So Premier Harris unveiled his new Cabinet last week. In so doing, he managed to strike a balance between his stalwart performers while making room for some newcomers.

But above this cursory review and the traditional media punditry of whose in and whose out or who won and who lost, there was no substantive analysis of what this new Cabinet will mean for taxpayers.

Keeping Ernie Eves at Finance assures the continuance of the tax cutting agenda. Who knows, the Tories may even make good on their pledge (4 years, 24 days & counting) to bring in Balanced Budget and Taxpayer Protection Legislation.

Elizabeth Witmer stays in the high-profile Health portfolio which is also a sound step given her knowledge of this file. The thought of a new Minister surely sent shivers through various stakeholders. The Premier did well to respect their requests for competence and consistency.

But Mr. Harris has also sent a signal that big government is still with us. The Privatization portfolio was axed and he handed the Municipal Affairs portfolio to Steve Gilchrist, an eager and loyal, but inexperienced candidate.

In the last government, Rob Sampson was the Minister of Privatization. As a junior minister, Mr. Sampson had little clout at the Cabinet table to push a cross-departmental agenda of privatization. Heck, the best candidate he found was a tree nursery. To save face, he brought in a largely symbolic Lobbyists Registration Act under the pretense of setting the groundrules for access before the privatization flood could begin. In short, he was ineffectual.

Where privatization has worked well, a senior Minister has always been in charge with cross-departmental responsibility. Michael Heseltine in the UK or Sir Roger Douglas in New Zealand, both had a mandate and vision to restructure government. Sadly the Premier has not attempted to emulate this proven template.

This is all the more troubling because a group of Tory backbenchers did much of the legwork last time out. The Agency Reform Commission chaired by Bob Wood identified a host of privatization and alternate service delivery (ASD) candidates. Both Mr. Sampson and Premier Harris have ignored this work.

Privatization/ASD works especially well at the local government level. This leads us to the challenges facing Mr. Gilchrist, the new Minister for Municipal Affairs. Without a government committed to new methods of public service delivery, Mr. Gilchrist is doomed to repeat the mistakes made during the Toronto amalgamation fiasco.

Mr. Gilchrist, an east-end Metro Toronto MPP, was front and centre in defending the Tories during the Toronto megacity debate. While many of his colleagues ran for cover or headed south to sunnier climes, it was Gilchrist who bore the brunt of megacity opposition and by all accounts, he performed well.

However, Mr. Gilchrist based his arguments in the very narrow view of administrative efficiencies and the symbolism of reducing the numbers of politicians and closing city halls. When one factors in consolidated union contracts, information technology costs, human resources attrition packages and the set-up for common procurement, most amalgamations are a wash.

Real savings are to be found in restructuring service delivery. Mr. Gilchrist's chances for success without a Privatization Minister to help him push this message, are slim to dim. And this spells trouble for Ontario taxpayers as mismanaged municipal restructuring initiatives will manifest themselves as increases on local property tax bills.

This approach to picking a Cabinet does not flow from a Blueprint built on Common Sense.