Perhaps for the first time in seven years, the Sask. Party government will have to fine tune their management skills, or at least ensure that their managers have fine-tuned their skill sets with or without the assistance of the high-priced Lean senseis.
With resource revenues leveling off, or in some instances, sliding ever so gently southward, and with income tax revenues falling short of expectations in a province with a growing population, it’s time for our government to start testing themselves on the efficiency file. That is something they’ve been able to defer for the last seven years with income always exceeding expectations, thus leaving a lot of wiggle room to escape what might otherwise be some embarrassing decisions and expenditures.
One of these management sectors that we feel must be sent back to the workshop for re-examination is the P3 file.
While the private, public partnership model appears to be solid enough on the surface and at first-glance, it might serve the Brad Wall ministries well to conduct a more serious exploration into P3 ventures.
The Official Opposition raised the possibility of introducing a P3 transparency bill in the legislature and while we understand governing parties are loathe to acknowledge any kind of positive ideas coming from opposition benches, Wall and his cohorts have shown us, on occasion, they are open to positive suggestions no matter the source.
In this matter of P3 conracts, we feel that a little bipartisan exploration could serve Saskatchewan’s population well.
The opposition NDP is suggesting that independent watchdogs be assigned to each P3 contract awarded. Since these will all be major projects of at least $100 million that probably isn’t a bad idea. In other words, if we’re heading full bore into the world of P3, it might be best to assign a neutral party with some expertise to ensure the customer is getting the best bang for the major bucks.
Another suggestion from the ranks, offers up the idea that there should be at least three bids received on any and all of these big capital projects. If not … no go because the sure signal would be impending disaster on the construction and financial fronts.
Making the full costs of the project, including the cost of borrowing over the length of the credit contract, transparent, speaks for itself. There can’t be any shading of facts and figures when dealing with construction contracts in excess of $100 million.
The P3 way of doing business is relatively new to Saskatchewan. We have seen other provinces and jurisdictions use it with mixed results.
If Saskatchewan is intent on moving toward the rent-a-school or rent-a-hospital model for the next 40 to 60 years, its citizens deserve to be educated as to what the true costs and long-range implications will be.
Construction companies come and go all the time, as do management consortiums and yes, even governments. That’s why there is a need to know all of the details for decades to come, long after the original contractors, managers and governments are gone.
The buildings should all be standing and serving their purpose, even if the construction companies, managers and governments no longer are.
