This Budget Is Toxic Fudge
BC's government is in denial about the economic realities we face.
A sugary slice of denial for BC.
In a province where phoney-baloney budgets and fiscal manipulation are as common as rain, BC Liberal Finance Minister Colin Hansen's 2009/10 plan is as misleading and deceptive as any we've ever seen.
The global economy, as every British Columbian over the age of three knows by now, has collapsed. Job losses are rising at an ever-increasing rate; retail sales and housing starts have plunged and commodity prices tanked; and many of the world's largest financial institutions have imploded. Federal governments of every ideological stripe, as well as U.S. states and Canadian provinces, have or are wracking up gigantic fiscal shortfalls.
Yet, Hansen wants British Columbians to believe that for the fiscal year just ending, 2008/09, Victoria will incur a surplus of $50 million. Next year, the province is expected to record a deficit, but a rather puny one of just $495 million.
In other words, over a two-year period when the world economy is tanking and Victoria's spending will total nearly $78 BILLION, Gordon Campbell, Colin Hansen and the BC Liberals expect us to believe that the total deficit will be just $445 million -- or about half of one per cent of planned spending.
Every other jurisdiction in the rest of the world is having a near-death fiscal experience; B.C. has got a minor rash.
It's the same old pre-election, budgetary sleight-of-hand British Columbians have seen many times in the past, but of a scale and breadth never seen before. Expenditures have been artificially dampened, revenues boosted heavenward and a fiscal shock-absorber eliminated, all to create the illusion of a fiscal shortfall that is probably just one-quarter to one-fifth of its actual size.
Bleak expectations...
The 2009/10 budget and fiscal plan certainly acknowledges that the global economy has fallen sharply into a fear-inducing recession. The following are direct quotes from the "Economic Review and Outlook" found on pages 75-93 of the government's fiscal plan:
- "Risks to the economic outlook are weighted to the downside..."
- "... British Columbia's economy slowed considerably in the latter half of the year [2008]."
- "...monthly retail sales declined.... A dramatic decline in housing starts also occurred... with starts plummeting nearly 36.0 per cent between July and December 2008."
- "B.C.'s unemployment situation has also weakened in recent months, with the unemployment rate climbing from 4.5 per cent in July 2008 to 6.1 per cent in January 2009."
- "...the value of manufacturing shipments fell steadily through most of 2008..."
- "...month-over-month retail sales in B.C. have declined in four of the last five months leading up to November, reflecting declining consumer confidence..."
- "The U.S. housing market continued its rapid decline through 2008... Only 1974 posted a greater annual decline in housing starts..."
- "With eroding demand for new homes due to job losses, rapidly weakening prices for new and existing homes, rising foreclosure rates, declining consumer confidence and tight credit markets, the bottom of this U.S. housing slump may still be far off."
...and rosy projections
Given those gloomy observations, one might have expected that Victoria's revenues are susceptible to erosion in the year ahead. In fact, it seems like a near-certainty, given that the finance department anticipates the provincial economy to contract by 0.9 per cent.
Strangely, Hansen's budget predicts that most of the government's revenue streams will record a significant improvement over the next 12 months.
Let's start with his projection for BC Lottery Corporation profits. Across the province, like elsewhere in Canada, casino and bingo-hall operators have announced employee lay-offs. In difficult economic times, unsurprisingly, fewer people seem willing to wager their hard-earned cash. And for those who do, they wager less, and less often.
Yet Hansen claims that the lottery corporation's net income -- which all flows to the province's bottom-line -- will jump to a record-breaking $1.154 billion next year. That's an increase of $53 million, or 4.8 per cent, compared to the revised forecast for last year.
The same sort of revenue optimism can be found with the government's Liquor Distribution Branch revenues. LDB profits are expected to soar to $896 million, an increase of $29 million, or 3.3 per cent over the current year's revised forecast.
Hansen, it seems, expects British Columbians -- many of whom are scared to death over losing their jobs and homes -- to boost both their gaming and alcoholic activities in 2009. Party on, Colin!
Hydro to power the government?
Another Crown corporation expected to bring in loads of new dough is BC Hydro. Hansen claims the government will receive a dividend of $452 million from Hydro next year -- an increase of $95 million, or 26.6 per cent. It seems like an unbelievably optimistic number, given the dozens of pulp-mills, sawmills and mines that have shut-down or reduced their operations in recent weeks and months.
Even more astounding are the government's "investment income" revenues. Nearly every British Columbian -- like investors elsewhere around the world -- has seen his or her investment or retirement portfolios decimated recently as equity markets plunge ever lower.
