Let's close off my series of posts on the policies put forward by the Saskatchewan NDP leadership candidates with an overall look at the candidates' scores:
Ryan Meili - 40/50
Yens Pedersen - 37/50
Dwain Lingenfelter - 36/50
Deb Higgins - 35/50
As noted in my posts about each individual candidates, the scores tend to reflect a divide between Meili and Pedersen who put together ambitious and complete platforms, and Lingenfelter and Higgins who played it safer with limited proposals. Meili then ranks ahead of the pack through third-party validation and a judicious choice of policies which minimize the problems which would normally arise in a more detailed platform.
But the most important message in looking at the platforms is found less in the candidate ranking than in the reality that the candidates each brought different strengths to the table in making their policy choices. And that should serve as a reminder that in order to put together the best possible platform for the NDP as a whole in 2011, all of the candidates should be eager to listen to each other and to the membership as a whole.
Showing posts with label leadership 2009 policy review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label leadership 2009 policy review. Show all posts
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Leadership 2009 - Deb Higgins Policy Review
Finishing off the policy review series, let's take a look at how Deb Higgins' platform compares to those of her competitors in the Saskatchewan NDP leadership race.
Thoroughness - 7/10
On the surface, the broad topics in Higgins' online platform would seem to cover significantly more ground than Dwain Lingenfelter's - if still missing a few obvious concerns like education of health care. But the subject areas included in Higgins' official platform are dealt with somewhat inconsistently: some (such as environment) are addressed with a fairly long list of proposals, while at least a couple still tell readers to "come back for updates". Which means that anybody who didn't hang onto the Commonwealth may have trouble finding out what Higgins has to say on some of the more important issues which figure to be dealt with during the leadership race.
Consistency - 8/10
One of the advantages of a fairly modest set of proposals like Higgins' is that it doesn't tend to lead to major inconsistencies. But that tends to lead to problems in other areas, such as...
Creativity - 5/10
As I've noted before, Higgins' platform consists almost entirely either incremental changes to existing programs, the implementation of previous Saskatchewan reports or policies modeled on plans which already exist elsewhere in Canada.
Support - 7/10
Yet even with ample opportunity to rely on outside sources in support of her policies, Higgins doesn't offer much by way of explanation for her policies. Both her website and her Commonwealth responses tend to include a brief paragraph or two providing an extremely high-level look at the subjects involved, but little beyond that to explain Higgins' policies.
Pragmatism - 8/10
Of course, the lack of a strong explanation may be mitigated by the fact that Higgins' policies are generally non-controversial. Noteworthy exceptions may include a "triple-bottom-line" assessment process for major developments and indexation of the minimum wage above the poverty line - but even in those cases the policies would seem to have at most incremental effects on their opponents, and there would be obvious constituencies in favour as well to help ease the policies' passage.
The Big Idea
Higgins' first major announcement of the campaign was her campaign finance reform package which would prohibit donations from out of province, set limits on donations from Saskatchewan individuals and organizations, and provide for a public subsidy to political parties based on their total votes received. And while the proposal has been echoed in full by Meili and in part by Pedersen, it still stands out as Higgins' most significant contribution both to the race, and hopefully to the political scene at large at the end of the race.
Of course, that may depend in large part on the NDP's own fund-raising strategy coming out of this weekend's convention: if Lingenfelter emerges victorious and figures that his Alberta connections can rival the Sask Party's, then it's unlikely that the plan will go any further. But I'd argue that whoever wins the race would be best off adopting the policy - both in order to create a strong issue to wield against the Wall government, and in the interest of better connecting political parties with voters than with their financial backers as a matter of principle.
Thoroughness - 7/10
On the surface, the broad topics in Higgins' online platform would seem to cover significantly more ground than Dwain Lingenfelter's - if still missing a few obvious concerns like education of health care. But the subject areas included in Higgins' official platform are dealt with somewhat inconsistently: some (such as environment) are addressed with a fairly long list of proposals, while at least a couple still tell readers to "come back for updates". Which means that anybody who didn't hang onto the Commonwealth may have trouble finding out what Higgins has to say on some of the more important issues which figure to be dealt with during the leadership race.
