them.  Last week’s spectacle in the House of Assembly showed the world that the 40 people who Newfoundlanders and Labradorians elected to represent them and run the province do not care about very much at all.

Alison Coffin and Ches Crosbie
talk to reporters on Friday about Gerry Byrne.
(Not exactly as illustrated)

A 23-year-old man lay on the pavement in downtown St. John’s last Tuesday night, the life running out of the bullet hole in him and mingling with the rain on the cold pavement, trickling along the gutter and into the sewer.

He died outside a shelter for homeless people. The community learned very quickly that it was a shelter, that it was a rental property, and that police frequently visited the place to deal with disturbances among the people who came and went from the house with great frequency.

We learned that information because neighbours put it on social media, where the local conventional media – newspaper, television, and radio - picked it up and repeated it.  Before anyone knew who the young man was, or what had gone on, they had decided what the issues were in the story.

That morning, in the House of Assembly,  the opposition parties asked for the Premier’s opinion on the fact that provinces in Canada received transfer payments from the federal government because they  - unlike Newfoundland and Labrador – didn’t make enough money on their own to meet the national minimum government income standard.  There were questions about flooding in a district on the west coast, a couple of questions about specific constituents who needed government money, and about the deaths of a couple of million salmon in a fish farm a couple of months before.

There was only one question thread - about ferry service to northern Labrador - that stood out for its consistency and seriousness - and the only question about homelessness was about people with high paying jobs in western Labrador who had to couch surf.

The morning after the death,  the few questions related to the murder were generic:  “’What plan does the government have’  to deal with crime and homeless in St. John’s?” opposition leader Ches Crosbie led with.  His second question was about a growth in payments to temporary shelters run by landlords, not not-for-profits.  That story had been in the local media before and brought back because of the assumed connection in media reports between the for-profit shelters and the murder.

Attention then turned to a general discussion of health care.  By the time the official opposition was done, the New Democrat leader Alison Coffin’s question about homelessness was also generic: 

“APEC reports that despite growth in the oil industry, our province is struggling. Homelessness, addictions, cost of living, bankruptcies, gangs, unemployment, electricity rates, out-migration are all on the rise.

“I ask the Premier: Will Advance 2030 address these pressing issues, or will we continue to stumble forward?”

That was the lone NDP question before her colleague got back to the dead salmon.

Captain Dildo, Dwight Ball, and the New Approach to Old Stereotypes #nlpoli

Last week, the Premier’s Office sent out a picture of the Premier standing next to the mascot of a town in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Nothing odd about it until you realise the mascot is called Captain Dildo and the Premier named Ball is standing to the left of the figure, which is slightly taller than him.

A dildo and a ball. 

Easy pickings for the jokesters out there. 

At least he is not Da Wight Ball, a wag observed.  No, came the reply, he is Da Weft Ball.

Some people might struggle to understand how the Premier and his staff could be beweft themselves,  beweft… err.. bereft… of a stwategy….

No, stragedy.

Umm.

Strategy.

The Narrative War (2015) #nlpoli

The day after a massive Liberal victory in the general election,  CBC’s David Cochrane posted an analysis piece on the new administration.  CBC distributed it nationally.

Cochrane described Dwight Ball as a man “unlikely” to be Premier:

Four campaigns. Two losses. Two wins.  By a combined 75 votes.

Cochrane’s account leaves out relevant context.  When it comes to describing how the Liberals won,  Cochrane focuses not on anything the Liberals did but rather a string of Tory blunders that  - according to Cochrane  - made it easy for the Liberals to win the election essentially by accident.

And now, as Cochrane’s story goes, Ball The Unlikely will have to face enormous financial problems using a plan that Cochrane claims “was greeted with enormous scepticism in the final week of the campaign.”

In the supper hours news, Cochrane then reported on information leaked to him by someone with access to highly confidential government  information.  Their purpose  - quite obviously – was to maximise the the damage to the new administration before it even had a chance to take office.  The information fit quite neatly with Cochrane’s ongoing narrative and so, he naturally, had no hesitation in using it. 

Spending the future (2005) #nlpoli

" [The change in the province's financial outlook] That's very dramatic...Some people are going to stand back and say 'Oh yeah, that's just because your very lucky. That's because the oil prices have gone up.' Well, no. That's part of it. But we had a tough budget, a prudent budget. We've managed the province, fiscally, very tightly."

Premier Danny Williams

Quoted in "Cash boon may fund province's infrastructure"

by Rob Antle, The Telegram, 22 October 2005, p. A3

Premier Danny Williams is absolutely correct.

The provincial government's financial state is a direct result of oil and gas revenues. High oil prices have produced a boost beyond what the Real Atlantic Accord, the offshore royalty regimes and development at Voisey's Bay would have produced anyway.