But Hansen's budget asserts that Victoria's investment revenues over the coming year will grow by $79 million, a 9.4 per cent increase. (How many British Columbians expect to see a gain of nearly 10 per cent in their investment earnings over the next 12 months?)
Sales tax will... climb?
One can find such examples throughout the budget documents. Personal income tax? Even as the B.C.'s unemployment rate registers whopping job losses -- more than 60,000 full-time positions eliminated in January alone -- the Campbell Liberals see personal income tax revenue next year climbing upward by $343 million.
Let's not forget the dire economic warnings by the finance department. "Falling confidence among consumers suggests that they will put off major retail purchases for the time being," the fiscal plan states, "and that B.C.'s retail sector is unlikely to resume the strong growth of recent years in 2009."
But as consumer confidence wanes, Hansen sees B.C.'s sales tax revenues rising by an extra $89 million in the year ahead. It's the same with property taxes (up $41 million), insurance premium taxes (high by $10 million) and fuel taxes (growing by $2 million).
In fact, in of all the government's taxation sources, Hansen anticipates a decline in revenues from just four: corporate income tax, corporation capital tax, tobacco tax and property transfer tax.
Overall, Hansen claims that the provincial treasury will receive an additional $357 million next year compared to the revised forecast for the current year.
The only rational explanation for this fantastical result is that, contrary to all available and empirical evidence, Gordon Campbell, Colin Hansen and the BC Liberals believe that the worst of the current global economic downturn is behind us! We're through the rough patch, and things only can improve from here on out.
Or, at least until the May 12 provincial general election is over.
Mysterious health savings
Like the revenue side of the provincial ledger, the expenditure side, too, has impossible-to-believe numbers.
Take Health, where Hansen believes the BC Liberals can somehow find "further efficiencies" of $125 million in the next fiscal year, and then another $250 million in the year after. In that latter year, of course, the BC Liberals promise to "balance" the provincial budget, and as Hansen's fiscal plan makes clear, finding $250 million in savings is crucial to attaining that goal.
Where will those savings be found? No one knows.
But there are a few clues as to how difficult it might be. The budget and fiscal plan also reveals that already B.C.'s regional health authorities have identified "annual spending pressures" of 3.5 per cent in their provincial transfers. How those diametrically opposite objectives -- managing upward pressures and obtaining downward efficiencies -- will be achieved is a mystery yet to be solved.
Spending plans for two of the next-largest social service departments, Housing and Social Development, and Children and Family Development are equally suspect.
Income Assistance expenditures are expected -- not surprisingly, given the economic downturn -- to rise by $60.8 million, but closer examination shows that nearly all of that amount is for 'temporary assistance.' Meanwhile, disability and supplementary assistance get a combined lift of just $5.6 million, or about one-half of one per cent.
And even as more families are distressed by deteriorating economic conditions, the Ministry of Children and Family Development gets a budget lift of just $14 million, or about one per cent.
Are these numbers realistic?
Union wage increases? Never mind
And while Hansen's fiscal plan acknowledges that numerous collective labour agreements between Victoria and public sector unions are set to expire at the end of 2009/10, the budget provides no provision for salary or benefit increases. It looms as one of the biggest impediments for the BC Liberals getting to their balanced budget in 2011/12, but this year's fiscal plan offers no clue as to how the issue will be resolved.
Finally, it is impossible to ascertain in Hansen's budget how much B.C. taxpayers will spend in the coming fiscal year on the 2010 Olympics (or afterward), both for the much-discussed security component, and the operational contingencies. A few million dollars or several hundreds of millions -- who knows? If Campbell or Hansen have any idea as to the final tab, they're not saying, and neither is this year's budget.
A billion dollars off, at least
All in all, instead of the $495 million that the BC Liberals acknowledge as the shortfall for the coming fiscal period, a more-accurate budgetary-deficit would be from $1 billion to $1.5 billion.
And that would be prior to the Forecast Allowance, a provision found in every provincial budget over the last decade -- except this year. At a time of historic economic uncertainty, Campbell and Hansen arbitrarily removed one of the touted "levels of prudence" found in each B.C. budget since the turn of the century.
Over the last few years, the Forecast Allowance has ranged from $750 million to $850 million. Add that to what is probably the actual budgetary shortfall, and you get a total projected deficit of about $2 billion, or even more.
But this is B.C., and we have an election fast-approaching. And so the Campbell government pushes-up revenues, tamps-down expenditures, and removes the Forecast Allowance from budgetary planning. Voila! The deficit is one-quarter or one-fifth its actual size.