Consistency - 8/10
One of the advantages of a fairly modest set of proposals like Higgins' is that it doesn't tend to lead to major inconsistencies. But that tends to lead to problems in other areas, such as...
Creativity - 5/10
As I've noted before, Higgins' platform consists almost entirely either incremental changes to existing programs, the implementation of previous Saskatchewan reports or policies modeled on plans which already exist elsewhere in Canada.
Support - 7/10
Yet even with ample opportunity to rely on outside sources in support of her policies, Higgins doesn't offer much by way of explanation for her policies. Both her website and her Commonwealth responses tend to include a brief paragraph or two providing an extremely high-level look at the subjects involved, but little beyond that to explain Higgins' policies.
Pragmatism - 8/10
Of course, the lack of a strong explanation may be mitigated by the fact that Higgins' policies are generally non-controversial. Noteworthy exceptions may include a "triple-bottom-line" assessment process for major developments and indexation of the minimum wage above the poverty line - but even in those cases the policies would seem to have at most incremental effects on their opponents, and there would be obvious constituencies in favour as well to help ease the policies' passage.
The Big Idea
Higgins' first major announcement of the campaign was her campaign finance reform package which would prohibit donations from out of province, set limits on donations from Saskatchewan individuals and organizations, and provide for a public subsidy to political parties based on their total votes received. And while the proposal has been echoed in full by Meili and in part by Pedersen, it still stands out as Higgins' most significant contribution both to the race, and hopefully to the political scene at large at the end of the race.
Of course, that may depend in large part on the NDP's own fund-raising strategy coming out of this weekend's convention: if Lingenfelter emerges victorious and figures that his Alberta connections can rival the Sask Party's, then it's unlikely that the plan will go any further. But I'd argue that whoever wins the race would be best off adopting the policy - both in order to create a strong issue to wield against the Wall government, and in the interest of better connecting political parties with voters than with their financial backers as a matter of principle.
Leadership 2009 - Dwain Lingenfelter Policy Review
In theory, one might have expected the campaign with the most resources to also spend the most time putting together a thorough leadership platform. Instead, Dwain Lingenfelter has been extremely selective in putting forward policy proposals, limiting his online policy to a few a grab bag of suggestions and even ducking a couple of written questions from the Commonwealth. That may make for a logical strategy from a candidate whose top priority is not giving people reason to oppose him, but it also leaves NDP members in the dark as to what we can expect if Lingenfelter wins.
Thoroughness - 5/10
Lingenfelter's complete list of independently-presented policy proposals is as follows:
- restoring SaskEnergy's mandate to develop energy resources;
- implementing an immigration and multiculturalism strategy;
- implementing a cap and trade system for CO2 along with increased renewable energy;
- providing greater support for women within the NDP;
- setting up a "blue ribbon panel" on electricity; and
- holding an NDP policy renewal process.
Which doesn't make for a bad start in signalling Lingenfelter's top personal issues, but leaves vast swaths of the party's policy priorities - from agriculture to health care to education to labour relations - completely untouched. And while at least a few of those blanks are filled in by Lingenfelter's responses in public forums such as the Commonweath and the leadership debates, the lack of any detailed policy leaves plenty of room for uncertainty.
Consistency - 8/10
But then, with only a few ideas being presented, there isn't too much room for Lingenfelter to contradict himself. And that goes doubly when most of his proposals start with consultation or collaboration rather than direct action.
Creativity - 7/10
Aside from his SaskEnergy proposal, Lingenfelter's policies are generally oriented toward either working with organizations or structures that are already planned or in place. But he does get credit for raising a serious issue about the proper role of Crowns in serving the public interest.
Support - 8/10
Interestingly, Lingenfelter offers the lengthiest discussions out of any of the leadership candidates. And while a good amount of that is generally dedicated to criticizing the Wall government rather than explaining Lingenfelter's proposals in great detail, there's enough background presented to allow readers to see where the ideas come from.
