Scandals are a tradition in Saskatchewan

Governments can’t resist filling imaginary gaps, writes Mark Stobbe.

As the Global Transportation Hub (GTH) controversies grow, so do the similarities with the ill-fated NDP efforts to grow more potatoes (Spudco). Both have the word “scandal” attached to their names automatically by the media, political opposition and much of the public.

Is this designation fair? The Oxford English Dictionary has many definitions of scandal. The government of the day fights for the definition of “a disgraceful imputation ... a baseless imputation, a slander” while the media and Opposition fight for “a grossly discreditable circumstance, event, or condition of things.” For GTH and Spudco, a third definition applies: “damage to reputation; rumour or general comment injurious to reputation.”

But GTH and Spudco have more in common than a battle over definition. Both originated from noble motives. The government was motivated by a desire to stimulate economic development, create jobs for Saskatchewan people, diversify the economy, and increase the province’s tax base so that programs could be improved without raising tax rates. So far, so good.

Both GTH and Spudco began with some smart person in government identifying a perceived missed economic opportunity. For GTH, it was the convergence of rail, highway and airport transportation at the edge of Regina. For Spudco it was underutilized irrigation infrastructure around Lake Diefenbaker. The solution proposed to this gap between perceived potential and reality was government-led initiative.

This dynamic is a longstanding one in Saskatchewan. In the first Douglas administration (1944-1947) a perceived gap was the combination of cold winters, lack of local capacity to make woollen long-johns, and a lack of market for the Saskatchewan wool. The government created a woollen mill in Moose Jaw.

Problems arise when the government initiative reveals the real reasons for the gap. For GTH, Regina is a poor location to be a global hub. It does not have ready access to ocean shipping. For Spudco, most farmers had no interest in growing potatoes. For the woollen mill, the type of sheep being raised in Saskatchewan had fibres ill-suited for quality textiles. The government initiative becomes a boondoggle.

In the case of the woollen mill, the government correctly identified the problem and shut down the woollen mill. There was controversy but no scandal. With GTH and Spudco, government was not as hard-nosed. Instead of facing the fact the opportunity was a mirage, the reaction was a governance fix. Red tape and bureaucracy was deemed the problem, not reality. Those operating the initiative got more flexibility and less transparency. For those seeking personal advantage, this created opportunities. For those trying to serve the public good, it allowed for an even deeper hole. A potential scandal was created and only needed exposure.

The aftermath of a scandal is always ugly. Accusations and recriminations abound. Investigations are conducted. Lawsuits are filed. The media and the lawyers both prosper, while the reputations built during a lifetime of public service are destroyed. The government is embarrassed and the opposition is indignant. Sadly, there is little evidence of learning. The opposition becomes the government. Convinced of its own genius, it identifies a gap that is hindering economic development. And on we go.

Saskatchewan scandals always seem to be in the $20-million to $30-million range (adjusted for inflation). This is the sweet spot for Saskatchewan politically driven economic development initiatives. It is big enough to get the attention of government but small enough that action is affordable. It is big enough that the government can seek credit but small enough that government relaxes its oversight vigilance.

GTH and Spudco became full-fledged scandals — but Saskatchewan is littered with similar-sized boondoggles. Some became full-fledged potential scandals but escaped significant scrutiny. Others died in boondoggle stage. However, the pattern will be repeated until Saskatchewan governments learn that a perceived gap is not necessarily a real gap, and that they are not as smart as they think they are.

Mark Stobbe, a PhD student in sociology at the U of S, is the former director of communications at Crown Investments Corporation and executive director of strategic planning and issues management at the Department of Executive Council for Saskatchewan.