In a moment of clarity, it became obvious. They鈥檙e doing it all wrong.
The New Democrat Opposition has created a review panel to go over the election results.
And the B.C. Liberals on Wednesday outlined the terms of the core-review process headed by cabinet minister Bill Bennett to drive more efficiency in government.
The two different reviews each have a big problem. The NDP needs a core review a lot more than the government does. And the Liberals are so delighted over their election win, it鈥檚 hard to imagine them adopting the right kind of nasty, critical attitude you need to look at government programs skeptically.
What鈥檚 clearly needed is for the two review teams simply to change jobs.
On the premise that fresh eyes are always welcome, it would make perfect sense to invite the NDP review team to poke around government for a while and see what they can turn up in the way of inefficiency.
And Bennett should be only too happy to write a report on everything the NDP is doing wrong. He could go for hours on that topic. He often does.
Each team of reviewers would enjoy the other side鈥檚 terms of references a lot more than the ones they鈥檙e currently working under.
Particularly the NDP review team 鈥� a.k.a. the 鈥渄eath panel.鈥� The job description for that outfit is fraught with peril.
Just one of the five points outlining the mandate runs to 60 words, and includes things like 鈥渃entral campaign decision-making, platform development, role of the leader, stakeholder relations including community, business, social movement, ethnic communities鈥� ... and on and on.
By the time the last gender-equitable, LGBTQ-representative, visible minority-reflective subcommittee is done 鈥渆xamining the NDP鈥檚 base of support compared to the changing demographics of the population,鈥� it鈥檚 a safe bet no one involved will be talking to each other.
Being asked to talk at length to the heartbroken membership about why they blew the election is an invitation to a world of pain.
(鈥淲e open the meeting now for recriminations and lashing-out. You have the floor.鈥�)
The panel鈥檚 highest-profile member is NDP MP Jinny Sims 鈥� the former teachers鈥� union head. Switching it up and turning her and the rest of the posse loose on government would be rejuvenating, and nothing but fun.
The NDP has been criticizing right-wing governments for 40 of the last 53 years. Giving them Bennett鈥檚 core-review job would be a golden opportunity for them to step up and identify how to do things better.
They have mastered the art in opposition of demanding more of everything. But getting them to recommend cuts would be as good for them as it would be for government.
As for the Liberals鈥� core review, Bennett released the terms of reference for his core review on Wednesday. Right off the top, there鈥檚 a self-congratulatory reference. It says this one will be different from the 2001 version 鈥済iven the cost-saving and efficiency work completed by the government over the past 12 years.鈥�
He cites reviews of regulations, executive compensation and bargaining mandates as examples of how government achieved its budget targets. (Overlooking the fact that, actually, they missed more than a few.)
In other words, his team is going in with the attitude that most of the hard questions were asked years ago.
A canned quote from the release provides further flavour: 鈥淲e know government has already done a good job of managing costs, but we also know more can always be done.鈥�
There is some tough talk about eliminating programs. But it doesn鈥檛 seem as if this one is going to be as tough as it first appeared when Bennett got the job in June.
He鈥檚 also charged with 鈥渆nsuring public-sector management wage levels are appropriate.鈥�
Imagine the NDP review panel 鈥� with four public-sector union types on board 鈥� sinking their teeth into management salaries.
They鈥檇 make more headway in an afternoon than the Liberals have in the past year.
The switcheroo is the obvious way to maximize the talents on both sides.
No need for thank yous. I鈥檓 here to serve.
