October 29, 2002

Communication Plans

At the October 24th staged cabinet meeting, Minister of Sustainable Resource Management (alias "two fish") Stan Hagen spoke about a vision of the future where an entrepreneur sits at her computer terminal, clicks on a map and is able to determine all land tenures pertaining to that point. Hagen's Ministry is moving along (some would say "forward") with changes to make his vision a reality. A communication strategy for what is called the "Integrated Resource Registry" is available on the government website.

The communication strategy document for the Resource Registry identifies audiences, key messages, assumptions and risks, budget, tools and approaches. Under risks the document warns "The ministry targets for this project are very aggressive in light of the complex nature and overall extent of the registry system in British Columbia." Under audiences the document lists several ministries as internal audiences and then provides the following list of external audiences for the communication strategy:

Whatever one thinks about Hagen's plan, the availability of the communication strategy document on a publicly accessible government website is an example of the kind of transparency and openness that was originally promised by the Campbell government. It is refreshing to see a government document that openly acknowledges that timelines may be too ambitious and that the external audience is a narrow list of special interests. Compare that to how the Premier's Office has responded to my request for the communication plan for the health ads that originally cost the public over $433,000 and since have been extended for further broadcasts.

In a letter dated October 15th the Premier's Office wrote saying "Please be advised that the Office of the Premier has no records that are responsive to your request." It is hard to believe that a government that has centralized and politicized communications through Order in Council appointments does not have a communication plan and a method of evaluating its television advertisements. In fact it is so hard to believe that I have appealed to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Commissioner with a request to review the failure of the Premier's Office to provide the requested documents.

Wouldn't it be nice to know what the objectives were for those TV ads and whether subsequent polling showed any success in meeting those objectives? As the ones who paid for the ads, doesn't the public have a right to have those questions answered? In the exceptional circumstance that nothing resembling a communication plan exists, then the Premier should start explaining how the biggest government ad campaign since he was sworn into office could be publicly financed with no documented objectives, messages, risks, audiences or evaluation.