On openness

With talk about transparency for MP expenses dominating the federal scene for the past few weeks, it was inevitable that similar questions would start to get asked at the provincial level. And it's a huge plus to see the Saskatchewan NDP take a stand in favour of improved disclosure from the start, particularly with the Sask Party going down the route of its federal cousins by making a fool of itself trying to defend the status quo.

Here's the Sask Party's response to a question about disclosure of caucus expenses:

Morgan, the (Sask Party) government's justice minister, struggled to explain why (caucus funding) has remained hidden over the years even while transparency has increased on other aspects of provincial spending.

He suggested details of caucus spending would provide information to political opponents and raise questions about "motives."

"I think by its nature, caucus is . . . very reluctant to release information that they feel could effect their ability to deal with issues in the house when they want to bring things up," said Morgan.

Sask Party. Hiding. Questionable motives. Can't deal openly with issues. Check.

In contrast, the NDP has nothing to hide, and is willing to disclose its caucus spending accordingly:

But (NDP MLA Kevin) Yates said he could not think of any aspect of caucus spending that would be problematic to release publicly.

He said it was probably time for the board of internal economy to review all rules around expenditure and disclosure.

Needless to say, that looks to be a difficult position for the Sask Party to argue against. So thanks to the Saskatchewan NDP, we should be well on our way toward improved disclosure on the provincial level without the waiting game being played federally - at least, unless the Sask Party thinks it'll do itself more damage by letting the truth get out than by arguing alone for keeping the public in the dark.

Checked out

At last notice, Saskatoon Sutherland MLA Joceline Schriemer wasn't sure whether she wanted to bother running to hold the seat in 2011. But based on what happened in the Legislature on Thursday, it's worth wondering whether she's even interested in the job while she continues to hold it.

Here's what happened when a Sask Party motion which Schriemer was supposed to be introducing came up for discussion:

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Lloydminster.

Children’s Hospital

Mr. McMillan: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m very pleased to speak to the children’s hospital in Saskatoon. It’s something that I know we take very . . .

An Hon. Member: — Point of order. Point of order, Mr. Speaker. Point of order . . . [inaudible] . . .

The Speaker: — Right. Right. Order. I remind the members that the member has to be in her chair to move the motion forward. I recognize the member from Saskatoon Sutherland.

[Interjections]

The Speaker: — Order. Order. Order. Why is the member on his feet?

Mr. Yates: — Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: — The member from Regina Dewdney.

Mr. Yates: — Mr. Speaker, in order for a motion before this Assembly to move forward when it’s called, the mover of the motion has to be in their seat and move the motion, Mr. Speaker, and enter the debate. At the time the motion was called, the member was not there. A second member stood and spoke, began to speak, Mr. Speaker. I rose on my feet to say that was out of order, Mr. Speaker. Subsequently the member came back into the House, Mr. Speaker. The rules would say that that motion should have been passed over, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: — I recognize the Government House Leader.

Mr. D’Autremont: — On the point of order, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I’m not in disagreement with the point of order that the member raises.

Now, I'd think that an MLA responsible for presenting a motion would generally want to pay at least enough attention to make sure that it could be discussed. And it doesn't look like anything much out of the ordinary happened on Thursday to disrupt the usual schedule for legislative proceedings.

But Schriemer apparently didn't bother to stay in the chamber at the one point where her presence was actually required, then was caught entirely off guard by what seems to have been her main legislative responsibility for the day. And the result was that the Sask Party threw away its chance to have the legislature discuss its choice of motions for the day.

Of course, that doesn't figure to result in any great loss for the province - particularly given that the motion looks to have been little more than an attempt to pretend that the Wall government's decision to pull funding from the Children's Hospital should be ignored. But Schriemer's constituents surely have to wonder just what else she's missed while hemming and hawing as to whether or not she actually wants her job. And Schriemer's failings can only help convince the riding that it'll be better served electing one of the strong NDP contenders for her seat.

Regina Dewdney - Kaitlin Stocks Seeking NDP Nomination

LRT is once again ahead of the game on the NDP's Regina Dewdney nomination race, as Kaitlin Stocks has been confirmed as the challenger to incumbent Kevin Yates - and looks to be off to a strong start with 110 fans already.

As I noted in my earlier post, the road is never easy for a challenger to a sitting MLA. But I maintain that it's a plus to see the kind of enthusiasm involved in such a challenge (and I'm not alone in that assessment). So kudos to Kaitlin for throwing her hat in the ring, and I'll be looking forward to seeing how the nomination race plays out.

On challenges

LRT breaks a noteworthy piece of news from the Saskatchewan NDP, as a "young, female challenger" will apparently be running against incumbent MLA Kevin Yates for the party's nomination in Regina Dewdney. But while that race itself may be one to watch, the more interesting question may be whether the move opens the floodgates for additional challenges for incumbents.

After all, the few non-incumbent nomination races in Regina and Saskatoon have attracted loads of strong competitors. And it wouldn't come as too much surprise if at least a few more new candidates decide they see a better chance to win a place in the Legislature by taking their chances on a difficult nomination fight for a seat the NDP already holds, rather than facing multiple challengers to contest a riding currently in Sask Party hands.

But what about the effect on the party in general? There too, I'd see it as a plus on the balance for some incumbents to face the possibility of nomination challenges. At the very least, the risk should push our current MLAs to work toward the party's membership targets in order to set an early nomination date and keep the field as clear as possible. And for those who do face a contested nomination, the extra work and energy that goes into competitors' efforts should prove a long-term advantage if the challengers aren't able to overcome the long odds facing them.

So I'll be looking forward to seeing not only how Regina Dewdney's contest plays out, but also how many more races materialize over the next little while.

Fixed

The Leader-Post misses what's sure to have been part of its story about 2011 election planning. So here's the fixed version:

(The NDP's Kevin) Yates said he hope(s) the Sask. Party is not so caught up in thinking about the 2011 election that it neglects the work it needs to do in government.

But Energy and Resources Minister Bill Boyd -- recently named by Wall to be Sask. Party campaign chair -- said that won't happen.

Pressed as to whether the answer should be "will happen" or "won't happen", Boyd noted that he might not have the correct information with him, and asked for time to allow his aides to work it out. After 90 minutes of Boyd cursing under his breath while whispering back and forth with his staffers, Sask Party MLA Tim McMillan stepped in to advise that the interview was over.