Pragmatism - 8/10
While most of Lingenfelter's policy proposals are fairly non-controversial, even his most striking departure from the status quo seems fairly well insulated from outside criticism. By stating his intention to have SaskEnergy work "in partnership with other companies" in developing energy resources, he offers up a suggestion that the private sector also stands to benefit from increased Crown-driven development - which combined with his own energy-sector connections would seem likely to minimize the risk of a strong corporate push against the plan (even if it may limit the benefits to the public as well).
The Big Idea
For obvious reasons, Lingenfelter's proposal to get SaskEnergy back into the business of owning and developing oil and gas reserves looks to be by far the most significant generated by his campaign. But it's worth wondering just what shape the proposal would ultimately take if put into practice.
After all, while Lingenfelter's proposal focuses largely on where SaskEnergy has been, a restored mandate wouldn't have the effect of turning back the clock on the context in which SaskEnergy operates. And it's some fairly subtle points within the larger plan - how aggressively SaskEnergy would bid for and develop reserves, how it would seek to interact with private-sector players, how it would deal with any international friction - which would ultimately determine how much benefit there is to be had from the idea.
Thoroughness - 5/10
Lingenfelter's complete list of independently-presented policy proposals is as follows:
- restoring SaskEnergy's mandate to develop energy resources;
- implementing an immigration and multiculturalism strategy;
- implementing a cap and trade system for CO2 along with increased renewable energy;
- providing greater support for women within the NDP;
- setting up a "blue ribbon panel" on electricity; and
- holding an NDP policy renewal process.
Which doesn't make for a bad start in signalling Lingenfelter's top personal issues, but leaves vast swaths of the party's policy priorities - from agriculture to health care to education to labour relations - completely untouched. And while at least a few of those blanks are filled in by Lingenfelter's responses in public forums such as the Commonweath and the leadership debates, the lack of any detailed policy leaves plenty of room for uncertainty.
Consistency - 8/10
But then, with only a few ideas being presented, there isn't too much room for Lingenfelter to contradict himself. And that goes doubly when most of his proposals start with consultation or collaboration rather than direct action.
Creativity - 7/10
Aside from his SaskEnergy proposal, Lingenfelter's policies are generally oriented toward either working with organizations or structures that are already planned or in place. But he does get credit for raising a serious issue about the proper role of Crowns in serving the public interest.
Support - 8/10
Interestingly, Lingenfelter offers the lengthiest discussions out of any of the leadership candidates. And while a good amount of that is generally dedicated to criticizing the Wall government rather than explaining Lingenfelter's proposals in great detail, there's enough background presented to allow readers to see where the ideas come from.
Pragmatism - 8/10
While most of Lingenfelter's policy proposals are fairly non-controversial, even his most striking departure from the status quo seems fairly well insulated from outside criticism. By stating his intention to have SaskEnergy work "in partnership with other companies" in developing energy resources, he offers up a suggestion that the private sector also stands to benefit from increased Crown-driven development - which combined with his own energy-sector connections would seem likely to minimize the risk of a strong corporate push against the plan (even if it may limit the benefits to the public as well).
The Big Idea
For obvious reasons, Lingenfelter's proposal to get SaskEnergy back into the business of owning and developing oil and gas reserves looks to be by far the most significant generated by his campaign. But it's worth wondering just what shape the proposal would ultimately take if put into practice.
After all, while Lingenfelter's proposal focuses largely on where SaskEnergy has been, a restored mandate wouldn't have the effect of turning back the clock on the context in which SaskEnergy operates. And it's some fairly subtle points within the larger plan - how aggressively SaskEnergy would bid for and develop reserves, how it would seek to interact with private-sector players, how it would deal with any international friction - which would ultimately determine how much benefit there is to be had from the idea.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Leadership 2009 - Ryan Meili Policy Review
Ryan Meili has followed Yens Pedersen's philosophy of putting together a detailed platform to introduce himself to the province's NDP members. In contrast, however, his one-piece-at-a-time release strategy has allowed him more time to refine his policies, and allowed him to frame them based on later developments in the campaign. The result is a platform that avoids a couple of Pedersen's relative pitfalls while enjoying the same strengths - though the downside is that there's been less time to discuss some of Meili's ideas.
