Premier Gordon Campbell is pushing back against local mayors, all but telling them not to count on provincial revenues from his controversial carbon tax to be diverted to transit.
“The carbon levy is not a revenue generator,” Campbell told reporters Wednesday, swapping the word ‘tax’ for the more neutral term ‘levy.’
“… Every single cent that is raised from the carbon levy is going in tax reductions.”
The 21 mayors who sit on the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation, set up by the province to ostensibly provide oversight to the TransLink’s private board last year, flexed their muscles for the first time as a group Wednesday. They said they would support in principle TransLink’s plan to take on $450 million in added yearly costs rather than cutting transit service – but the extra money on top of the current $1 billion budget must not come from cash-strapped municipalities in the form of increased property taxes.
Instead, the mayors want the province to redirect portions of the carbon tax paid in Metro Vancouver.
But Campbell is fighting back against the mayoral push, stopping just short of suggesting local municipalities have paid less than their fair share compared to other regions.
“We recognize the difficult choices to make,” Campbell. “But if they decide they want to expand transit services, they’re going to have to be part of the partnership that funds that, just like they are in Prince George, or Kelowna, or Victoria, or Campbell River.
“The region’s got to share in the funds.”
But the mayors say local taxpayer dollars already go towards funding two-thirds of TransLink’s budget, compared to one-third from the province.
The question over who funds transit expansion has become a highly-charged debate in the Lower Mainland, where cash-strapped TransLink is warning it will have to cut services if new revenue can’t be found.
Already, it’s plugging a yearly $150-million budget shortfall with money from its reserves, funds that will run out in 2011.
The $450 million price tag is what is required to meet the transit plan laid out by the province last year.
Irwin Loy reports for Vancouver's 24 hours.
18
Login or register to post comments
Skywalker
2 years ago
It's about wealth distribution
So it is a "wealth distribution tax". That would be fine if it was on income, but it is on gas use; natural gas and hydro. These are not things you always have control over. No wonder people are not buying his "Carbon Tax" grab. So it is about wealth distribution and given Gordo's priorities so far it is clear who will benfit most.
i
Bruce
2 years ago
>These are not things you
>These are not things you always have control over.
I'll believe that when I no longer see people buying electric space heaters by the container-load. It's like turning gold into lead.
People do have control over their energy use, both in their habits and in their decisions around renovation, home purchase, appliance purchases, and vehicle choice. For example, even if you don't have good access to transit, the difference between an efficient normal car and the vehicles many drive is around 3:1.
It does take time for consumers and industry to respond to price signals in this way. But we have to start somewhere. I tend to suspect the whiners about the carbon tax are mostly driving SUVs or not-actually-justified pickup trucks they purchased when energy prices were lower. Tough beans. The writing has been on the wall for almost 40 years, and it's your problem if you made irreponsible choices.
G West
2 years ago
The only wealth distribution
The only wealth distribution that will go in this province so long as the CEO is in power is to his friends and the Howe Street/Bay Street/Wall Street elite.
British Columbia has become a far less equitable place since Campbell took over - in another 4 years a small coterie of Campbell's friends will have 98 % of the wealth rather than the 80 or so they have now.
The Campbell Tax will do nothing to help anyone and it will never reduce ghg unless the proceeds of the tax are used for something other than feathering the Premier's soiled nest.
de Falla
2 years ago
Better Than Revenue Neutral
I heard Colin Hansen on CKNW today claim that they’ve been looking to find an example of a family that has been out of pocket as a result of the carbon tax, but haven’t been able to find one yet. Everyone apparently has more money coming back to them in a tax cut than they are paying in the carbon tax.
This certainly holds true for my example. I live in Kitsilano and can take the bus or walk to most of where I want to go, so only drive my modest car approx 14k/annum. I have a taxable income of approx $100k/annum give or take. According to the table on page 65 of Budget 2009 I should expect the tax cuts bundled into the carbon tax scheme to return me $224 this year. My car gets approx 8litre/100k, so I can expect to pay $34/annum with the carbon tax at $0.0351/litre. An extra $190 in my pocket at the end of the year isn’t high motivation to go out and buy a Prius, but it’s a nice dinner and bottle of wine with my girlfriend at the end of the week.
Sounds like everyone will come out ahead if they do the calculation.
mīrācula
Bruce
2 years ago
>The Campbell Tax will do
>The Campbell Tax will do nothing to help anyone and it will never reduce ghg unless the proceeds of the tax are used for something other than feathering the Premier's soiled nest.
I absolutely agree here. The carbon tax as implemented is broken, not least because if the funds are used carefully, the public distrusts the motive.
But objecting to carbon taxes is not the answer. The fact is that any effective cap & trade system would increase fuel prices by the same amount. The NDP's "industry only" policy is just as flawed as Campbell's, but throws out a tool.
Bruce
2 years ago
>are used carefully... read
>are used carefully...
read "are not used carefully"
Frank
2 years ago
de Falla
Pretty much the same as what Wilfred Laurier posted here last year. That he comes out ahead also.
So if high income earners are coming out ahead and the tax is "revenue neutral" I wonder who is losing?
