Three new Sask. trade offices shouldn’t be our new normal

Nary a day has gone by since Saskatchewan’s first COVID -19 cases in mid-march that Premier Scott Moe hasn’t talked about the “new normal.”

So often has it been uttered by Moe (and virtually everyone) that it has become a pandemic cliché — short of “two-metre social distancing” but certainly right up there with “pivoting,” “virtual meetings” and all those TV ads with sombre music and faraway stares talking about companies “being there for you” and “becoming the best version of ourselves.”

This is not to make light of Moe’s dedication to the need to be better while battling the pandemic enemy (there’s a couple more clichés) ever since he dispensed with the nonsense of a snap spring election that would have served nothing other than the Saskatchewan Party’s ambition of annihilating the NDP.

But you have reason to question clichés when they become easily ignored as politicians return to: (a) doing things in a familiar way because they aren’t inclined to explore alternatives, and; (b) doing things that serve their own political purposes rather than the true needs of the day.

This takes us to Friday’s announcement that — notwithstanding a $2.4-billion deficit or a pandemic proving business can get done from a distance — we’re still opening foreign trade offices.

“International offices, and a sustained international presence, are a key component of our strategy to grow Saskatchewan’s economy as we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic,” Trade and Export Development Minister Jeremy Harrison said in a Friday news release that announced plans to forge ahead with Saskatchewan offices in Tokyo, Singapore and New Delhi by early 2021 — quite possibly before all the COVID -19 restrictions are lifted.

Let us set aside the thinly veiled politics within the news that clearly revolved around the loathing of Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and an eagerness to heap largely merited abuse on him for turning his 2018 trip to India into a national embarrassment.

Objectively speaking, diplomatic and trade relations with India have declined and nowhere is that more evident than here in Saskatchewan where annual trade numbers with the country from 2015 to 2019 were as follows: $1.88 billion, $1.45 billion, $ 1.04 billion, $629.4 million and $775.3 million, respectively.

Friday’s news release slyly noted that “Minister Harrison went to India on a trade mission and was joined by Stephen J. Harper, CEO and Chairman of Harper and Associates” to advocate for the elimination of trade barriers and further welcomed “the recent announcement by the Government of India that tariffs on lentils have been temporarily reduced from 30 per cent to 10 per cent, effective from June 2 to August 31, 2020.”

Of course, the main purpose of the news release was to justify hefty travel bills run up by Harrison and other cabinet ministers, the somewhat hefty $240,000 annual contract Harper has with the Saskatchewan Party government and the need for $5-million-per-year trade offices.

There is no denying how important trade is and — again, objectively speaking — hiring Harper may be completely justifiable to deal with such problems. Whether the Indian government’s change on lentil tariffs can be fully attributed to Harper may be a point of debate, but he does enjoy a strong relationship with the India’s rather conservative Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Many might not like the seedy perception of ex-politicians profiting off their contacts, but, alas, that’s how politics works.

But why, then, do we also need trade offices that have too often been a soft landing spot for political appointees without skills, contacts or track records to justify their placement?

If Harper was as effective as the Sask. Party government suggests, why do we need trade offices and travel?

Why three more trade offices? Perhaps a presence is justifiable in the U.S., China and India (our three biggest trading partners). Are we truly not concerned about austerity? Have we learned nothing about doing business from a distance?

How is the “new normal” business as usual?