Thoroughness - 8/10
Again, Meili's platform addresses all of the major provincial policy areas while delving into a few interesting new areas (such as his specific focus on developing rural arts and culture). That said, I'll rank Meili just slightly behind Pedersen here due to the difficulty of putting the full program together as early as Pedersen did, as well as his additional discussion of the structures involved in policy implementation.
Consistency - 7/10
For the most part, Meili's core policies (i.e. the ones listed on his website as "issues") are remarkably consistent for a platform with the Meili's amount of detail. But while I noted above that Meili's gradual policy release strategy has allowed him to maintain flexibility throughout the campaign, that can also lead to some contradictions - particularly when a proposal is drafted primarily as a response to events as they happen. And so it is with Meili's stance on nuclear energy, where a recent proposal to effectively restart the Sask Party's nuclear development consultation process to include more time and a broader range of issues doesn't seem to fit with Meili's previous statements which (rightly in my view) suggested that any insistence on discussing nuclear development is likely to make for a waste of time and effort.
Creativity - 8/10
Once again, Meili's platform contains a number of significant new ideas - most notably SaskPharm (discussed in more detail below) and a truly progressive justice policy. But there are a few areas as well (education and labour being two notable examples) where Meili's platform consists mostly of a continuation or expansion of existing policy.
Support - 9/10
As I've discussed before, Meili has taken an important step beyond his competitors here by seeking outside support for his policies even during the course of the leadership campaign. And that isn't as a matter of an either-or choice in how to support his policies either, as Meili's platform is backed by solid principled explanations and links to reading material or related programs.
Pragmatism - 8/10
What's perhaps most striking about Meili's distinctive ideas is their ability to propose major changes without creating obvious opposition constituencies within Saskatchewan: it's hard to see who in the province would want to take the "no" side against cheaper prescription drugs or the development of rural culture. But at least a few policies (the focuses on encouraging organic farming and "closing the loop" of food production in particular) would likely face some opposition from the free-trade crowd and actors from outside the province. (Which might actually make for reason for Meili to run with Deb Higgins' proposal to limit political contributions from outside the province before moving on to his substantive ideas.)
The Big Idea
Meili's SaskPharm proposal ranks alongside the idea of increased public resource ownership (proposed in different forms by Pedersen and Lingenfelter) as the two ideas which seem virtually certain to stay in circulation at the end of the leadership race. And indeed it may also serve as the best example of how Meili's policies can lead to substantial positive change without raising significant opposition from within the province. While it would obviously have supporters in the health professions and among those whose prescription drug bills might be reduced - and create potential side benefits in terms of increased research and development of drugs for public health purposes around the world - it wouldn't seem to compete with any existing Saskatchewan industry or raise too many concerns from anybody besides the most rabid anti-government voce who would oppose anything of substance from the NDP.
Of course, the flip side is that SaskPharm too may face substantial opposition from abroad. Manitoba and its generic drug manufacturers presumably wouldn't be happy to see SaskPharm moving in on their industry, and even the broader pharmaceutical industry might decide to try to shut down research in the hands of a Crown corporation. But if the greatest problem with an idea is that others prefer to have similar types of development for themselves, that's probably a sign that there's plenty of benefit to be found.
(Edit: fixed wording.)
Thoroughness - 8/10
Again, Meili's platform addresses all of the major provincial policy areas while delving into a few interesting new areas (such as his specific focus on developing rural arts and culture). That said, I'll rank Meili just slightly behind Pedersen here due to the difficulty of putting the full program together as early as Pedersen did, as well as his additional discussion of the structures involved in policy implementation.
Consistency - 7/10
For the most part, Meili's core policies (i.e. the ones listed on his website as "issues") are remarkably consistent for a platform with the Meili's amount of detail. But while I noted above that Meili's gradual policy release strategy has allowed him to maintain flexibility throughout the campaign, that can also lead to some contradictions - particularly when a proposal is drafted primarily as a response to events as they happen. And so it is with Meili's stance on nuclear energy, where a recent proposal to effectively restart the Sask Party's nuclear development consultation process to include more time and a broader range of issues doesn't seem to fit with Meili's previous statements which (rightly in my view) suggested that any insistence on discussing nuclear development is likely to make for a waste of time and effort.
