A Rocky Path

Mandryk's column today dumps a number of Sask Party skeletons from their closets. Or more appropriately, from the "Hidden Agenda" vault they left when vacating their offices:

After all, if labour money can buy off the NDP, why wouldn't we assume that the Saskatchewan Party's $668,016 in corporate donations has influenced its policies? Wouldn't we also assume that the tens of thousands of dollars the Saskatchewan Party has received over the years from implement manufacturers (who demanded changes to the union certification laws) or from former media baron Conrad Black (who loved to crush unions) is the driving force behind Bills 5 and 6?
(Leader-Post - April 18, 2008)

Good questions, Murray. Thanks for pointing this out. And thanks for going further and speculating about oil royalty rates and Big Mouth Billy Bass. Your dig at the CFIB falls a little flat, though, because while the budget doesn't really address property taxes, Wall's one-eighty on municipal funding could be tied to this very issue. His change of mind was so abrupt that it even took Hutch, the Minister responsible for Municipal Affairs, by surprise. The CFIB, meanwhile, are too busy swooning not over the budget, but over the Premier they have in their pocket.

But for me, the best part about this column wasn't the blunt message to Tim McMillan that he should just shut the hell up and return to his job of warming the backbench, or Mandryk noting that the Sask Party took in two-and-a-half times the NDP's union donations from their corporate pals, or even the not-so-subtle reminder that the Kathy Youngs (and the Tom Lukiwskis) of the world don't change their stripes. Instead, it was the following:

Here's a simple solution to the Saskatchewan Party government's concerns over the undue influence union donations are having on the NDP: ban donations from all unions and corporations.

Indeed, some forward-thinking New Democrats raised this very issue at convention. It was voted down, of course, because people get stuck in their ways, and worried about cash flows, and can't see the big picture. But some of us -- Mandryk included, apparently -- want to see a democracy run by the people -- not by businesses, and not by organizations. The shift will be another rocky path, but with enough people on side it won't be too hard to clear the stones.

Edit: Fixed typos.

Reaching Out to Labour

However, Wall told reporters Friday that a Sask. Party government would "reach out" to labour. "We want them to join in the Enterprise Saskatchewan model," Wall said.
(Saskatoon StarPhoenix, Oct. 27, 2007)

In yet another example of how the Sask Party is reaching out to labour, officials listed only as "two high-ranking government bureaucrats" have pulled out of a public labour forum. Of course, they've done this on the day the forum is to take place, and after confirming their attendance.

This is no different from the antics of the Sask Party during the election, when candidates ducked public debates in Regina and Moose Jaw. So although it shouldn't be surprising to anyone that the Sask Party is still pulling this bullshit, it's very disappointing that ducking public forums, public debates, and stakeholder consultations is how little Bradly Wall intends to honour his committment to "reach out".

The labour forum is still going to take place, even without government representation. Anyone interested in labour issues or how Bills 5 and 6 will affect the current labour climate should definitely be in attendance. The stronger labour's presence is, the less government can continue its tactic of avoidance and indifference.

Federal Largess

So there it is. With much hoopla, Harper announces Saskatchewan's chunk of the $1 billion in Federal money. Brad Wall was on hand to let people know how happy he was to get some juice from the federal lemon squeezed into the province. But money's money, and I think everyone was pretty happy about it -- with the notable exception of the Jurist, who informs us that the $1 billion comes on the heels of $14 billion in tax cuts for industry; and Wheatsheaf, who points out that Saskatchewan is due only $36 million of the proposed funds. But I guess it's the thought that counts.

The only problem is, the money is just that: a thought. The premier's pipe dream. Why? Forget for a moment that Quebec alone dumped $1.4 billion into forestry and that this is chump change with respect to a national industry. The real issue is that Wall and Stelmach made the foolish fucking decision to back Harper's desire to tie this money to the coming federal budget, while McGuinty and Charest rightly came out against the idea.

Harper is playing politics with this money instead of moving immediately to put it where it's needed. But as for poor old Brad, it seems his lips only move when Harper's doing the talking.

As much as I dislike him, I have to admit Harper's a smart man. And he's played this minority government the way Satriani plays guitar. So a huge stumble like this, open to such deep criticism from all corners, can only mean one thing: he's getting ready to let his government fall.

The Enterprise Saskatchewan List

Joe Kuchta at Owls and Roosters has the full list of organizations receiving letters soliciting nominations for Enterprise Saskatchewan, as well as a breakdown by industry. It's interesting to note that the government's press release is misleading: 55 organizations received more than one of the 303 letters sent.