Unfortunately, the premier's positive comments may have two unwelcome results. First it may make it seem as though the province can afford to increase spending in a number of ways. Second, his comments divert attention away from the fundamental failure of the Williams administration, two years into its mandate, to produce integrated plans to address the province's financial windfalls in a way that will yield the greatest long term benefit.

The Narrative War #nlpoli

The day after a massive Liberal victory in the general election,  CBC’s David Cochrane posted an analysis piece on the new administration.  CBC distributed it nationally.

Cochrane described Dwight Ball as a man “unlikely” to be Premier:

Four campaigns. Two losses. Two wins.  By a combined 75 votes.

Cochrane’s account leaves out relevant context.  When it comes to describing how the Liberals won,  Cochrane focuses not on anything the Liberals did but rather a string of Tory blunders that  - according to Cochrane  - made it easy for the Liberals to win the election essentially by accident.

And now, as Cochrane’s story goes, Ball The Unlikely will have to face enormous financial problems using a plan that Cochrane claims “was greeted with enormous skepticism in the final week of the campaign.”

House of Cards (Part A) #nlpoli

_______________________________________________

This is the third in a four part series on the current financial crisis the provincial government is facing.  The first instalment – “The origins of rentierism in Newfoundland and Labrador” – appeared on Tuesday and the second – “Other People’s Money”  - appeared on Wednesday.  The third instalment – “Rentierism at the national and sub-national level” -  appeared on Thursday.

_______________________________________________

Finance minister Jerome Kennedy told the Telegram’s James McLeod on Wednesday that the provincial government had a structural deficit problem.

His proof was that government spent 60% or so of its total outlay each year on the social sector.  That includes health, social services, justice, and education.  If that’s what Jerome is worried about then he and his cabinet colleagues should know that in 2005, they spent 67% of their budget on the social sector.  In 2003,  the last year the Liberals ran the place, they spent about 64% of the budget on the social sector.

Before he goes all Grim Reaper, Jerome should know spending that kind of percentage on the social sector isn’t unusual for governments across Canada.  That’s been pretty much the norm since the late 1960s when governments introduce publicly-funded health care. In Ontario in 2012, for example, all but about $30 billion of the government’s $126 billion budget went to social program spending.

That doesn’t mean the provincial government doesn’t have a huge financial problem. They do. It just means that Jerome is looking in the wrong place to find a sign of it.

Verbiage Growth Strategy #nlpoli

Right on cue in the controversy over the population growth “strategy”,  a provincial cabinet minister issued a news release late on Monday and assured us that everything will be all right.

There is lots of bureaucratic jargon, like the trendy use of the word “inform”:

The Provincial Government has developed strategies focusing on youth, immigration, seniors and others. These efforts will help inform the development of the Population Growth Strategy.”

Aside from that, there’s very little of consequence in Joan Shea’s release. 

15 ideas (and more) – Setting the Table

Our economic vision for Newfoundland and Labrador is that of an enterprising, educated, distinctive and prosperous people working together to create a competitive economy based on innovation, creativity, productivity and quality.

Strategic Economic Plan, 1992

Our social vision for Newfoundland and Labrador is of a sharing society which balances its economic and social interests, cares for its disadvantaged, nurtures its human and physical environment, celebrates its quality of life and traditional values of individual respect and community responsibility and provides opportunities for personal and collective achievement.

Strategic Social Plan Consultation Paper, 1995

 

Within a mere two decades, Newfoundland and Labrador transformed almost two centuries of economic backwardness into unprecedented growth.

And yet, as we enter the second decade of the 21st century, a number of factors, some identified in the early 1990s, threaten to rob Newfoundlanders and Labradorians of the bright future they worked to achieve through careful planning, steady work, and a steely determination to endure.

Public sector debt remains at record levels.  Rather than reduce debt, the current Conservative administration plans to increase the debt burden still further by building an economically unsound megaproject.  What’s more, the most recent economic forecast predicts that the current administration’s policies could triple the debt within a decade.  That is on top of the burden from the  Muskrat Falls megaproject.

Changes in the province’s population, forecast in the early 1990s, have started to create pressure for new government spending and more government spending.  Just paying the interest on the growing debt will rob money that could be helping to pay for those new services.

The highly competitive global economy that has emerged in the past 20 years, coupled with fall-out from the recent recession, will demand even greater inventiveness if businesses in Newfoundland and Labrador will meet the challenges these changes present. 

Yet, over the past decade government policy has fostered greater social and business dependence on government hand-outs.  The result is a fragile economy that will grow less robust and more susceptible to set-backs.

