Nova Scotia government needs a style make-over

If ministers are not responsible for the delivery of public services, who needs them?

After getting a just-adequate performance review from Nova Scotians last spring, will the provincial government try to change its bad habits?

The first test comes in nine days, with autumn and the new legislature.

The summer’s over, the assembly convenes, a Throne Speech signals a new start and there’s a budget redo that offers a chance to heal some wounds.

Premier Stephen McNeil and his mostly low-profile cabinet defended an uneven, thin record and got a scare May 30 from broad Tory strength mixed with signs of NDP regeneration. But that dynamic also created vote splits that gave Liberals narrow victories in metropolitan bedroom communities, and saved their majority.

The voters spanked the government mostly on substantive issues, like health care, but there was a discernable undercurrent of discontent with its style, too.

The substantive problems are welldocumented. The paucity of family doctors that shows signs of further deterioration; a restructuring that delivered woeful health administration; an economic program that dismissed creativity to embrace convention; and ham-handed labour relations with teachers and other public employees.

Opposition and media attention are naturally drawn to the substance of governing. Issues identify themselves and are deemed the measure of government efficacy.

But it is the government’s style that burrows deep into people’s psyche and shapes the voter-government relationship – positive or negative. More than policy, style determines whether people like or dislike their government.

Absent a style makeover, the Liberals are likely playing out their string.

Premier McNeil is the public presence of the government. He single-handedly earned just enough style-points to hang onto the government. But, in part because of his imposing physical stature, McNeil needs to tone down his naturally combative style. During the first term, he came perilously close to looking like a bully.

Whether by design or timidity, the rest of the government bench – the cabinet – appears, with a few exceptions, weak or empty. Those ministers need to step it up.

In the leadership-driven politics of the times, if the priority is political success, the leader becomes the government. That’s both unfortunate and destructive in the parliamentary system, where cabinet consensus and ministerial responsibility are elemental principles.

Nova Scotians don’t get to sit at the cabinet table, so don’t know if there’s an iron fist or a collection of equals in there.

As for ministerial responsibility – cabinet ministers openly taking on the good and the bad that comes with their portfolios – the government was a failure in the first term. While it’s too soon to draw any conclusions, early indicators are not positive for change.

Case in point: Health Minister Randy Delorey said a published Canadian Press report that women are enduring long delays for abortion services was, “the first I’ve heard of it.” That begs the question “why?” and I wanted to ask it.

Typical of the government, rather than being granted a ministerial audience, a vapid response crafted by risk-averse bureaucrats arrived saying, “There is no institutional memory that this was brought to government.” Once recovered from a fit of laughter, it occurred that it matters not whether the institutional memory is decrepit or the news never arrived. Either is the mark of lousy governance.

Further, the missive suggested that the minister need not accept responsibility for poor access to medical care.

“The NSHA and IWK are responsible, by legislation, for the front-line service delivery and the operation of the health care system.” Yeah but the minister has statutory responsibility for those same outfits.

This response suggests that cabinet ministers should get a seminar on how their jobs work. At the very least, someone could slap together a “power point” on the basics of executive responsibility in a parliamentary government.

If ministers are not responsible for the delivery of public services, who needs them? If a minister is inclined to dodge responsibility by passing the buck to organizations for which he is responsible, the premier needs to sit him down for a serious talk.

This stuff seems obtuse, but the heart of the matter is simple. Governments are responsible, to the people, for the conduct and operation of publicly-funded programs and services.

And, if the essence of the above paragraph is “the first I’ve heard of it” for any minister or senior civil servant, we’ve got bigger problems.

The rest of the government bench – the cabinet – appears, with a few exceptions, weak or empty.