Another fudge-it budget, you say? It's worse than that. This fictional fairy-tale might better be described as Toxic Fudge.
Related Tyee stories:
- Balanced Budget BozosBC politicians keep passing, then changing, laws against deficit spending. Are we nuts?
- BC Then, Ottawa Now: Who's Crazier?Province's wild political history offers context for current crisis.
- Campbell Misled Public on NDP FinancesIn 2001 the incoming premier called NDP finances "worse than we anticipated." His briefing binders, gained by The Tyee through an FOI, told him the opposite.
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
RickW
17-02-2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.co
http://tinyurl.com/aeal9c
The budget did nothing to address this simple fact -- not to mention that BC has virtually NO income-generating base, outside of the proverbial "hewers of wood" one.
But, as an aside, since when are petroleum and forest products considered "manufacturing"? I suppose that, if the numbers actually factored out oil and wood exports, the pundits would have to expose Canada's "manufacturing" base for the farce it is.
And this BC government has done nothing to encourage anything other than a "chop it down, dig it up, pump it out, until it's all gone" mentality. Easier to do that than to think (which only hurts one's head).
Luke Skywalker
17-02-2009
Chris Trumpy...
From a recent Keith Baldrey column:
I'm sure looking forward to Chris Trumpy's take on this budget.
DPL
17-02-2009
Hansons predictions really
Hansons predictions really don't mean much. An election in a very few months means a new budget no matter which side wins. He can say what ever he wants to get through the election. This governments predictions have never even been close before so why do we expect them to be correct now?
Will McMartin
17-02-2009
Luke
You don't have to wait for Chris Trumpy's letter.... it's here, in the Budget and Fiscal Plan, on p. 7:
http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2009/bfp/2009_Budget_Fiscal_Plan.pdf
Read where Trumpy states, "Unlike recent years, there are no forecast allowances [for any of the next 3 years!] included in this fiscal plan and government will be managing risks to the fiscal plan through expenditure management...."
Neat, eh? And then, if you like, you can read the "Material Assumptions" on pp. 140-148. Please let us know if you think those assumptions are realistic.
For example, what do you think of the Children and Family Development assumption of a decline in the number of children-in-care in a worsening economy?
Will
quarry bay
17-02-2009
Can you say GOTCHA.......
The only part of the forcast I believe is BC Hydro projections, 2 tier hydro and the base rate has been raised.
No wonder Hansen and the entire Campbell clan looked nervous.
Yes indeed Mr. McMartin.
And just how big will the SUPPLIMENTAL budget be this year?
I am guessing 1.4 billion dollars.
Any ideas Mr. McMartin?
realisticman
17-02-2009
Will
Are you not sympathetic to government spending to help working families? Would you side with the Taxpayer's Federation and decry government spending? You must have been impressed with the infrastructure spending, which will create thousands of jobs and stimulate substantial economic activity. Budget 2009 will invest almost 14 billion dollars in infrastructure projects in every region of British Columbia.
This is a good budget for all BC. Increased Health Care and Education spending is good for society.
Some neocons will not like this budget but it's good for the province and good for all regions of BC.
You mention that there's no money earmarked for future labour contracts. Did you forget that all public sector unions enthusiastically signed on for massive wage increases in the multi-billion dollar agreements bought forward by Carole Taylor just a couple of years ago? This is why we've had this long stretch of labour peace.
There's also a number of credits for the rural towns Will.
Something for everyone to like.
As Barak Obama said today; "And, you know, one of the things that I think has been striking about Canada is that in the midst of this enormous economic crisis, I think Canada has shown itself to be a pretty good manager of the financial system in the economy in ways that we haven't always been here in the United States."
realisticman
17-02-2009
Specifically...
Over the next three years, health-care funding will increase by 4.8 billion dollars. By 2011/12, total provincial health spending will be 17.5 billion dollars - an increase of 65 per cent since 2001.
The budget maintains funding for kindergarten to Grade 12 education, resulting in per-student funding of 8,242 dollars, the highest level in B.C. history. The budget invests 228 million dollars over three years in post-secondary education to enhance access to institutions, expand health education programs, and fulfil the commitment to increase the number of trained physicians in B.C.
Don't listen the neocons that don't want this spending. This is the time when government must help these vital areas, health-care and education.
RickW
17-02-2009
R/M old man....
This government has been spending like the proverbial drunken sailor for the last 7 years, and all it's accomplished is the devastation of the forest sector and the fishery.
Now it will spend yet more and devastate what next?