It'll be interesting to see how the SaskParty makes its appointments to the Enterprise Saskatchewan Board. Although the press release says that the SaskParty wants to "ensure we have a transparent, open and accountable process in place," in the Leader-Post Lyle Stewart says that "he and another minister, along with some deputy ministers, will be part of the committee that selects the final board members," and "as candidates for the board are narrowed down, the government may conduct interviews." He also says that the committee will select the "best" candidates (emphasis mine) who "also seem to have a willing and collaborative attitude to work with the other sectors of the economy." (Source: Leader-Post, Jan. 5/08)

Clearly, there are enough wiggle words here to drive a truck through. While Stewart claims the details are still being worked out, let's not forget that Enterprise Saskatchewan has been Brad Wall's baby since 2004. I would be flabbergasted if an appointment process had not been developed in those three years. If it truly hasn't, it's a horrible omission in the development process and speaks more to the secret agenda of Enterprise Saskatchewan than to the incompetence of the SaskParty (though it speaks to that, too).

As Stewart promised, it's vital that the SaskParty gives us a transparent, open, and most of all, accountable appointment process, and that we hold them to their word.

Bernadette at The Regina Mom has another perspective on the organizations receiving invitations.

Essential Services

I've said it before, but it's a point I think bears repeating: the Sask Party is an unholy alliance of hard-line Conservatives with a bunch of blue Liberals. Wall is trying very hard to keep the soft and chewy Liberal face on his party for the public's benefit, but after being sidelined for 16 years, the hard, crunchy Conservatives are spoiling for a fight; they want action, dammit, and they want it now.

So, to keep his party from breaking apart before reaching the ultimate goal of kicking the NDP out of power, Wall has had to make some assurances to his hard-line supporters: we'll privatize industry, we'll cut social services, we'll bust those unions. Just give us your vote and relax. And knowing they couldn't win government on that platform, they've had to tuck those hard, crunchy parts away, fooling the public into thinking the Sask Party was soft and chewy all the way through.

Unfortunately, some of those nuts he's hidden are starting to show through.

In a media scrum earlier this week, Rob Norris politely give the answer "I'll have to get back to you on that" to the question, "What groups have you consulted with over this proposed essential services legislation?" Of course we found out later that the answer was none, because, as Norris again so nicely explained, the legislation has been in the works for over a year -- without any kind of stakeholder

I'm sure SUN is going to be pretty happy about this.

So how about another round of applause for Rob Norris, who's too stupid to brief himself on his portfolio and too stupid not to release more of the Sask Party's hidden agenda to the media.

There's a long list of people talking about Wall's and McMorris's backpedaling on this issue, in addition to articles in the Leader-Post, CBC, and the Canadian Press -- hell, even Mandryk chimed in with something negative -- so I don't think I can break any new ground. But communication is clearly lacking in the Sask Party caucus right now -- partly because of inexperience, partly because of incompetence, and partly because there are simply too many secrets they need to keep.

Labour is on the Agenda

Session starts again on Dec. 10, and Wall has already said Labour is on the agenda. His need to get this out of the way so soon means something is in the works. So much for Larry Hubich's request for compromise:

Saskatchewan Federation of Labour president Larry Hubich said he'll be looking to the government to consult broadly before any changes are made, adding the labour movement is prepared to be respectful and "engage in compromises."

"If that's the approach that the new government wants to take then I think they'll see a favourable response from the labour movement," Hubich said, who has written the premier to request a meeting between labour leaders and cabinet.

"If they're not interested in that approach, then they shouldn't be surprised at the kind of response that might ensue."
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)

No Larry, they're clearly not interested in that approach. Barely a month after the election and they're already going into session? Who could they have possibly consulted?

What's more concerning than their clear agenda to change the labour laws is the hidden agenda Rob Norris lets out of the bag:

When asked about the planned changes to labour legislation, Norris said there is a need to "rebalance relationships."

But the minister said he couldn't detail which relationships or the changes that need to occur until he was more fully briefed about his new portfolio.
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)

Rob is clear that there's a need to rebalance the relationship between labour and management, but he apparently doesn't know where or what that imbalance is. If he's saying this just to toe the party line on labour, then he's an idiot. If he shed some more light on the Sask Party's hidden agenda, which is more likely, then he's an idiot and a liar.

Brad Can't Add

Mandrake came out hitting pretty hard with his piece Friday about how the province's finances are probably better than Brad Wall would care to admit (Leader-Post, Nov. 23).

He starts by saying $2 billion in the bank would cover the Sask Party's election promises, then asks if Lorne Calvert is lying about the money in the bank. We know from the bumblings of Dan D'Autremont that the Sask Party says one thing when they mean another, so it's not surprising to have Wall forced into a corner so quickly.

Mandrake is uneven in his column when he should be hard-hitting. Although he does point out that this is an old political tactic to lower voter expectations, and is also likely a way for Wall to criticize the spending of the outgoing government, he stops just short of Wall's promise to curb the growth of the civil service and his promise of no deficit budgeting. And in spite of Wall's insistence in the following quote, I think we'll be seeing both of those promises go out the window very shortly:

"We're going through a transition program right now. I can tell you this, there's no directive today in that (cabinet) room ... to say 'Here, we're going to find a bunch of savings through fewer public service jobs.' We have said we think government ought not to grow faster than the population it serves. We will be looking for efficiencies and savings in government and I think that's reasonable given what we will report," he said.
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)

Another thing we can expect is the privatization of SPM. There are certainly some budgetary efficiencies to make up there.