Hey there, time traveller!

This article was published 22/11/2014 (2130 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Opinion

What would you do if you found out you only have one year left to live?

Maybe you would take that trip around the world you always dreamed of. Perhaps you would overcome your fears and finally unleash your long-ignored, bottled-up inner daredevil and go base jumping or skydiving.

Many people who develop terminal illnesses do things that they may have put off because of practical, pragmatic considerations in order to ensure that they will die without regret. So why don't politicians and governments whose days are numbered do the same thing?

The provincial NDP government -- which Probe Research Inc. polling shows is almost certainly doomed to lose the next election -- delivered its annual throne speech on Thursday. This mission statement for the upcoming year was a lengthy, dry and immediately forgettable piece of rhetorical boilerplate that extolled previous government commitments and set out a general outline of what the government intends to do in the months ahead.

There were a few attention-getting baubles -- a commitment to raise the speed limit on the Trans-Canada Highway, a pledge to eliminate interest for student loans, more details about additional flood protection and infrastructure renewal -- but very little that suggests the NDP has a game-changing idea up its sleeve that it could use to win back the support of enough Manitobans.

Perhaps this throne speech was meant to project stability at a time when the strife-riven New Democrats are anything but stable. However, what it suggested was that this is a government that is ignoring the fatal prognosis. It was like hearing someone with stage-four lung cancer talk about what they plan to do 10 years from now.

Granted, just as there is a small chance of surviving stage-four cancer, there is a small chance that the NDP could somehow miraculously win the next provincial election. We will know next month, when the next Probe Research quarterly results come out, how much worse the diagnosis is for the NDP.

Either way, the spectre of party infighting and the wholly bizarre process of seeing Premier Greg Selinger re-apply for his own job suggest the NDP's days as government are almost certainly numbered -- regardless of whether Selinger remains as premier. If this is the case, it is interesting that the New Democrats, a party that has stubbornly resisted its inner urges to build a social democratic new Jerusalem in favour of boring, cautious incrementalism, chose not to take this opportunity to do the things it always wanted to do, but was afraid to take the risk.

Modern governments are typically very cautious and acutely aware of fickle public opinion. The urge to do something bold and courageous is almost always resisted, because politicians know they risk antagonizing a public that will have to re-elect them in four years. While governments were more open to doing big, controversial things in the past -- think of Duff Roblin's decision to build the Red River Floodway, or Ed Schreyer's plan to create a public auto insurance provider in Manitoba -- modern politicians of all stripes tend to always colour within the lines.

All governments accumulate political capital, which they can choose to hoard (as the NDP has done for most of its 15 years in office) or spend. Although the government's real capital has been eaten away by structural operating deficits, it does have some political capital left, and little else left to lose at this point. Therefore, now would be a perfect time for the party to do something bold that would define its legacy in office.

So what could it do? These are just ideas -- you may like them, or you may think I'm on drugs.

Perhaps it could propose moving the major rail lines outside Winnipeg, thus tearing down the divide between the North End and the downtown created by the CP Rail mainline while also creating an opportunity to improve the flow of goods and people throughout the city.

Perhaps it could comprehensively address Manitoba's -- and especially Winnipeg's -- pernicious inequality, perhaps through a guaranteed minimum annual income (there was such an experiment conducted here in the 1970s).

Perhaps it could actually do something meaningful to manage growth in the Capital Region, particularly outside the city of Winnipeg, so that regional infrastructure is developed and maintained in a sustainable, sensible manner.

This idea would be subject to many changes in federal and U.S. drug policy, obviously, but perhaps the government could take advantage of Manitoba's abundant land and water, cheap electricity and location in the centre of North America and develop a commercial marijuana industry that can supply the increasing number of American states that have now legalized this drug.

Acting on these ideas requires vision and will. I do believe the vision has always been there, but the will has been lacking because of the fear that a major initiative will lead to the NDP's defeat.

But if the NDP accepts the prognosis and makes the most of its final 12 to 18 months in office, it could leave Manitoba with a much-stronger legacy than 16 years of half-measures and regret.

Curtis Brown is an independent political analyst and the vice-president of Probe Research Inc., a Winnipeg-based public opinion firm. These views are his own and not those of Probe Research.