Premier Graham’s no Robichaud

What does Shawn Graham have in common with Louis J. Robichaud? No, this isn’t the start of a joke.

Both were members of the Liberal Party and have been the Premier of New Brunswick. And Shawn has the desk that Louis used in his office back in the 60’s.

Beyond that, any similarities are difficult to find at this moment. Louis Robichaud succeeded in making revolutionary changes in the administration of New Brunswick. Today, most people see his legacy as positive and progressive. He was involved in the building of schools and universities and the principles of equality of opportunity for all. The creation of a province with two official languages recognized the reality of New Brunswick but was difficult politically and yet very necessary at the same time.

Louis J. Robichaud was a courageous and visionary politician.

Certainly, our latest premier has the best of intentions. He wants to follow in the footsteps of Robichaud and Hatfield in transforming our province. What we may not understand is his vision and how his actions will accomplish the task.

Since being elected, he has announced studies and commissions galore on large sectors of public administration. The public has been invited to respond with their ideas but it has become clear that the course has already been determined. The reports are pre-written and public consultation is only part of change management techniques.

It is also possible that the continual vague announcements of the self-sufficiency task force and the recent speech from the throne are part of a technique to pummel the masses with boredom and remove ammunition from the opposition. When the day of shock and awe arrives, the changes will be legislated quickly. The citizens of the province will be so tired of the empty promises that they will accept any harebrained scheme as an alternative to no government action.

Each year the federal government sends us a big cheque courtesy of the people of Ontario and Alberta, which amounts to 1.5 billion in 2007/08. Thank you very much! The idea of a province of only 750,000 people, operating on an annual deficit of $1.5 billion, spending its way to prosperity by building highways is fairly ridiculous. Adding 100,000 new people with high paying jobs is another dream. Other provinces with greater populations clearly show us that 100,000 is not nearly enough to succeed.

The self-sufficiency agenda presumes that the economy of the world is likely to remain the same till 2026. Nothing could be further from the truth. Almost all oil analysts foresee a peak of oil production by 2020 and most see a peak within five years. Production for the past 18 months has been at a plateau of 85 million barrels per day. In an industrial society like ours, the decline of oil production, at a rate of perhaps 3% per year, will cause a large increase in price eliminating any possibility of economic growth. In fact, we will see hardship in many areas due to our exposure to the cost of oil in transportation, heating, electricity and other products that are based on oil.

The crown jewel in the energy hub concept is a new refinery. However, the new refinery in Saint John may just be a mirage. If world oil production is nearing the peak, perhaps at 87 to 90 million barrels, financing for an unnecessary refinery may be hard to find. Refineries around the world will be shutting down in the next fifty years at the rate of 10 a year, due to lack of crude.

Is the Premier playing ” pin the tail on a donkey?” He knows that he wants a vigorous economy that will support New Brunswick without handouts and that is a good thing. Unfortunately, he had a blindfold on his eyes and can’t see the future of our world. Being very generous, his transformational philosophy might be perceived as adequate according to the economic theories of the last 50 years. However, the game has changed and for New Brunswick to survive and perhaps prosper, we have to change radically our focus and expenditures.

New Brunswick uses 34 million barrels of oil each year, which at $55 a barrel costs roughly $1.8 billion in 2006.  If the price of oil now averages $90, then we will be paying to sources outside of Canada over $3 billion. This is an extra $1.2 billion taken out of our pockets. What is the government’s plan to deal with this? What has Efficiency NB accomplished in the almost two years of its existence. How many barrels of oil has it saved? How many kWh’s are being saved by customers? Where is its annual report?

The Energy Department has moved to Saint John. They have started the Lepreau 2 review and accelerated the windpower program. Has the move to Saint John accomplished anything? Can we expect a revised energy policy? How are we going to reduce our exposure to oil price volatility. Shall we wait until oil is $200 a barrel? Many questions exist but are our eyes wide open?

No one doubted that Louis Robichaud had the interest of the people at heart. His battles with the industrial interests of the province are proof. How will Shawn Graham be remembered?

His handling of the Post Secondary Education review, the self-sufficiency task force, his orientation towards energy exports leave little doubt which group is guiding his agenda.

Captain Graham might think of that when his ship of state gets a little closer to the iceberg.


