The government's "Strategic Plan" doesn't get the attention it deserves. Perhaps that is why no one seems to have noticed important changes in this year's update to the plan. Last year the first sentence in the cover letter signed by the Premier said "There are many dedicated people that work in the public service in British Columbia. This Strategic Plan is for them." This year the first sentence in the Premier's letter said "The following Strategic Plan has been produced for you, the people of British Columbia." Getting the Premier to recognize that the Strategic Plan, a requirement of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act, is for the people of British Columbia rather than instructions to the bureaucracy, is a step in the right direction.

Former Auditor General George Morfitt deserves credit for measures in the Act that help to hold government accountable. The former government acted on Morfitt's advice and included the legal requirement for government to table "service plans" for ministries and an overall "Strategic Plan" for government. The Act states that the Strategic Plan must "set out the government's priorities" and "identify specific objectives and expected results". Isn't that a radical idea? Instead of having tricky wording in something like the New Era Document, Campbell's book of campaign promises, the Act requires clear language and measurable outcomes. That hasn't stopped the Campbell government from making references to their New Era Document throughout their service plans and Strategic Plan. It is as if they resent having to be clear about expected outcomes.

The 2004/05 - 2006/07 Strategic Plan is the third strategic plan prepared by the Campbell government. Like the two plans before it, the introduction to the plan says "Renewing our economy is unquestionably this government's top priority." Many economists have observed that the government's plan has failed to "renew" the BC economy. Perhaps that is why a major change was made in the target for that goal. Last year the plan said "Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita is a key measure of overall economic activity, expressed in terms of economic output (new goods and services produced) per person." Last year's plan set the target for that measure when it said "The B.C. Progress Board has set a target for us of 1st or 2nd place in Canada by 2010. To meet that goal, by 2005/06 we expect to be at a 5th place rank in Canada in the growth of real GDP per capita, from the 2001 baseline rank of 10th place." That is a very specific, measurable target, but it was watered down in this year's plan when the real GDP per capita measure remained the same but the target was changed to "Improve upon the 2001 baseline rank of 10th place growth in Canada." It looks like when Statistics Canada reports the data for 2003, BC will be in 10th place. Look for next year's plan to see if they lower the target yet again.

The Strategic Plan sets out two other measures of economic performance. Like real GDP per capita, this year's plan lowered the target for those measures. One of the measures is "Real GDP per hour worked in the business sector indicates overall efficiency of our labour efforts." Last year the target for that measure was "By 2005/06 we expect to be at a 3rd place rank in Canada in the level of real GDP per worker hour in the business sector, from the 2001 baseline rank of 5th place." This year the target was changed to "Improve upon the 2001 baseline rank of 5th place in Canada."

The third measure of economic performance is "Total amount of gross fixed business investment as a percentage of provincial GDP." Last year the target was "By 2005/06 we expect to be at a 3rd place rank in Canada in the level of business investment, from the 2001 baseline rank of 5th place." This year the target was changed to "Improve upon the 2001 baseline rank of 5th place in Canada." It may be easier to improve the ranking than to reach a specific ranking by a specific date, but don't hold your breath that the target doesn't change again, to something like "improve performance" rather than "improve ranking", but even that may be too difficult for the Campbell government to achieve.