Imagine that all of this newspaper's editors are gathering for a three-day retreat. They have the opportunity to discuss an array of issues, from how to improve synergy between departments to the development of new features. But they choose to focus on one issue -- budgeting.

At the end of those three days, they return to their superiors. "Good news," they announce. "After much deliberation, we've reached a consensus: Each of our departments needs a 10-per-cent budget increase, and we need it now."

Most likely, the response will not be pleasant. "That's not a consensus," they're told, "that's just a collective cash-grab."

But suppose the newspaper is sitting on an extra cash reserve and decides to use it to its advantage. "All right," the publisher says. "You can have your increase. But I want a say in how it's going to be spent, and I want you to do an annual review to make sure the cash is going to good use."

Now imagine that the editors balk. "Oh no," they tell the publisher. "No strings attached. Sorry, but we're all in agreement on this one."

There would only be two conclusions to be drawn. First, that the editors would soon be looking for new work. And second, that they'd been taking far too much advice from Canada's premiers.

Admittedly, going to your boss for more cash to run your department isn't exactly the same as asking a different level of government for more help funding the health-care system. But there are enough similarities to illustrate just how absurd and all-consuming Canada's health care "debate" has become.

The premiers want increased transfer payments to help repair the system. The feds are willing to provide the money, but only if they're given a degree of control over how they're spent. This does not seem an unduly onerous request. But somehow, it's pushed the country into a stalemate that's lasted several years, taking Canada's doctors, nurses and patients hostage. And even worse, it's taken every other issue with it.

Going into this week's premiers conference in Niagara-on-the-Lake, we already knew it would almost certainly end with a unanimous request for an unconditional federal cash infusion. The media can report all they want on the difficulty the premiers are having reaching a consensus; ultimately, not one will dissent from the party line that the federal government is not holding up its end of the bargain.

And yet, remarkably, the leaders of our 10 provinces and three territories decided that this conclusion would be so difficult to reach, they wouldn't have time to discuss a single other issue over the course of their meeting. Not infrastructure, or interprovincial trade, or trade disputes with the United States, or education - all areas where they could gain something from co-operation or shared wisdom. Not when they had an important health-care consensus to reach.

It's possible, even probable, that there are some intelligent discussions on the subject going on behind closed doors. Perhaps the premiers shared their expertise on how best to prioritize in order to get the most out of every health-care dollar, or even debated the merits of private delivery of public services.

Ultimately, though, it really doesn't matter. Come September, when they meet with the prime minister, it'll be right back to the same old one-dimensional debate.

This year will be even more of an embarrassing spectacle than usual. No longer will the two sides merely emerge from behind closed doors to spin the media on how unreasonable the other is being; instead, by Paul Martin's decree, the actual negotiations will be in front of the cameras. So instead of saving the grandstanding for the press conference, they'll do it for the entire meeting.

The best bet is that the negotiations will end up the same way they always do. The federal government will increase health-care funding, but not as much as it would if it were convinced its wishes would be given priority. And there will be some vague declaration of shared goals, but nothing approaching actual specifics.

Surely we can do better than this. The premiers are all reasonably savvy politicians - so they presumably understand that, having campaigned on a promise to reduce waiting times, the federal Liberals must be seen to do more than just throw money at the provinces and hope for the best.

If they're not willing to give Paul Martin's party that satisfaction, that's their prerogative. They can settle for a bit less funding than they'd otherwise receive, and count on their own abilities to make the most of the control they're retaining. But whatever their decision, they could usefully spare us the annual melodramatics and actually do something constructive the next time they get together.