The Solution to All Problems

Yes, I haven’t posted in a while. I know. But my bunker is coming along nicely, and the canned goods shipments should start arriving any time now…

[Sidebar: I’ve identified a gap in the bookselling market: self-help manuals for the coming times. You know, like What to Expect When You’re Expecting a Dictatorship or What Color is Your Flak Jacket?]

But I digress. You come here for commentary on Alberta, not that other place.

I’ve been developing a theory about decision-making in the Premier’s office. It goes something like this. There’s a big wheel over on one wall, like the ones contestants used to spin on The Price is Right. (Maybe they still do? Is it still on TV?)

On the wheel, there are four sections. A big one (say 40%) is labeled “blame Trudeau.” A smaller one (say 20%) is labeled ‘appoint Jack Mintz to a panel.’ Another 20% is labeled ‘fire the board of directors’ and the remaining 20% is ‘have the province take direct control.’ So, when a Minister comes with a problem, they’re invited to spin the wheel.

While I’ve been off lamenting the state of the world, the wheel has been spun several times. Mintz is going to solve post-secondary education (she said through gritted teeth). Horner fired the board of AIMco, made himself the board, and then appointed Stephen Harper to replace himself. The Premier’s office is going to be in charge of the Edmonton Police, or something…

All joking aside, what we have seen from the Smith government over the past 18 months has been a consistent pattern of centralization of authority in the province. When Smith was elected UCP leader, she described herself as a ‘libertarian populist.’ Looking at her time in government, it appears that she puts more emphasis on the noun than the adjective.¹

One pathology that affects leaders (of organizations, including governments) is the belief that they (the leader) are the answer to all problems. You’ve probably run across this person: “…then I decided it would just be easier to fix it myself.” (Often, this leader ends up burning out. It’s hard being everything to everybody).

Not long after being sworn in as Premier, Smith fired the board of AHS and appointed an administrator to run AHS and report directly to her. She could solve the problem. Wrong route for the Calgary LRT? The province could swoop in and fix it. Disorder in Edmonton? On it. Urban Albertans electing the wrong city councils? Give the province a veto. AIMco not performing? I’m sure I can run a pension fund off the side of my desk…

On file after file, we have seen the Smith government assert its authority. One mechanism they have settled on is to appoint Deputy Ministers to boards, ostensibly to ‘ensure communication’ with government but perhaps also to exert control. We have two deputy ministers serving on the seven-member AHS board, and as of yesterday one deputy minister serving on the AIMco Board.

Corporate governance is grounded in the principle of fiduciary responsibility: members of a board have a duty to act in the best interests of the organization and its beneficiaries. Deputy Ministers are employees of the government and must act on the its direction. What are they to do if these two roles conflict with one another? In other words, can we think of a board with a deputy minister serving on it as being at arm’s length from government?

I don’t think we can, and I suspect that this is the point. There isn’t much room for arm’s length organizations in Smith’s Alberta. It will be interesting to watch to see how far these moves go. Should we expect the Deputy Minister of Advanced Education to sit on the University of Alberta board, to “improve communication”?

As every leader who imagines themselves to be the answer to all problems discovers, this approach comes with some risk. On one hand, if all goes well, the leader can claim credit — their direction saved the day. But if all does not go well, there is no one to blame but the leader. The ‘fire the board’ option isn’t nearly as palatable when it’s your board.

If all goes well, Smith has positioned herself to claim credit. If it doesn’t, she will find it more difficult to avoid blame, especially once the ‘blame Trudeau’ segment of the wheel becomes unavailable.

Now, back to the bunker!

1. Margaret Thatcher once famously quipped that Mulroney’s Progressive Conservatives put too much emphasis on the adjective and not enough on the noun.