Pallister practising prudence with picks

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 07/05/2016 (3735 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Brandon once again found itself without a cabinet minister as new Premier Brian Pallister announced his cabinet on Tuesday. There was a paucity of Westman names, short of Spruce Woods MLA Cliff Cullen.

Given that the Spruce Woods constituency basically encompasses countless rural communities surrounding Brandon, we can take some comfort in knowing the Westman region, our broader trading area, will be represented in cabinet.

New Agassiz MLA Eileen Clarke was also named to cabinet.

She told reporters of her familiarity with our city —apparently she “actually lived in Brandon for a very short period of my life …”

(If that is what qualifies someone to represent a region or community, you’re reading a column from the minister for Toronto, Winnipeg and Israel. Also, I’ve visited Disneyland and Whistler. Does that count?)

With respect, when former Brandon East NDP MLA Drew Caldwell was dropped from cabinet, it actually made little difference to me. I don’t believe in the power of an individual cabinet minister being the “make or break” factor when it comes to a government investing in our community.

We all seemingly buy in to the grand idea that having a cabinet minister at the table equals a preponderance of pork-barrel projects coming our way. In other words, we voted for you and now it’s your turn to pay us back.

From my perspective, this idea of greasing palms in order to get elected represents old-style, New York Tammany Hall politics at its very worst. Manitobans have moved beyond this … if you believe the results of the April 19 election. 4/19 was a turning point in the political history of our province — at least it has the potential to be.

Simply put, Manitobans overwhelmingly voted for a new government that literally promised them nothing more than continued infrastructure spending; reducing the growth in overall provincial government spending; reducing the PST by one per cent by the end of the first term, and reducing the size of cabinet to 12 ministers from the NDP’s 19.

Manitobans voted for prudence, not profligacy.

Premier Pallister did not campaign on countless spending initiatives, unlike the NDP or Liberals. As such, he has a clear mandate to reduce spending — even in his own cabinet.

Pallister’s cabinet has fewer members, all with copious amounts of responsibility as this new government has combined tasks previously given to multiple ministers. That is, these ministers have accepted much larger workloads than were previously undertaken by their NDP predecessors.

During a debate between former premier Greg Selinger and Liberal Leader Rana Bokhari, Selinger defended his government’s spending by asserting there are times to spend and times to cut back.

Those of us who have studied Keynesian economics will concur — the government can limit the impact of economic peaks and valleys through expenditures and cutbacks. When the economy slows, governments can prime the pump. As the economy grows, governments can then pull back on expenditures in an effort to prudently build resources for the next downturn. This is the essence of a rainy-day fund.

As I suspect we will learn in the coming weeks, the NDP left Pallister, and by implication all Manitobans, with record levels of debt and deficit. Like it or not, there is a time when these “investments” must be paid for, regardless of whether we wish to do so.

This leads back to a simple question — does it matter whether Brandon has a cabinet minister?

Brandon elected two bright, capable representatives who, one would hope, will find themselves in cabinet at some point. Note, however, that the Tory plurality means that Pallister has some 40 caucus members to choose among.

In a time of fiscal restraint combined with a reduction in government spending, tough decisions will be made. Rather than 19 ministers, we will be forced to get by with 12. I accept this logic with one proviso — that Pallister’s commitment to fiscal prudence is real and lasting, not illusory or cynical.

My personal sense is that there will be many cabinet shuffles in Pallister’s time in office. While spending is easy, restraint requires sacrifice and tough decisions. Further, the premier need only look to Saskatchewan for an example of a government that alternates its ministers with regularity in an effort to drive the results citizens demand. Yet another victory by the Wall government ought to tell us that restraint appeals to voters.