The answer to these challenges can be found in the principles that lay at the heart of the 1992 Strategic Economic Plan: 

• We must foster a change in people.  We must renew genuine pride, self-reliance and entrepreneurship. We must once more become outward-looking, enterprising, educated and innovative. 
• We must change government.   Our people do not need saviours or demigods.  They can run their own affairs.  We must introduce fundamental democratic reforms.  Decisions about education, health and economic development must be made closer to the people directly affected by them. The role of government is to create an environment in which the private sector can develop economically and environmentally sustainable  businesses.
• We must change relationships. We must replace the chaotic, secretive and highly centralised government of the past decade, with mature, professional and open government based on sound long-term planning and a genuine understanding of the province’s long-term interests.  Beyond that, we must forge new relationships among governments, business, labour, academia and community groups of the sort envisioned two decades ago. We must build a strong relationship between the federal and provincial governments in order to deliver government services as efficiently and effectively as possible while ensuring that the people who pay for those services can hold the right government to account for what they do.

The ideas that will follow in posts over the coming days and weeks are nothing more than the starting point for discussion.

Only through vigorous, free-wheeling public debate can we build a mutual understanding among all the people of the province on both the necessity of change and of the specific changes themselves.

Change is not a luxury.

Change is not merely possible.

Change is essential.

- srbp -

Next:  Building the Fishery of the Future

Guaranteed Annual Income

The Globe and Mail version by Kevin Milligan.

From the 1992 Strategic Economic Plan, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador’s idea for income support reform as a means of promoting fundamental economic and social transformation:

The unemployment insurance system was originally intended to provide temporary income to people seeking alternative employment who had lost their regular jobs in the work force. The system was not designed to provide basic income support, or as supplemental income for short-term, seasonal jobs. The present downturn in the economy has pointed to weaknesses in this system which must be addressed and corrected.

Strategy Statement. The Province will work with the Federal Government to ensure that the inevitable changes to the current income security system are designed so that basic income support is provided to every household, and that weaknesses in the present system are corrected to encourage the economic growth that is needed to reduce dependency on income security itself.

- srbp -

The value of education

Talk about putting the emphasis on the wrong syllable.

The provincial government thinks innovation is about how much money it spends on something. Take this quote from Danny Williams as being just one of many:

That is an area [innovation] we are now moving in. It is a very, very important area that we have to address and this government is committed to putting that money into that research. That is why the experience that I had yesterday was an incredible experience, but it goes to show the importance of using those monies in the proper areas so that we can prepare for the future at a time when the oil and gas is gone.

That event, incidentally happened actually two days before he made those remarks.  The province’s new research and development corporation announced $775,000 in funding for different research projects.

This emphasis on cash is not surprising. The crowd currently running the place seem to think that everything can be reduced to how much money government spends. 

But as good as it is to fund research and development, when it comes to innovation, education is the key.
When you look at education in the province, though, you don’t get a warm and fuzzy feeling.

Reading and writing is a challenge.

Almost half the adult population of Newfoundland and Labrador doesn’t have a literacy level that would allow them to “function well in Canadian society.”

Basic math skills are an even bigger problem.

Almost two out of every three adult Newfoundlanders and Labradorians don’t have the skill with numbers and mathematics – they call it numeracy – to function well in Canadian society.

Numeracy is actually a far greater problem because it involves not just an ability to add, subtract, multiple and divide.  Numeracy also involves logic and reasoning, probability, and statistics.  That's basically the ability to solve problems using  - for example - an }if this, then that" way of thinking.

The only place worse off than this one?  Nunavut.  New Brunswick is tied with Newfoundland and Labrador with low numeracy and literacy levels among adults.

Just think about it for a second:  half the workforce of the province lacks the ability to function adequately in modern society. It’s not their fault, mind you, and it certainly doesn’t mean they are stupid.  These figures tell you that the province’s education system failed them, not just in the past but in the present day.

The problem, you see, isn’t confined to adults. Student literacy is about the same as the adult scores, while student numeracy is nothing to write home about either. 

Now on the other hand, the drop-out rate has plummeted in the past 20 years. But as CBC Radio noted late last December, high school graduates in the eastern part of the province are more likely to graduate with a general pass than with the results needed to carry on to university or trades training.

You can see the consequences in the completion and participation rates. University participation is among the best in the country even if the completion rate is one of the worst. College and trade school education has a relatively low participation rate but a decent completion level.

It’s not like the connection between education and prosperity isn’t well known.  The 1992 Strategic Economic Plan included a section specifically on education reform. The premise was simple enough:

Education is the key to economic development. Studies have shown conclusively that skills, qualifications, innovation and the adaptability of individuals are critical determinants of economic performance and the success of enterprises.

The 1995 Strategic Social Plan, while never implemented, included significant reforms in our education system.

The answer to the education problem in the province is not merely about spending money, as much as the Premier likes to talk about how much cash winds up going out the door.  Nor is the answer found in issuing nonsensical news releases that claim the education department scored a goal when it didn’t.

The first step is to realise there is a problem.

And with half the work force unable to function adequately in modern society, there’s a pretty big problem going unrecognized.