Creativity - 8/10
Once again, Meili's platform contains a number of significant new ideas - most notably SaskPharm (discussed in more detail below) and a truly progressive justice policy. But there are a few areas as well (education and labour being two notable examples) where Meili's platform consists mostly of a continuation or expansion of existing policy.
Support - 9/10
As I've discussed before, Meili has taken an important step beyond his competitors here by seeking outside support for his policies even during the course of the leadership campaign. And that isn't as a matter of an either-or choice in how to support his policies either, as Meili's platform is backed by solid principled explanations and links to reading material or related programs.
Pragmatism - 8/10
What's perhaps most striking about Meili's distinctive ideas is their ability to propose major changes without creating obvious opposition constituencies within Saskatchewan: it's hard to see who in the province would want to take the "no" side against cheaper prescription drugs or the development of rural culture. But at least a few policies (the focuses on encouraging organic farming and "closing the loop" of food production in particular) would likely face some opposition from the free-trade crowd and actors from outside the province. (Which might actually make for reason for Meili to run with Deb Higgins' proposal to limit political contributions from outside the province before moving on to his substantive ideas.)
The Big Idea
Meili's SaskPharm proposal ranks alongside the idea of increased public resource ownership (proposed in different forms by Pedersen and Lingenfelter) as the two ideas which seem virtually certain to stay in circulation at the end of the leadership race. And indeed it may also serve as the best example of how Meili's policies can lead to substantial positive change without raising significant opposition from within the province. While it would obviously have supporters in the health professions and among those whose prescription drug bills might be reduced - and create potential side benefits in terms of increased research and development of drugs for public health purposes around the world - it wouldn't seem to compete with any existing Saskatchewan industry or raise too many concerns from anybody besides the most rabid anti-government voce who would oppose anything of substance from the NDP.
Of course, the flip side is that SaskPharm too may face substantial opposition from abroad. Manitoba and its generic drug manufacturers presumably wouldn't be happy to see SaskPharm moving in on their industry, and even the broader pharmaceutical industry might decide to try to shut down research in the hands of a Crown corporation. But if the greatest problem with an idea is that others prefer to have similar types of development for themselves, that's probably a sign that there's plenty of benefit to be found.
(Edit: fixed wording.)
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Leadership 2009 - Yens Pedersen Policy Review
When Yens Pedersen's platform was first released early on in the Saskatchewan NDP leadership campaign, it looked entirely likely to be overtaken by the other candidates' eventual policy proposals. In retrospect, though, Pedersen's platform has held up remarkably well over the course of the campaign - with the only downside being that some of the more distinctive ideas don't seem to have sparked a lot of discussion even in the leadership race.
Thoroughness - 9/10
If anything, Pedersen looks to have erred on the side of overinclusion: his platform includes a set of broad principles on five main issues before delving into proposals which cover the vast majority of provincial functions and responsibilities.
Consistency - 6/10
Of course, the problem with proposing a lot of different ideas is that some are likely to come in conflict. And there are at least a few apparent contradictions within Pedersen's platform - most obviously his musings that health care should be brought under central administration, to be followed by a discussion as to whether municipalities ought to bear responsibility. Either of those ideas could make sense in principle, but it's hard to find a unifying theme in s platform that proposes centralization first, then a discussion of increased decentralization on a single issue.
Creativity - 8/10
While Pedersen's platform includes some well-worn content, it also raises a reasonable number of new ideas - some of which simply haven't registered as issues, others of which haven't been looked at from the angle which Pedersen offers (e.g. for all the talk about electricity generation, I'm not aware of many others raising the option of phasing out coal-fired power entirely).
Support - 8/10
Pedersen's platform itself is limited to describing his ideas in point form. But having put his ideas in the public eye early, he's had a chance to expand on them and back them up through subsequent press conferences as well as the leadership debate, and has presented strong arguments in favour of his policies when given an opening to do so.
Pragmatism - 6/10
Here's where Pedersen's platform runs into the most significant problems, as a number of his proposals look to be potential lightning rods for criticism and comparatively few would have obvious support constituencies to overcome any opposition. Most notably, Pedersen's call to fundamentally reorganize municipal structures and responsibilities would obviously raise significant opposition among the structures which now handle the issues in question. Meanwhile, there would be few obvious supporters since a general discussion process wouldn't leave any clear beneficiaries until after the fact.