Bruce
2 years ago
>Sounds like everyone will
>Sounds like everyone will come out ahead if they do the calculation.
Not quite. At the very bottom end of the chart, $20k per year, a person with your car would only get $28 back and so lose $6. Everybody else would come out ahead. That said, it could certainly be improved.
G West
2 years ago
No Bruce
That's where you're wrong - a BAD TAX is worse than no tax at all - and Campbell is satisfied with a bad tax because it suits HIS purposes.
He, like all sociopaths, cares for nothing but himself, runs the province out of his own office and delegates his authority, not to the legislature and the political process, but to his friends.
He must be fought with everything at our disposal. Only when he's been destroyed as a political force can the question of addressing the problems of the climate - and how people manage to adapt to those problems as a society - be addressed in a comprehensive way.
Or, to take a riff from Leonard Cohen - 'First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin....'
If you get my drift.
We need a premier who knows the definition of fairness and decency.
G West
2 years ago
da Falla
You make my case for me, many thanks. If you have an income of 100K per annum you are far above the average - in fact, you may even be able to afford a home....Mr Campbell indeed wants to 'help' you.
The poor fella making 45K per annum and driving to and from Surrey every day to work is getting poorer by the day..he, and folks like him, who make up the majority of people in this province....well, the CEO couldn't care less about the fact that things have been getting progressively worse for him with each passing year.....
Frank
2 years ago
G
Were you at the Leonard Cohen concert?
Bruce
2 years ago
>Or, to take a riff from
>Or, to take a riff from Leonard Cohen - 'First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin....'
I agree completely about the BC Liberals. They're the partly of developers and corrupt landlords.
The trouble here is, the signal being sent to enviro-concerned voters is that they'll be symbolically hauled off stage and shot the day after your mini revolution. The trust is gone.
rac
2 years ago
A Gift from the Mayors
It is shocking that neither of the parties is using this gift from the mayors as a way out of bad policies. I'm coming to the conclusion that neither is competent enough to run the province.
The only thing worse than a revenue neutral carbon tax is an axe the tax campaign.
People need options to avoid paying the carbon tax. Using the revenue from the tax to pay for transit is a great way to do that.
Meanwhile both parties realize that TransLink needs more revenue and that some tax will have to be increased but they aren't willing to say what tax.
Aurora
2 years ago
Mayors denied--- what were they thinking?
Campbell really said it all today. Who needs spin doctors? Not Gordo. If Lower Mainland mayors were dreaming they would see some of this "carbon" levy (love the new lingo), I have an island in Delta I'd love to sell them. I think Campbell's pushback today says it all. Anyone who is still harbouring any grand noble illusions this wonderful (sanctimonious) TAX is truly going to do anything remotely meaningful towards reducing carbon use in this province, or - what a concept - go towards something as silly and superfluous as public transit in this region, should finally put that bombastic argument to rest. Moreover, added bonus, I look forward to those transit cuts post 2010, this should get interesting. One can only hope, by that point,irregardless of which party is in power, the public will finally rise up and demand an end to the closed door, secret, private entity that is the Translink Board. I'd hate to be a bus-driver when they bring those on. As for the misguided fans of this green pr scam of a "carbon" TAX, I hope you're reconsidering your support and will start weighing the real issues in this campaign, so eloquently spelled out by 'Spirt of the West' in an earlier post here today.
G West
2 years ago
We thought about going Frank
But bought the CD instead..there's something about the acoustics in the Save On Foods Memorial Arena that tends to spoil any musical experience - last time I was there was to see Bob Dylan....
Campbellwearsatutu
2 years ago
@ Da Falla
Maybe your calculations aren`t quite right.......
Your groceries and everything moving by truck cost more,What about the Carbon tax on naural gas(home use) heating oil(home use)
Independent truckers are out about 1600.00$ a year,so they raise their prices.....
Where do you think the local school district`s carbon tax goes? Or hospital,or regional districts?
And Da Falla,you prove my point,the Campbell gas/heating oil/propane/natural gas tax doesn`t do a FFFFFFIIIINNNGGGG thing.
Which makes it worse than a bad tax,so here we have a useless bad tax that even Marc Jaccard says won`t do nothing,where we might get a good idea to curb pollution we will wallow in the mire of a feel good tax and accomplish sweet fuck all!
Anyone who believes this money wurlitzer Gas/tax is doing anything for the enviroment is a fool/
And the mayors have said just that,lets put the tax into transit,green projects.......
So there it is,21 mayors have said the Campbell tax is useless,.......
May12th---The Campbell gas tax/minimum wage/ROR/ pay raises/Corruption,corruption,more corruption,did I mention corruption?....
NDP 50 seats--1 independent--34 Liberal seats.........
These internal polls are fantastic.
Cheers-Eyes Wide Open
de Falla
2 years ago
Lesson Learned
Never tell a joke with a Latin punchline.
becksirani
2 years ago
TransLink funding discussion
Funding of our public transportation system is definitely an issue for discussion and it affects each and everyone of us in Metro Vancouver. TransLink is openly asking everyone to have their say about funding on the bepartoftheplan.ca, as well as in person at a number of live discussion groups taking place in Metro Vancouver from June 1st.