- srbp-

The Cutting EDGE

Introduced in 1995, the Economic Diversification and Growth Enterprises program – known as EDGE – is the most successful economic development program currently offered by the provincial government.

According to an article in the March 20 issue of the Telegram,

The province estimates that EDGE has created 1,500-1,600 jobs over the years. The government has forked out $17 million in rebates to employers under the program. Those rebates are linked to things like provincial income tax, payroll tax and corporate income tax.

Roughly 40 municipal governments also signed on to the EDGE scheme, providing their own tax relief to qualified companies.

Within the past five years alone, 30 companies have applied for support under the program and two thirds were accepted.

Compare that to the hand-out programs introduced under the current administration.  Of the $75 million budgeted over the past three years, the programs have only managed to give away $14 million;  of that amount $8.0 million went to a company that promised to increase its workforce but in the end cut jobs.

The provincial government is reviewing the EDGE program to see how it can be improved. Currently 69 companies hold EDGE status.  A further 54 held the status at one point but no longer qualify.

As the Telegram described the EDGE program:

To be eligible, a company must create and maintain 10 new permanent jobs in Newfoundland and Labrador and make a minimum capital investment of $300,000 or have incremental annual sales of $500,000.

Tax incentives are provided to EDGE-designated companies for a period of 10 or 15 years, followed by a five-year period of partial rebates.

Part of the program’s enduring success is the philosophy behind it. EDGE recognised the changed global economic circumstances and placed its greatest emphasis on encouraging the private sector to develop innovative, globally-competitive industries that could survive without extensive government cash support.

The background to the program is contained in a public consultation paper released in the summer of 1994.  The main sections of that document are reproduced below.  in light of the current government policy and the review of EDGE, it would be useful if more people in the province were aware of an economic development philosophy that continues to deliver strong results almost two decades after it first appeared.

Excerpts from: 

Attracting new business investment: a White Paper on proposed new legislation to promote economic diversification and growth enterprises in the province

(June 1994)

1.0  BACKGROUND

The Strategic Economic Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador, which was released in June of 1992, outlined the economic challenges facing the Province and charted new policy directions to guide economic development over the long term.

The Strategic Economic Plan noted in particular that the globalization of economic activity and the liberalization of world trade presents significant new export opportunities for manufactured goods and commercial services. Technological advances made in transportation and communications over the past decade, combined with the shift towards a more knowledge based world economy, have also reduced the relative importance placed on geographic location for many industries and firms, and this has created further opportunity for the development of new products and services. At the same time, however, these trends have brought increased international competition for economic activity, not only in the development of new products and services, but in respect of many of our existing industries as well.

These profound changes in global trade patterns, investment flows and technology constitute the driving force behind the fundamental economic restructuring that is now occurring in many countries. In an increasingly competitive and knowledge based world economy, it is clear that we can no longer rely on traditional approaches to attract new business investment and expand existing business enterprises. We will, out of necessity, have to become more outward looking in our approach to economic development and create an appropriate investment climate that supports international competitiveness.

It must also be recognized that the private sector is and will continue to be the engine of economic growth. This is a key principle embodied in the Strategic Economic Plan and reflects the reality that the private sector is the most effective vehicle through which lasting economic wealth and employment opportunities can be created for the people of this Province. It is the role of government in this context to create the economic climate in which private sector investment can occur and be successful.

2.0       GOAL

The goal of attracting new business investment as a means to create additional employment opportunity for the people of this Province is not a new concept. Indeed, various governmental incentive programs have met with measured degrees of success over time in this regard. However, the rapidly changing global marketplace and the province-wide impact on the economy resulting from the collapse of the groundfish fishery have heightened the need to significantly improve the attractiveness of the Province to the private sector as a place to invest and prosper. New business investment directed at economic diversification and general economic growth is not only an objective but an imperative at this juncture of the Province's history.

The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador intends to adopt bold and innovative measures to transform the Province into one of the most attractive locations - not only in Canada but in all of North America - for new business investment and to take aggressive new steps to market and promote the Province's strengths in this regard on a national and international basis.

The main elements of this new program will be reflected in legislation to be known as "An Act to Promote Economic Diversification and Growth Enterprises in the Province". This legislation will be presented to the House of Assembly for its consideration in the fall of 1994 and will provide an enhanced "business friendly" regime for new and expanding business enterprises in the Province.

3.0       SCOPE OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION

3.1      Eligibility

New business enterprises wishing to establish in the Province and existing businesses wishing to expand their enterprises will be eligible to receive a range of special business development incentives, provided that certain conditions are met. These will be in addition to any other incentives the enterprise may be eligible for under other assistance programs established to encourage business development in the Province.