Likewise, a coal power phaseout would naturally be subject to criticism from the parts of the province who depend on it, and a firm timeline for asbestos remediation might meet with resistance as a less than optimal use of public resources - while again there would figure to be a limited number of people willing to take a strong stand on Pedersen's side of the issues.
In sum, there's plenty within Pedersen's platform which deserves more discussion, both in the limited time available in the leadership race and beyond. But there's also plenty of room for additional polish and revision to put Pedersen's vision in terms which are more likely to win broad support - and less likely to raise fierce opposition.
The Big Idea
Unfortunately, an idea which Pedersen himself describes as potentially the "single largest advancement in social justice in 50 years" seems to have received little attention over the course of the campaign. But Pedersen's proposal for a combined system of child care and early learning - with the goal of building toward a universal system incorporating both - would indeed be a massive step forward in developing greater opportunities for Saskatchewan's children.
As with many of Pedersen's proposals, though, there is some concern as to how the idea is structured. Pedersen's plan is to fund the early learning program out of non-renewable resource revenues, using the rationale that one-time resources are best put into investments whose benefits may be felt in the longer term. While that message may have some appeal for the moment (particularly with oil prices beginning to climb again), I'd think there are significant long-term risks in tying a structural program to non-renewable revenues: not only is the resource bound to run out at some point, but even in the short term the viability of the program in its building stages would be entirely at the mercy of commodity prices.
Instead, to build up from the limited child care available to a universal system would seem to me to require a long-term commitment that isn't tied to uncertain revenues. And even if that proves more difficult to sell in the short term (which itself isn't clear since there's no reason why investment can't simply be targeted during resource booms rather than linked to the revenue stream), the long-term goal of implementing the system would make the tougher road more than worth it.
(Edit: fixed typo.)
Thoroughness - 9/10
If anything, Pedersen looks to have erred on the side of overinclusion: his platform includes a set of broad principles on five main issues before delving into proposals which cover the vast majority of provincial functions and responsibilities.
Consistency - 6/10
Of course, the problem with proposing a lot of different ideas is that some are likely to come in conflict. And there are at least a few apparent contradictions within Pedersen's platform - most obviously his musings that health care should be brought under central administration, to be followed by a discussion as to whether municipalities ought to bear responsibility. Either of those ideas could make sense in principle, but it's hard to find a unifying theme in s platform that proposes centralization first, then a discussion of increased decentralization on a single issue.
Creativity - 8/10
While Pedersen's platform includes some well-worn content, it also raises a reasonable number of new ideas - some of which simply haven't registered as issues, others of which haven't been looked at from the angle which Pedersen offers (e.g. for all the talk about electricity generation, I'm not aware of many others raising the option of phasing out coal-fired power entirely).
Support - 8/10
Pedersen's platform itself is limited to describing his ideas in point form. But having put his ideas in the public eye early, he's had a chance to expand on them and back them up through subsequent press conferences as well as the leadership debate, and has presented strong arguments in favour of his policies when given an opening to do so.
Pragmatism - 6/10
Here's where Pedersen's platform runs into the most significant problems, as a number of his proposals look to be potential lightning rods for criticism and comparatively few would have obvious support constituencies to overcome any opposition. Most notably, Pedersen's call to fundamentally reorganize municipal structures and responsibilities would obviously raise significant opposition among the structures which now handle the issues in question. Meanwhile, there would be few obvious supporters since a general discussion process wouldn't leave any clear beneficiaries until after the fact.
Likewise, a coal power phaseout would naturally be subject to criticism from the parts of the province who depend on it, and a firm timeline for asbestos remediation might meet with resistance as a less than optimal use of public resources - while again there would figure to be a limited number of people willing to take a strong stand on Pedersen's side of the issues.
In sum, there's plenty within Pedersen's platform which deserves more discussion, both in the limited time available in the leadership race and beyond. But there's also plenty of room for additional polish and revision to put Pedersen's vision in terms which are more likely to win broad support - and less likely to raise fierce opposition.