Top down spending doesn't work. That;s been demonstrated time and again.
realisticman
17-02-2009
RickW
We've had massive economic growth, expansion of health-care, labour peace and the lowest unemployment for 30 years. I'm surprised that you would be against these expenditures, particularly when the world is in financial crisis, that will expand and maintain our helth-care services, create education for more nurses and physicians and epand funding for k-12 and college education. As well as create work for many thousands of families in the massive infrastructure expenditures.
Are you now a neocon that wants less government spending too?
moodyguy
17-02-2009
unbelievable
Thank you Will:
The reported numbers did not add up but I did not have time to look at the documents myself. I will have a close look. My concern is that, given a reduction in tax a few years ago which produced record deficits which were followed by revenue growth generated by a huge worldwide boom. Now that the Boom is gone, and we have been experiencing going debt. (not deficits but financing is happening not counting BC Ferries debt and others that we don't know)do we now have a significant structural deficit??
Frank
17-02-2009
A fudge-it budget
No doubt Help BC is already on the lookout for a good lawyer to take Campbell to court over this. After all they claimed to be non-partisan when they went after Glen Clark for far less than this.
For a better world
18-02-2009
A real fudget budget
During the last eight years, the current Liberal (Socred) regime operated on the philosophy that “BS baffles brains”. Their latest budget is no different. Gordon Campbell and Colin Hansen have been deceitful since the beginning of their term of power, and not surprisingly they continue to have the basic support of mainstream media.
Carol Taylor knew when to bail. That has been her modus operandi. Since she entered public life, her astute timing of when to exit has been perfect, she comes out smelling like a rose, and then goes on to the next generous publicly funded freebee.
We are now left with the residual scam artists who carry on giving away the assets of the Province to their business associates. Thank goodness we do not have the rhetoric of Farrell-Collins dominating air waves, although the BC Rail scam is still smoking lightly after all these years.
Campbell and his ilk will covey to the public that conditions are not so bad and there will be limited cuts to civil services, but as soon as they are re-elected they will slash and burn more basic services. This will give them the opportunity to privatize even more government obligations to their business cohorts.
The previous NDP government was hammered, by the mainstream media, for their alleged fudget budget. This budget has greater fudge in both magnitude and non benefits.
If you can filter the misinformation, you know Campbell and his entourage already slashed basic social services to support Olympics funding……..and that was when the provincial economy was upbeat. As all previous Olympics have been over budget this one is no different, but until recently (as expected by many wary observers) the overruns are now rearing their ugly heads.
quarry bay
18-02-2009
What does ........
Michael Smyth(Province newspaper columnist)have to say......
Mr. Smyth is totaly disgusted but not for the reasons you think.
A good read.....
http://www2.canada.com/theprovince/columnists/story.html?id=c58af530-498c-4a98-b280-d4b6a9e3a39c
Yes, Campbell has priorities,fattening his freinds wallets.
jimmy_laroux
18-02-2009
GREAT ARTICLE!
British Columbians drowning their sorrows?
Future income tax rate increase?
Followed by a magical recovery the year after :)
Here is a great article about the “optimism” of non-academic economists.
http://www.straight.com/article-200862/federal-budget-based-crystal-ball-ubc-professor
Not that BC’s economy won’t recover the following year. But it’s just generally agreed that these long-term macroeconomic predictions are pretty much worthless.
jimmy_laroux
18-02-2009
SURPLUS
That depends on how you define deficit. In the literal sense, surplus means “an excess of income over expenditures in a given period.” But in the technical sense in which it is used in GAAP,
http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2009/bfp/2009_Budget_Fiscal_Plan.pdf
So that the BC provincial debt will increase much more than just than just 495 million $ in 2009/10. These are the estimates, using the Hansen’s unreasonably optimistic income projections, of the total provincial debt (in millions of dollars) over the next four fiscal years:
2007/08 -- 34,627
2008/09 -- 37,487
2009/10 -- 40,471
2010/11 -- 44,203
2011/12 -- 47,215
This amounts to a projected increase of roughly 13 billion dollars over 4 years. Of course this does not include debt hidden in P3s.
nightbloom
18-02-2009
"BC has virtually NO
"BC has virtually NO income-generating base, outside of the proverbial "hewers of wood" one."
You've got your multi-billion dollar drug trade.
Grumpy
18-02-2009
In your dreams.
Quote:
"We've had massive economic growth, expansion of health-care, labour peace and the lowest unemployment for 30 years."
Most of the economic growth is on paper - house prices etc. and the last few months have blown this out of the water. Our funny accounting in BC makes believe we have had huge growth, in reality we are just average.
