Why can't we get anything done?

[I am Groot]

I was reading a column in the Globe that kind of crystalized what I've been thinking for a while about how everything we try to build takes years, is delayed for years past when it was supposed to be completed, and is nowhere near the budget set out for it. The column is for subscribers only so I will quote more liberally than usual. But I remember when a sinkhole opened in downtown Ottawa years ago. A major intersection was closed for almost a month for repair. Not that long afterward a larger sinkhole opened in a downtown Japanese city and was fixed and repaired in three days. Bridges go up, highways are built, buildings are constructed lightning fast in other countries compared to Canada. How long did it take us to finally even agree to build new fighter planes? Ten years? Fifteen? The new frigates are going to be a decade behind schedule and cost five times what they were supposed to cost. The same huge delays and price increases are attached to new patrol ships, supply ships, and icebreakers. The centre block of parliament hill is closed and has been for years and will be for years. Renovation will take a decade and cost a billion dollars. As for the PMs residence at 24 Sussex, we're still unable to make a decision. But when we do finally decide to renovate or replace it the cost will be far and away higher than any residence ever built in Ottawa.

From the article

For example, this country is finding it remarkably difficult to get important things built on time and on budget, or at all. Consider the Trans Mountain pipeline, which the Trudeau government bought in 2018 to ensure its expansion, and to allow billions of dollars to be pumped back into Canada through the export of more of Alberta’s landlocked oil. It was the right move, and the expectation was that, once shovels were in the ground, the feds could sell the project back to the private sector and even turn a profit. Instead, TMX announced earlier this month that the project’s budget is now $30.9-billion – just the latest big price jump that brings it to nearly triple the original price tag. Financial analysis firm Morningstar estimates that taxpayers could be saddled with a $20-billion loss.

It’s hardly an isolated case. The Site C hydro project in British Columbia is far over budget. So was Muskrat Falls in Newfoundland and Labrador; costs got so far out of control they imperilled the province’s fiscal health, necessitating a quiet federal bailout. In Montreal, the REM regional rail project was pitched as a public-private partnership to build badly needed transit on a tight budget and in a short time; it is behind schedule and over budget. Same goes for Toronto’s Eglinton Crosstown subway. It didn’t open in 2020 as planned and things are so far behind schedule that the provincial agency in charge refuses to say when it might be completed. The cost of the Ontario Line, a 15-kilometre subway also being built by the province in Toronto, has nearly doubled from $10.9-billion when it was announced in 2019 to as much as $19-billion late last year.

In Europe, transit is regularly built at far lower prices per kilometre. Our system for deciding what infrastructure to build, and managing it to a successful completion feels, well, kind of broken.

Or consider that the United States this year will become the world’s largest exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG). In 2016, neither the U.S. nor Canada exported any LNG despite their vast gas reserves, as both lacked the port facilities and pipelines to do so. Since then, the necessary infrastructure in the U.S. has been built – just like that – allowing its economy to benefit from huge quantities of high-priced exports to Europe and Asia.

And Canada? Still working on it. Projects are in process, notably the massive LNG Canada terminal in B.C. But it won’t come onstream until at least 2025. Until then, Canada’s scorecard shows zero LNG exports in 2016, zero LNG exports today.

Why? Is it just bureaucracy? Is there so much red tape, so much corruption, so much incompetence? Is it a combination of them all? It isn't just one government, though red tape has certainly multiplied under Trudeau. It's at all levels of government right down to municipalities that take forever to fix roads and almost immediately have to start repairing them. Are we degenerating into a third-world country?

Edited March 26 by I am Groot

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

I was reading a column in the Globe that kind of crystalized what I've been thinking for a while about how everything we try to build takes years, is delayed for years past when it was supposed to be completed, and is nowhere near the budget set out for it. The column is for subscribers only so I will quote more liberally than usual. But I remember when a sinkhole opened in downtown Ottawa years ago. A major intersection was closed for almost a month for repair. Not that long afterward a larger sinkhole opened in a downtown Japanese city and was fixed and repaired in three days. Bridges go up, highways are built, buildings are constructed lightning fast in other countries compared to Canada. How long did it take us to finally even agree to build new fighter planes? Ten years? Fifteen? The new frigates are going to be a decade behind schedule and cost five times what they were supposed to cost. The same huge delays and price increases are attached to new patrol ships, supply ships, and icebreakers. The centre block of parliament hill is closed and has been for years and will be for years. Renovation will take a decade and cost a billion dollars. As for the PMs residence at 24 Sussex, we're still unable to make a decision. But when we do finally decide to renovate or replace it the cost will be far and away higher than any residence ever built in Ottawa.