To qualify for the special incentives, an enterprise must meet the following tests:

• The proposed new business activity must have the potential to bring substantial new or expanded business investment and employment to the Province.  Only those projects involving capital investments of at least $500,000 and having the potential to generate incremental annual sales of $1.0 million, as well as creating and maintaining at least 10 full time permanent jobs in the Province, may apply to Government for access to the special incentives.
• The proposed new business activity must be consistent with the objectives for economic development that are embodied in the Strategic Economic Plan.
• Reasonable assurances must be available to demonstrate that the proposed new business activity, in the absence of the special incentives, would not otherwise be pursued in the Province. This test is intended to ensure that incremental economic activity will be stimulated by the new incentives.
• The proposed new business activity must not be directly competitive with or have an adverse impact on the viability of other businesses already established in the Province.   This will ensure that existing business enterprises will not be placed at a competitive disadvantage relative to those companies and investors who are able to take advantage of the new incentives.
• The proposed new business activity must have the potential to generate substantial value-added economic benefit to the Province.

Both new businesses and existing businesses expanding their operations will be eligible for the special incentives. However, in the case of existing businesses, only those elements of a company's operation which are incremental to its existing scale of operation will be eligible for the incentives.

3.2      Review and Approval Process

Companies seeking the special incentives available through the new legislation will be required to provide documentation in the form of a comprehensive business plan to allow for a thorough assessment of its proposal. The specific requirements in this regard will be outlined fully in the legislation.

Particular attention will be given during the review process to the commercial viability of the proposed business activity over the long term. It is not the intent of the legislation to artificially support new industries or new business activity in the Province, but rather to attract and assist in the development of viable and sustainable economic enterprises and employment opportunities for the long term benefit of the people of this Province.

All applications received under the new legislation will be reviewed by a committee of Cabinet Ministers chaired by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, with final decisions on eligibility to be made by Cabinet. Part of the process in making a determination as to whether or not the special incentives will be granted to a company will involve a public notice procedure whereby Government will invite interested parties to make submissions respecting all proposals received. This is intended to ensure that all proposals are available for public scrutiny in respect of their potential competitive impact on existing business enterprises and jobs. Appropriate steps will be taken to protect the proprietary and commercial interests of the company when this public notice procedure is invoked.

While all proposals made to Government under the new legislation will be thoroughly assessed to protect the general public interest, Government is committed to a timely review process such that potential investors are not unduly delayed in the implementation of their business plans. Once the committee of Cabinet Ministers is satisfied that it has all the information it considers necessary to properly evaluate a proposal, a decision will be rendered by Cabinet on acceptance or otherwise of a company's proposal within 60 days.

Successful companies will be expected to enter into a formal contract with Government in which the Province will guarantee the benefits provided in the new legislation and the company will bind itself to implement the business proposal as accepted by Government. Notification will subsequently be given to the House of Assembly of all such contracts entered into, and ongoing monitoring of their terms and conditions will be carried out by senior officials.

3.3      Incentives Available through the Legislation

3.3.1    Taxation Incentives

The private sector is presently faced with a relatively high burden of taxation which impedes new investment and the creation of new employment opportunities in the Province. While a number of significant changes to the existing business tax structure have been made by Government in a number of areas in recent years, the entire taxation regime requires further attention if it is to be used as a means of promoting the Province as a highly competitive location in which to do business. Accordingly, the following taxation incentives are proposed for those companies qualifying for assistance under the new legislation:

(i) A full tax free holiday for ten years in respect of provincial corporate income tax, the health and post-secondary education "payroll" tax, and retail sales tax.

(ii) Further relief in these specific tax areas for an additional five year period on a reduced scale, commencing in the first year at 80% of total taxes payable and declining by a factor of 20% each year thereafter.

Municipalities will also be given the necessary legislative authority to grant full property and business tax exemptions on the same basis as outlined in (i) and (ii) above with a majority vote of the respective municipal council. At present, municipalities do not have the legislative flexibility to offer tax relief to individual companies to the extent contemplated herein.

3.3.2    Productivity Incentive

All new and expanding business enterprises experience a significant "learning curve" during the formative years of their operation. Part of this process inevitably results in a productivity "loss" that is incurred by the company at all levels in the organization.

To offset part of this productivity "cost", the Province will provide financial assistance to new and expanding business enterprises in an amount of $2,000 for each full time job created in the Province during its initial five year operating period where the company employs a resident of the Province to permanently occupy the job from the time of its creation.

Appropriate provisions will be included in the legislation to protect the pubic interest in the event of failure by a company to fulfil the conditions upon which the productivity incentive has been granted.

3.3.3    Labour Relations Incentives

A new approach to labour-management relations is required to attract new investment and stimulate new business enterprises in the Province. Government remains fully committed to ensuring that adequate safeguards are in place to protect the legitimate interests of employees and unions. However, it is in the broader public interest to achieve this objective in a balanced manner that also assures those who wish to make new business investments and provide economic opportunity in the Province have a reasonable prospect of receiving an acceptable level of return on their investment without undue risk from uncertain labour relations conditions.

