[Editor's note: The Tyee reposts this column printed today by Bruce Stewart at Beacon News for your consideration. During the election season, we'll post various perspectives on The Tyee's Election Hook, labelled clearly as "VIEW."]

The BC Liberals really don't want anyone talking about the Pacific Carbon Trust for the B.C. 2013 election.

They stonewalled early and often in the legislature. They tried trashing the reputation of the Auditor-General. Deny, deny, deny is the order of the day.

The Pacific Carbon Trust made the news because it's an intermediary for public funds. Public sector bodies -- schools, hospitals, and the like -- are required to be carbon neutral. If they aren't (and unless they're new buildings odds are they're not built to be) they have to buy carbon offsets via the Trust.

The Trust, in turn, is supposed to act as a buyer of offsetting operations (alternative energy production, tree planting). It doesn't actually do anything other than that.

That some of the beneficiaries of the Trust's "investments" just happen to be largish donors back to the BC Liberal Party isn't today's point. Rather, it's that this election offers choices about the future of B.C., at least to the extent that citizens get out of the "he said, she said" media story of a great battle between the Liberals and the NDP.

What the BC Conservatives offer on the Pacific Carbon Trust is a different model for B.C. No faux carbon neutrality. No tens of millions in health care or education dollars flowing to buy carbon offsets.

By all means design for environmentally sensible structures when building -- but if this year isn't a year in which the capital for rebuilding isn't available, don't rob the operating funds to "pretend" you're doing something.

If the offset enterprises are real businesses, after all, they'll survive just fine without a regular infusion of public monies passed through the Trust. If they're not, say the Conservatives, they should be, and the "free" profits from the public sector aren't a sign of business health -- and if it can't be a viable profit-making enterprise, then close it.

Meanwhile, the monies that never pass through -— because they're spent by the Trust on salaries, benefits, bonuses, office space, supplies, and all that —- stop doing nothing useful for the institutions that are supposed to heal, teach, and serve British Columbians.

The Conservatives, by tackling the issue of the Pacific Carbon Trust, are really asking the electorate a more fundamental question about public monies and how they should be spent.

Now, you may disagree completely with the notion that all this carbon neutrality money flowing away from programs is a waste. You may (as the BC Greens would do) see the building of B.C. enterprises capable of delivering renewable power, environmental restoration and other services as worth doing, part of building an emergent sustainable economy in the province. You may (as the BC NDP might well do) think carefully about regions without a lot of employment opportunities and figure the distortions pay off with jobs.

I think we know what the BC Liberals think, given their actions. It works for them. "Nothing to see here, move on." Especially since this isn't an issue they can point back to the 1990s and blame the NDP for.

What the Conservatives are saying (if you get down to the core of it) is that monies in the spending transfer for a hospital should be used to care for patients, and that money sent to a school district should be used to educate students. No matter how "noble" the cause, or no matter what the side-effects might be, the funds should be used for the program purpose they were allocated for. If the other things are wanted, they should be done directly, not through a roundabout back door, with salaries and other costs of handling diluting the effect.

"Know where your taxes are going and what you're getting for it." Now that's an idea worth paying attention to.

The 12 years of Liberal government have been filled with smoke and mirrors and games of redirection. There was the "not a Crown Corporation but we'll still meddle" quasi-privatization of BC Ferries. There was the sale of BC Rail (and nine years later BC Rail's residue still sops up more than a million annually for executive pay and offices). There's the "couldn't be bothered to hold the private partner to public account for the terms they proposed" deals around the Olympics (the Canada Line comes immediately to mind). There was the period where "the answer is outsourcing, what was your stupid question" was driven out of the Premier's office (and it took the Board of one of the Crown Corporations standing up and saying it would cost money, not save it, and threatening to make that public to rein it in).

It's a long, long list, and the slew of links around the Pacific Carbon Trust is just the latest one.

This is the value, in an election, of voting for a stance that matters rather than worrying about who wins. The polls say Adrian Dix's NDP will form the new government. How different would the next four years be if 25 per cent of British Columbians had voted (even if their riding went NDP instead of Liberal as a result) saying "enough of the games, make program monies deliver services."

Yes, John Cummins and his Conservatives want to return a large bloc of MLAs to Victoria. They, like every other party running, want victory.

But they'll take the victory of seeing public policy change after reaching the voters even if, this time, they don't elect many.

With 26 days to go, there's more going on than just "The Christy and Adrian Show" -- and there's more at stake than just Liberals vs NDP.

Bruce Stewart is a columnist for Beacon News, where this article first appeared. Reprinted with permission.