From the article

For example, this country is finding it remarkably difficult to get important things built on time and on budget, or at all. Consider the Trans Mountain pipeline, which the Trudeau government bought in 2018 to ensure its expansion, and to allow billions of dollars to be pumped back into Canada through the export of more of Alberta’s landlocked oil. It was the right move, and the expectation was that, once shovels were in the ground, the feds could sell the project back to the private sector and even turn a profit. Instead, TMX announced earlier this month that the project’s budget is now $30.9-billion – just the latest big price jump that brings it to nearly triple the original price tag. Financial analysis firm Morningstar estimates that taxpayers could be saddled with a $20-billion loss.

It’s hardly an isolated case. The Site C hydro project in British Columbia is far over budget. So was Muskrat Falls in Newfoundland and Labrador; costs got so far out of control they imperilled the province’s fiscal health, necessitating a quiet federal bailout. In Montreal, the REM regional rail project was pitched as a public-private partnership to build badly needed transit on a tight budget and in a short time; it is behind schedule and over budget. Same goes for Toronto’s Eglinton Crosstown subway. It didn’t open in 2020 as planned and things are so far behind schedule that the provincial agency in charge refuses to say when it might be completed. The cost of the Ontario Line, a 15-kilometre subway also being built by the province in Toronto, has nearly doubled from $10.9-billion when it was announced in 2019 to as much as $19-billion late last year.

In Europe, transit is regularly built at far lower prices per kilometre. Our system for deciding what infrastructure to build, and managing it to a successful completion feels, well, kind of broken.

Or consider that the United States this year will become the world’s largest exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG). In 2016, neither the U.S. nor Canada exported any LNG despite their vast gas reserves, as both lacked the port facilities and pipelines to do so. Since then, the necessary infrastructure in the U.S. has been built – just like that – allowing its economy to benefit from huge quantities of high-priced exports to Europe and Asia.

And Canada? Still working on it. Projects are in process, notably the massive LNG Canada terminal in B.C. But it won’t come onstream until at least 2025. Until then, Canada’s scorecard shows zero LNG exports in 2016, zero LNG exports today.

Why? Is it just bureaucracy? Is there so much red tape, so much corruption, so much incompetence? Is it a combination of them all? It isn't just one government, though red tape has certainly multiplied under Trudeau. It's at all levels of government right down to municipalities that take forever to fix roads and almost immediately have to start repairing them. Are we degenerating into a third-world country?

Here's the non-paywall link to the full article

https://archive.ph/LxeNy

[CdnFox]

There is no incentive for the officials to get something done in a timely way. And we have a LOT of red tape.

And there's no punishment for parties that DON'T get things done. There just tends to be an attitude in the public of 'oh well, i'm sure they'll get there some day'

[I am Groot]

37 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

There is no incentive for the officials to get something done in a timely way. And we have a LOT of red tape.

And there's no punishment for parties that DON'T get things done. There just tends to be an attitude in the public of 'oh well, i'm sure they'll get there some day'

There are a few reasons for that. Canadians have become far too placid with regard to political incompetence, far too accepting of dishonesty, of politicians who blatantly lie to them. They also seem to largely be unaware, perhaps due to a third rate media, of how other nations do things so much better, be it healthcare, public transit, law or education. They don't question why it takes so long to build anything because as far as they know that's just how long it takes. Not many have the time and inclination to devour media stories and articles from around the world. Far too many pay little to no attention to news of Canada. 

[Michael Hardner]

10 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

There are a few reasons for that. Canadians have become far too placid with regard to political incompetence, far too accepting of dishonesty, of politicians who blatantly lie to them. They also seem to largely be unaware, perhaps due to a third rate media, of how other nations do things so much better, be it healthcare, public transit, law or education. They don't question why it takes so long to build anything because as far as they know that's just how long it takes. Not many have the time and inclination to devour media stories and articles from around the world. Far too many pay little to no attention to news of Canada. 

Great post, but I will quibble it.  Overall we are a great nation but we don't have the right kinds of conversations in the public sphere.

[Michael Hardner]

Maybe you were saying that also...

[Michael Hardner]

There's a style of management in IT that big tech has successfully used.  It eschews over planning in favour of failing fast and often.  It sounds counter intuitive but exactly what government needs.

This is what Musk and Trump did and we could do it too.  The time it takes to find the right solution through failure is less than the time to plan a solution that will take years to fail.

Nobody in government has the vision to try it though.

[bcsapper]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

There's a style of management in IT that big tech has successfully used.  It eschews over planning in favour of failing fast and often.  It sounds counter intuitive but exactly what government needs.

This is what Musk and Trump did and we could do it too.  The time it takes to find the right solution through failure is less than the time to plan a solution that will take years to fail.

Nobody in government has the vision to try it though.