Pursuant to a commitment made in the Strategic Economic Plan, Government is presently developing a comprehensive consultation document which will address various concerns respecting the general labour relations regime in the Province. While the intent will be to develop consensus on changes necessary to make the general labour climate more favourable for all businesses, Government believes that extraordinary measures are required beyond this if new business   enterprises   are   to   be   stimulated   in   the   increasingly competitive global economy.

Government's proposal in this regard is to make available different Labour Relations Act provisions to new enterprises wishing to establish in the Province and to do so in a manner that will not affect the application of current labour legislation to existing businesses. As well, any existing business where a bargaining agent has been certified for the employees of that company prior to the time it wishes to expand and take advantage of the special incentives under the new legislation will not be eligible for the labour relations provisions of the legislation. Considerable difficulty from a number of perspectives would be encountered in applying two different labour relations regimes to a single business operation, as one firm could have two separate collective bargaining processes, labour contracts and wage rates applying to employees doing the same kind of work. Accordingly, the labour relations provisions of the new legislation will apply to new business start-ups only.

The main  features of the proposed  new labour relations provisions are as follows:

a.  All collective agreements entered into between a company and the bargaining agent for the employees will remain in force for a period of at least five years, unless the contract entered into between the Province and the company in respect of the business undertaking as a whole expires in a period of less than five years.

b.  In circumstances where a company and a bargaining agent engage in collective bargaining but are unable to reach a collective   agreement,   a   special   panel   consisting   of   a representative   appointed   by   each   of  the   parties   and   a chairperson appointed by the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations will establish a collective agreement by addressing those specific matters in dispute at the time the matter is referred to the panel.

c.  Where a company and a bargaining agent are unable to conclude a collective agreement and the matters in dispute are referred to a panel, the company will not be permitted to lock-out the employees and the employees will not be permitted to strike.

d.  A panel, in concluding a collective agreement, will take into account the following factors:

(i) the overall policy objective of the new legislation which is to create conditions favourable to the establishment of new businesses and the expansion of existing businesses in the Province (this factor will be given paramount consideration by the panel);

(ii) the effect of the agreement on the profitability of the business;

(iii) the terms and conditions of employment of employees in occupations in the same or similar businesses both within and outside the Province, with consideration to be given to geographic, industrial, economic, social and other variations that the panel considers relevant;

(iv) the need to establish terms and conditions of employment that are fair and reasonable in relation to the qualifications required, the work performed, the responsibility assumed and the nature of the service provided; and

(v)      the needs of the employer for qualified employees.

e.  An agreement concluded by a panel will be binding on all parties.

f.  The panel will be required to conclude an agreement no later than 90 days after disputes are referred to it for resolution.

g.  Every collective agreement entered into between a bargaining agent and a company, including an agreement concluded by a panel, will contain provisions:

(i) requiring the application of progressive work practices in the work place including the use of composite crews;

(ii) relating to wages and to wage increases of employees during the term of the agreement, but those increases will not be permitted to exceed the percentage rise in the consumer price index as reported by Statistics Canada for that area; and

(iii) respecting the final and binding resolution of disputes without work stoppage.
Notwithstanding the provisions outlined above, where a company and a bargaining agent both agree that it would not be in their collective interest to apply the labour relations provisions of the new legislation in its entirety or in part, then those provisions will not apply to the parties concerned. Similarly, in circumstances where a panel has concluded a collective agreement, the parties concerned may, where they mutually agree, vary any term or condition the panel has applied, provided that such agreement does not offend other applicable provisions of the new labour relations regime.

3.3.4    Access to Crown Land

Crown land that a company may require to implement its business plan as approved by Government will be leased to the company for a nominal sum of $1.00.

3.3.5    Appointment of a Facilitator

Upon the request of a company, Government may appoint a person, either from within or outside of Government, to assist the company in obtaining governmental permits, licenses, options for use of Crown assets, and any other authorizations that the company may be required to obtain in connection with its business. This will expedite the processing of all applications for regulatory approval of the business plan and thereby allow the business plan to be implemented in a timely manner. The responsibility for actual decision-making in these areas will, however, remain with the appropriate regulatory agency.

- srbp -

Eventually the other guys will lose…

A couple of weeks ago, your humble e-scribbler picked up a story at the political science reunion.  It was about a bunch of university types who met with a political leader looking for some advice.

Do some polling, find out what people are looking for and develop a platform came the advice.  Then go out and work hard to persuade people to join you and vote for you.

No way, came the response.  We don’t need to do that: eventually the other guys will lose.

Telegram editorial page editor Russell Wangersky offered a thoughtful commentary on local politics last week:

Sitting on the government side has been a free ticket to talking down to whatever party's in opposition and just generally acting like God's gift to politics.