Self-Sufficiency: Boon or Boondoggle

Our political leaders are no different from us except for the size of their egos and the cost of their dreams. Trudeau had his “Just Society”, Lyndon Johnson’s “war on poverty”, Mike Harris his “Common sense revolution” and I’m sure that you could mention many others over the years. And you know who gets the bill. It is sometimes difficult to determine whether their vision is really intended to succeed or if it is just a political tool to divert attention from other problems that beset a government. Is it just smoke and mirrors?

The Liberal government of Shawn Graham has begun a task force on self-sufficiency, which seems to be a grand and noble enterprise. After all, who wouldn’t want to stand up on our own two feet and not receive handouts from Ontario and Alberta. The expected subsidy in 2006/07 is $1.45 billion or roughly $1900 per person in New Brunswick. This is about 22% of the NB’s annual operating budget.

To date the task force has issued three reports and received submissions from a number of individuals and groups. The pre-packaged reports seem to have it all figured out with some of the interesting items being suggested: raising the population of the province by 100,000 people, higher paying jobs, investing an extra $1 billion in infrastructure (mostly roads) and helping targeted businesses, and many other industry friendly items. What is of some concern is the lack of documentation supporting the recommendations and the lack of economists involved in the review process. After all, it is suggested that we spend $1 billion and I haven’t seen a business case in sight. Can we expect that this approach will have a realistic chance of success?

First we could take a look at some of the principal recommendations and pass them through a logic test. The report states that we need to grow our population by 100,000 people. At first glance, this would seem to make sense – more workers to cover the fixed costs of government. However, Nova Scotia has 185,000 more and Manitoba has 428,000 more people than New Brunswick and each of those provinces receives $1450 per person equalization. In fact, Quebec at 10 times the population of NB receives $725 dollars per capita annually. So it would seem that a small increase in population is not the determining factor. The report states that wages have to go up to attract people back to New Brunswick. Typically, jobs in this region have been rare and out migration has been a matter of necessity. Of the hundreds of thousands of former easterners that have gone west over the years, a large number would love to move back but no opportunities presently exist. When the jobs become available here, they will come.

The report indicates that we must spend hundreds of millions of dollars on highways. Unless I am mistaken, we have been spending, on average, $300 million dollars per year on capital highway improvements since the McKenna years. Where is the dramatic economic improvement from that investment? Are we to increase those expenditures? What is the benefit of going from a two-lane highway to a four-lane highway? Traffic is still limited to 100 km/h and we don’t have the traffic volumes of larger provinces.

Call me simple, but I see a road as an expense – having an incredibly high cost to build, snow clearing expense each year and repaving every ten years. The only tangible payback is the gas tax and that remains fairly constant no matter how many new roads we build.

What will be the economic impact of spending $1 billion dollars as proposed? (allocation of $500 million on new roads and $500 million on aid to new and expanding enterprises). Government investments in business startups and expansions can lever private investment greater than the original capital investment of $500 million perhaps to a tune of five times or $2.5 billion. Road construction is a one-time expenditure that doesn’t leverage private investment. The total impact, ignoring other economic multipliers is approximately $3 billion.

To remove the necessity for equalization, government revenue has to rise higher than the amount of equalization. However, to increase government revenue to remove the $1.45 billion annual equalization subsidy at an income tax rate of 20% would require an increase in personal income of $7.25 billion dollars. This is the equivalent of 100,000 new jobs at $75,000 annually. The New Brunswick employment levels for the past five years show a small increase of 1670 people. The Alberta statistics show an increase of 225,000 jobs over the same period.

The annual capital investment in Alberta rose from $29 billion to $58 billion. In the same period New Brunswick rose from $2.5 to $3.6 billion. Given that the population of Alberta is four times higher than NB, one can see the incredible difference in investment, above that which population would normally create. 55% of the $58 billion is in the mining, oil and gas sector and that creates large numbers of jobs and draws employees from elsewhere in Canada. Looking at the investment and the jobs created, it looks like approximately $1Million per job. The proposed Irving refinery is costed at $5 billion and will produce 1000 full time jobs. That is $5 million per job created.

So if we invest the equivalent of $3 billion (with private investment added in), then the jobs created would be 3000 or perhaps 5000 if we are optimistic. This is a long way from the 100,000 that would be necessary to achieve the self-sufficiency that the task force has suggested is possible.

There are some good ideas in the reports of the task force, especially those items related to the availability of credit for expansion and new business. However, the implementation of the consultation process has been flawed, hurried and basically just going through the motions. The choices made by this government preclude other paths that would actually work and lead to true self-sufficiency. My suggestions for success will follow in a future column.