The Big Idea
Unfortunately, an idea which Pedersen himself describes as potentially the "single largest advancement in social justice in 50 years" seems to have received little attention over the course of the campaign. But Pedersen's proposal for a combined system of child care and early learning - with the goal of building toward a universal system incorporating both - would indeed be a massive step forward in developing greater opportunities for Saskatchewan's children.
As with many of Pedersen's proposals, though, there is some concern as to how the idea is structured. Pedersen's plan is to fund the early learning program out of non-renewable resource revenues, using the rationale that one-time resources are best put into investments whose benefits may be felt in the longer term. While that message may have some appeal for the moment (particularly with oil prices beginning to climb again), I'd think there are significant long-term risks in tying a structural program to non-renewable revenues: not only is the resource bound to run out at some point, but even in the short term the viability of the program in its building stages would be entirely at the mercy of commodity prices.
Instead, to build up from the limited child care available to a universal system would seem to me to require a long-term commitment that isn't tied to uncertain revenues. And even if that proves more difficult to sell in the short term (which itself isn't clear since there's no reason why investment can't simply be targeted during resource booms rather than linked to the revenue stream), the long-term goal of implementing the system would make the tougher road more than worth it.
(Edit: fixed typo.)
Leadership 2009 - Policy Reviews
The four Saskatchewan NDP leadership contenders have handled the question of policy in different ways throughout the race, ranging from Yens Pedersen's early platform rollout to Ryan Meili's gradual unveiling of policies to the more scattershot approaches from Deb Higgins and Dwain Lingenfelter. But less than a week before the vote, it seems fairly safe to say there won't be too much yet to come on the policy front. So now would seem to be an ideal time to take an overall look at each of the candidates' policy proposals.
Before jumping into a candidate-by-candidate review, though, I'll use this post to set out the criteria which look to me to define how a candidate has handled policy questions:
- Thoroughness - has the candidate covered most or all of the public policy areas which members are likely to want to see addressedby a leadership candidate?
- Consistency - is the platform internally consistent, or do the principles underlying some policies conflict significantly with those supporting others?
- Creativity - how much of the platform reflects new additions to the Saskatchewan political scene compared to what's been discussed over the past few years?
- Support - how well does the candidate support the policies within the platform, whether through research, argument or third-party validation?
- Pragmatism - how likely is the platform to be successfully implemented, based on both the public demand which can be mustered in support and the likely degree of resistance?
Note that while I'll be referring to a "platform", I won't be looking only at the policy contents of the candidates' websites. Instead, I'll be incorporating proposals and arguments made in the Commonwealth, in candidate media conferences, and anywhere else that seems to me to shed light on the policy work that's been done during the campaign.
In addition to reviewing the platforms in general based on these principles, I'll also highlight one "big idea" from each candidate which seems to me to reflect their policy choices. So, stay tuned - as while the race may be nearing a close, there's still plenty left to discuss before NDP members cast their final ballots on Saturday.
Before jumping into a candidate-by-candidate review, though, I'll use this post to set out the criteria which look to me to define how a candidate has handled policy questions:
- Thoroughness - has the candidate covered most or all of the public policy areas which members are likely to want to see addressedby a leadership candidate?
- Consistency - is the platform internally consistent, or do the principles underlying some policies conflict significantly with those supporting others?
- Creativity - how much of the platform reflects new additions to the Saskatchewan political scene compared to what's been discussed over the past few years?
- Support - how well does the candidate support the policies within the platform, whether through research, argument or third-party validation?
- Pragmatism - how likely is the platform to be successfully implemented, based on both the public demand which can be mustered in support and the likely degree of resistance?
Note that while I'll be referring to a "platform", I won't be looking only at the policy contents of the candidates' websites. Instead, I'll be incorporating proposals and arguments made in the Commonwealth, in candidate media conferences, and anywhere else that seems to me to shed light on the policy work that's been done during the campaign.
In addition to reviewing the platforms in general based on these principles, I'll also highlight one "big idea" from each candidate which seems to me to reflect their policy choices. So, stay tuned - as while the race may be nearing a close, there's still plenty left to discuss before NDP members cast their final ballots on Saturday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)