It also means a fundamental weakness in opposition - and never forget that the opposition has a crucial role in good government. The weakness is that no one runs to be a member of a strong opposition - instead, potentially strong candidates sit on their hands and wait for the right time to throw their hats in the ring. That time only comes when it looks like they can take the government - and until then, we tend to get leaders of the opposition who are seat-warmers, at best.

Wangersky hit on a major problem in local politics, but it isn’t one of majorities.  Nor is it the case that people don’t run to to be part of a strong opposition:  not a single politician has ever run in order to sit on the side of the House that doesn’t have power.

Rather, the problem has to do with the local political culture. 

For starters, politics is seen by many as nothing more than a game.  Voters don’t necessarily weigh policies;  they just make a guess early on which side is going to win and then park their vote with the winner.  That’s where this whole idea comes from about losing one’s vote. Being on the winning side is the most important thing for many voters.

Second, consider that parties don’t divide up along any really well-founded ideological lines either. Take a look at the 1996 Tory platform, for example, and you’ll see basically policies that are similar to the Liberal platform at the time.  In 2003, Danny Williams’ platform included an entire chapter that was nothing more than a précis of the 1992 Strategic Economic Plan. 

On some issues in that election – like say the idea of a state-owned oil company – all three parties had exactly the same idea.  Just to give a sense of the absence of any ideological divide consider that the New Democrats look on it as if it was actually some kind of public ownership.  Lorraine Michael praises the hell out of NALCOR because it looks like something her peeps would like.

In practice, NALCOR is something the local New Democrats should be opposing vehemently.  It runs without adequate public oversight and can hide most of its financial workings from legislative scrutiny. NALCOR has received bags of public cash but produces no identifiable public benefit.

Even if all that weren’t true, somewhere along the line Lorraine missed the biggie clue that should tell her Danny is no advocate of public ownership of the kind New Democrats as social democrats would understand:  Williams has said in the legislature right in front of her that he’d flip the whole deal if the price was right.  New Democrats don’t usually advocate converting principles to cash.

To be sure, the current Williams crowd are viciously partisan in a way locals have seldom seen.  The truly hard core Danny-ites approach politics with the sort of closed-minded zeal that would make your average Fox News watcher green if only with envy.  But still,  what we are referring to in Newfoundland today is not an ideological division,  that is unless Chris Crocker-style hysterical celebrity worship is now a political belief system. 

And through it all, there’s the simple fact that since the Great Sectarian Accommodation of the mid-19th century, the Newfoundland establishment culture does accept open political debate and discussion as being legitimate.  To the contrary, local political culture explicitly divides the world into acceptable views and those which are treasonous, to use the popular freshie-gulper language.

You’ll see a fine example of this time-honoured approach in the comments on a post from 2009.  There’s a back and forth between your humble e-scribbler and a chap who wanted to offer some free advice.  part of the exchange included this::

Complaining about the tone of my comments or saying I am negative (there's a popular one) is really a code for identifying someone who is outside the range of accepted belief. It identifies someone who must conform or be ostracised.

It is a way of suppressing ideas and views which run contrary to that of the dominant authorities. Remember a couple of years ago when DW referred to some people in Stephenville as "dissidents"? Bit of an odd choice of words but, if you appreciate the wider context, it made perfect sense. How about the constant refrain that different ideas are "negative"?

…

As a last point, I will note that there is one thing I have seen fairly consistent[ly] over the past four or five years. The only people who criticise my tone (even with the little bit of sugar about it being a "nice" blog) or who suggested I am merely a partisan hack advancing something called "Liberal dogma", whatever the hell that is, come from a very particular ideological or partisan background themselves.

They are, in effect, using coded language in another way: to avoid dealing with conflict. They want to suppress some sort of conflict either between their ideas and ones they don't agree with or can't accept or - more typically with the person. In the latter case the sublimation comes from misperception that criticism of an idea is criticism of the person suggesting the idea. Either way it is unhealthy.

This isn’t just an abstraction or a left-over fear from another age. 

Once in power, political parties have been known to use their considerable economic might to punish those who speak publicly even if it simply doesn’t conform to the exact government line. Whether it is that economic punishment or merely the phone call asking if someone had actually meant to say something quoted in the news media, the message of suppression and the need for conformity gets through loudly and clearly.

No one should be surprised that, in such a culture, aspiring politicians often wait around hoping for the day the other guys lose.  Nor is it surprising given such a repressed political environment that in the 60-odd years since Confederation, there have been only three changes of governing political party in Newfoundland and Labrador:  1972, 1989 and 2003.

A healthy democracy requires more than a strong opposition in the legislature.  It requires a strong party system that accepts as legitimate both differences of view and the right to express those differences without fear of reprisal. That strong party system cannot take root in a place where conformity is demanded, where differences are actively suppressed and where politics is reduced to nothing more than a game.

