Annual Reports and Meetings

July 29, 2003

Targets Missed in Campbell's Annual Reports

"Pending", "underway", "ongoing" and "X" are a few descriptions the Campbell government has applied in its annual service plan reports in place of simply saying "missed target". Performance targets are measurable outcomes specified by government at the time the budget is introduced. For example, in the overall strategic plan for government, a key performance target is to increase real personal disposable income per capita - how much money is in your jeans after paying taxes. The report says that indicator declined from $19,486 in 2001 to $19,455 in 2002 - oops, wrong direction! Likewise the report says that the target of increasing real GDP per person from the year 2000 level didn't quite make it; in year 2000 it was $30,587, in year 2002 it was $30,459 - another change in the wrong direction.

Perhaps the reason you won't find a news release about the 2002-03 annual service plan reports, which are now available at http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/annualreports/default.htm, is because of the missed targets. Unlike the political propaganda on the top level government website labeled "positive economic indicators", you won't find a link on the top level page to the annual reports. You also won't find them on most of the top level Ministry pages. They are hidden in a list of "popular topics" on the Premier's website.

An introduction to the overall strategic plan says "Second, some goals may take several years to accomplish, while others may be affected by national and global events. Nevertheless, it is important to set benchmarks for future progress. On balance, government is making significant progress in achieving its goals and objectives." That is not the kind of boasting one usually finds in government news releases. "Years to accomplish", "global events", "on balance" all sound like excuses for not being able to produce the kind of instant success that Premier Campbell spoke of when he made reckless tax cuts on his first day in office.

The annual service plan reports are legally required by the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. In the hands of the Campbell government, they are a bizarre mix of references to the New Era Document and the kind of performance reporting that is required by law. In the summer of 2004, reports for 2003-04 will be made public, and those who support evidence based, accountable public policy will get their last chance to see measures of results before government unleashes more of the kind of propaganda seen in "positive economic indicators" rather than in objective annual reports. The election will be over before anyone sees the reports for 2004-05.

July 14, 2003

Watch for Notice of Public Meetings on Annual Reports for all Ministries

By this time last year the Campbell government had released all its annual reports and boasted about the accomplishment in a news release that proclaimed:

"To improve the timeliness of performance reporting, the government amended the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act in August 2001 to require every government organization to release its annual report within five months of its fiscal year-end."

"The amended legislation takes effect beginning with the 2002-03 fiscal year. In the spirit of the act, however, the government has released its 2001-02 reports more than 1½ months in advance of the Aug. 31 deadline that will come into effect next year."

Where are this year's reports? The reports for 2001 were for a year of transition for Campbell; this year there are some tough requirements for his performance. Last year the Campbell government was still finalizing its performance measures as it struggled to come to grips with the difference between political spin around the New Era Document and the statutory requirements of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act which requires specification of goals, specific objectives and performance measures. The Act also requires an Annual Report for each ministry that compares "actual results for the preceding fiscal year with the expected results identified in the service plan." Unlike government's rating of how it is doing with respect to its political platform, there doesn't appear to be much room for fudging on legally required performance measures. Although the Campbell government deleted key measures like infant mortality from its service plans, there will be public pressure to also comment on those traditional measures.

Section 16(4) of the Act requires public meetings for the purpose of discussing the Annual Reports. There may be some wiggle room regarding which government organizations comply with the spirit of the Act, since the meeting requirement refers to "a government organization specified by regulation of Treasury Board". Of course, an open and honest government wouldn't allow entire government ministries to escape their obligation to hold public meetings to discuss their annual reports, would it? Those meetings might be good organizing opportunities for advocates who are disappointed with the performance of any of Campbell's 27 ministers, and of course, many might want to attend the big meeting not only on the Office of the Premier but also on his report for the Strategic Plan for all government.

The 2002-03 Strategic Plan for the Campbell government set three goals: 1) A strong and vibrant provincial economy, 2) A supportive social infrastructure, and 3) Safe healthy communities and a sustainable environment. If the Ipsos-Reid polls are any indication, many British Columbians believe that the plan is no where close to being achieved.