IT doesn't have to go to the polls every four years.

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

IT doesn't have to go to the polls every four years.

What are you saying?  

They're in business so arguably they're more accountable than government.

 

[I am Groot]

19 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Great post, but I will quibble it.  Overall we are a great nation but we don't have the right kinds of conversations in the public sphere.

We do not. We spend far too much time on inconsequential subjects. The last several elections have seen American style diversions into hot-button issues like abortion, guns, gay rights and 'white supremacy' instead of economic improvements.

I would suggest you read the article. It's interesting in that they compare Canada to Argentina and show how Argentina was, in many ways, ahead of us a century or so ago, but a series of bad political decisions turned their economic and social fortunes downward over time. Canada seems to have been heading down lately, as well, with little in the way of economic expansion other than what's driven by immigration and the lowest productive growth in the West which is allowing other nations to surpass us one by one.

[eyeball]

16 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Great post, but I will quibble it.  Overall we are a great nation but we don't have the right kinds of conversations in the public sphere.

Put the public close enough to the discussions they can hear them and things might change.

28 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

There are a few reasons for that. Canadians have become far too placid with regard to political incompetence, far too accepting of dishonesty, of politicians who blatantly lie to them.

...

Far too many pay little to no attention to news of Canada.

Sadly, many Canadians who do pay attention are amongst the first to declare the public really has no business sticking it's nose into the government's business.

[Michael Hardner]

Amen.

 

I'll try to read it later.

 

 

[bcsapper]

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

What are you saying?  

They're in business so arguably they're more accountable than government.

 

If you like.  They also get to keep the profits so the risk is easier to take. 

Try explaining to the voter that failing fast and often was actually the plan.

Edited March 26 by bcsapper

[I am Groot]

40 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

There's a style of management in IT that big tech has successfully used.  It eschews over planning in favour of failing fast and often.  It sounds counter intuitive but exactly what government needs.

This is what Musk and Trump did and we could do it too.  The time it takes to find the right solution through failure is less than the time to plan a solution that will take years to fail.

I think Ottawa tried that with its LRT line. Hasn't worked out very well, so far.

[Michael Hardner]

13 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

1.  They also get to keep the profits so the risk is easier to take. 

2. Try explaining to the voter that failing fast and often was actually the plan.

1. I would say there are different types of profits waiting to be garnered right now in public life.

2. It's going to happen at some point, I assure you.

 

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

I think Ottawa tried that with its LRT line. Hasn't worked out very well, so far.

I wonder... 

Large infrastructure, physical plant increases, aren't a great fit for this.

[bcsapper]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I would say there are different types of profits waiting to be garnered right now in public life.

2. It's going to happen at some point, I assure you.

 

If it got things done I wouldn't mind.  I don't see it though.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, bcsapper said:

If it got things done I wouldn't mind.  I don't see it though.

The idea is that overplanning is a detriment to providing good solutions.

[bcsapper]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

The idea is that overplanning is a detriment to providing good solutions.

Yes, but failing fast and often is how not to get re-elected.  And politicians put that above everything else.

It's more than conceivable that such a strategy would reward the opposition, as results and benefits show themselves too late.

 

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

1. Yes, but failing fast and often is how not to get re-elected.  And politicians put that above everything else.

2. It's more than conceivable that such a strategy would reward the opposition, as results and benefits show themselves too late.

 

1. I don't think that the concept is so hugely complicated that the public couldn't understand it.

2. They would show themselves earlier and in better solutions.  The concept is proven in other areas of business and government.

 

[bcsapper]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I don't think that the concept is so hugely complicated that the public couldn't understand it.

2. They would show themselves earlier and in better solutions.  The concept is proven in other areas of business and government.

 

Well, if you're right about:

17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. It's going to happen at some point, I assure you.

I guess we'll see.  It would be nice if you were right.  Pretty much anything is better than what we've got. 

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I don't think that the concept is so hugely complicated that the public couldn't understand it.

It's odd that when incompetence of the government is given as the reason for its poor performance the public's competence is often graded as being on par or even worse.

[myata]

Only natural evolution of a no-incentive society. The second law of (social) thermodynamics at work. It won't get better: without thoughtful, active and intelligent contribution, the entropy can only increase with time.

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It's odd that when incompetence of the government is given as the reason for its poor performance the public's competence is often graded as being on par or even worse.

Publics are not just people.  The way they interact with government is part of publics, and that's designed.

[I am Groot]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The idea is that overplanning is a detriment to providing good solutions.

The mentality of government and bureaucracy is that the highest priority of all they do is to never be held responsible for something going wrong. If that means spending a million dollars to ensure that you don't lose fifty thousand - and get blamed for losing it - then that's considered a good trade.