-srbp-

Where the money goes – 15 years later

Just to put the Strategic Social Plan (1995) in a bit of context, you should realise that health care spending as a share of the provincial budget has increased dramatically in the past 15 years while other sectors have stayed the same or decreased.

The change is actually quite dramatic – 10 percentage points – from 265 in 1995 to reportedly 36.8% in 2010.  In dollars, spending on health care has tripled in the province since 1995 and the health share of the budget going from $933 million to $2.7 billion in a decade and a half.

This chart compares the 1995 figures from the Estimates with the recently tabled budget. It corresponds to a chart (Figure 2) from the 1995 Strategic Social Plan consultation paper. The light blue line represents the 1995 budget while the purple-blue line is the current budget estimate.

The province’s business development and economic diversification efforts – ITT then and INTRD and Business today – take less of a share of the budget now.  That’s despite government claims that it has a plan to expand the economy and that the plan is in place.

Mind you, the amounts spent have increased.  For example, the cost of operating the departments has gone from about $50 million for the Industry, Trade and technology department to about $66 million spread over Business and Innovation, Trade and Rural Development today. 

The amount available for business investment is also up:  $18 million then compared to $29 million. Even then, though, the province’s business department -  the vehicle through which Danny Williams was once supposed to personally reinvigorate the provincial economy – actually doesn’t do very much with the cash in the budget.  Sure there are plenty of free gifts – like Rolls Royce – or the apparently endless supply of cash for inflatable shelters. 

But as the Telegram discovered two years ago, the provincial government spent nothing at all of the $30 million budgeted for business development in 2007. And earlier this year the Telegram confirmed that in the past three years, less than one third of the $90 budgeted for business attraction was ever spent.

Spending on education is down as a share of the overall budget, even though the amount spent is up from $763 million to $1.2 billion.

Interestingly, the most dramatic decline has been in what the budget estimates call Consolidated Fund Services.  Basically CFS covers all those expenditures that it takes to pay the interest on the public debt, maybe retire whatever tiny portion comes due each year, cover bank charges and  that sort of thing.

As a share of the budget, CFS has gone from 17% to 6.6%.  In dollars we are talking $403 million this year to service the public debt and another $87 million to cover employee retirement plans.  Fifteen years ago, the figures were $544 million and $60 million respectively.

Some bright bunny out there is likely hopping up and down thinking that the big improvement there is due to the actions of the current administration in paying off debt. 

Some bright bunny like innovation minister Shawn Skinner, speaking in the budget debate last week:

Our net debt, that big yolk around our necks that everybody talks about, that big millstone that drags everybody down which was about $12 billion - that is billion with a ‘b’ - when this government took office is now down by $3.9 billion to just under $8 billion. We have gone from a twelve-billion-dollar debt down to an eight-billion-dollar debt in six short years. Now, that is good economic policy I would suggest to you, Mr. Speaker. That is good fiscal policy and that is something that the people of this Province understand and appreciate. I do not have the figures right in front of me …

Well, not exactly.

The taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador actually have greater liabilities now than they did in 1995. 

What Skinner mentioned was net debt – liabilities less any assets – and that figure has actually gone back up in the past year.  Why?  Well because the provincial government had to dip into its cash reserves to avoid borrowing money from the banks to cover the $500 million they were short last year.  It’s also a couple of billion or so beyond what it was in the bad old days of the mid-1990s when the provincial government had no where near as much cash flowing in as it does today.

There’s no real point in going into the debt charade Skinner and his colleagues have been foisting the past few years. Regular readers of these scribbles are well-used to the argument.

What we really have to look at are the things that make the cost of carrying that debt lower today than in 1995. 

For one thing, interest rates are much lower than they were when some of that debt was incurred in the 1980s.  As old debt at high interest rates has matured, successive administrations simply rolled it over at much lower rates.  In that respect, the current crowd are doing exactly what the former crowd used to do. It’s a perfectly sensible thing to do when you don’t have the cash to pay debt off.

For another thing, the debt today is pretty much all in Canadian currency.  In the 1990s, chunks of the debt  - upwards of a third of it - were in American dollars and Japanese yen.  The weak Canadian dollar over the years meant that the taxpayers shelled out bundles in order to pay interest in higher valued currency.  Starting in the Wells administration, the provincial government started rolling over that foreign debt and borrowing Canadian.  That has saved the taxpayers hundreds of millions over the years.

For a third thing, the direct provincial debt  - the money the provincial government itself owes – has been dropping again from the high incurred during the Williams administration. Yes, that’s right for all the pitcher plants clogging the local media Internet sites thinking other. 

The direct public debt actually hit its peak of almost $7.0 billion under the current crew.  In fact,  the guy the pitcher plants and Fan Clubbers love to hate – Roger Grimes – left office in 2003 with the provincial government direct debt lower than the direct debt under Danny Williams today:  Grimes = $6.5915  billion versus Williams 2010 = $6.6468 billion. 

-srbp-