Unemployment is counted on those receiving benefits, this doesn't include those who are not working or on welfare, as well it doesn't include the thousands of self employed people whose businesses have collapsed and do not receive any benefits at all.
It's why the drug trade is such an attraction to people in BC, at least one has the chance to make real money and what the hell, we all gotta go sometime!
realisticman
18-02-2009
Your dreams come true
Estimates are just that but boosts to health-care and education spending, as well as preservation of social spending is going over well. It's what people want in times of worldwide uncertainty.
Very important:
http://solosong.net/wish.html
Essential:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHPOzQzk9Qo
seth
18-02-2009
hansens 2nd fudget
The mainstream media has chosen to ignore the fact that Hansen's last pre-election budget was also a fudget.
The Dominion Bond Rating Agency stated that the actual budget was a 1 billion dollar deficit not a 1 billion surplus. Slick accounting changes allowed him to make his frivolous claim.
http://thetyee.ca/Views/2005/09/26/BizBCLibs/
Also missing from the budget is any accounting for the 100 billion or so in PPP commitments. These would normally show up as a 100 billion dollar increase in debt but with new slick accounting will be paid as they occur.
rac
18-02-2009
Not Green Either
It is also not green at all. Way to much on roads and not enough on transit and cycling
Road funding capital funding over 3 years amounts to $1,665 million while transit funding is only $517 million (24% of the total). Cycling is a mere $17 million (.77%) over three years.
A carbon tax will not work that well unless people have improved options like transit and cycling so they are not forced to drive.
puppyg
18-02-2009
grow-op industry
Nightbloom is on it. With a grow-op in every basement, we can grow our way out of this crisis.
Think Mahatma Gandhi. Thinking spinning wheels spinning cloth in every home in the nation. We are saved!
realisticman
18-02-2009
Quite Green Too
Don't worry rac, business groups wanted the gas tax canceled but Gordon Campbell insisted on keeping the tax. Environmental groups are pleased. A large proportion of the roads budget is for the new bridge, which is needed so that the buses can cross the river there and for the Gateway project which will get the trucks moving and not idling on our smaller roads; ergo, less pollution.
Skeena Fisherman
18-02-2009
Education spending for K-12
Realisticman: Maintaining funding for public schools will do nothing for the education of these students in spite of the cost per student. The current education budget requires an additional $135 million just to meet cost shortfalls in this province according to the Centre for Civic Governance. With increased hydro prices, the increase in the carbon tax and other labour related costs (other than teacher salaries)our school districts are going to have to close more schools, overload more classrooms and lay off more staff to meet a predicted increased shortfall. When the Liberals made it illegal for school districts to run a deficit budget they chopped off educators at the knees. Now they plan to take the whole leg and maybe an arm or two. If they can change the law to allow the government to run a deficit maybe they should do the same for the school districts as well.
jimmy_laroux
18-02-2009
@seth
I doubt that P3 debt is even 10% of this, probably less.
jimmy_laroux
18-02-2009
@realisticman
The Ministry of Finance seems to disagree.
http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2009/bfp/2009_Budget_Fiscal_Plan.pdf
Wrong again. This highway will encourage sprawl (i.e. auto-dependent housing) in the Fraser Valley, which will, in the long run, dramatically increase GHG emissions. And since so much money is blown on highways, transit funding will have to take a back seat (pun intended).
realisticman
18-02-2009
jacques
Gateway is designed to route trucks from the Trans Can to the Tsawassen port and south on Hwy 99. Can't see sprawl encouraged. I guess it might happen in a couple of pockets but most of Vancouver, including East Vancouver, don't want higher buildings and more density, so the only alternative is to go out to cheaper land.
jimmy_laroux
18-02-2009
@realisticman
Wrong yet again. This is just a part of the "Gateway Program".
It includes the Port Mann Bridge and Highway 1 widening, the South Fraser Perimeter Road, Pitt River Bridge and North Fraser Perimeter Road.
http://www.gatewayprogram.bc.ca/
Yikes. Apparently there's a whole lot you don't see. Easier access to land at the edge of the city, coupled with a weakened ALR, results in sprawl.
In the very sentence before this you write that sprawl won't be encouraged, and now you write sprawl will be encouraged. Wow.
If by "a couple of pockets" you mean Surrey, Delta, Langley, Maple Ridge, and Abbotsford, then I agree.
As for "higher buildings" not wanted in Vancouver, I seem to recall the odd condo getting built recently in Greater Vancouver. Maybe you heard about that?
realisticman
18-02-2009
Aren't we lucky
The west of Canada is the best place to be.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/183670
G West
18-02-2009
Chris Trumpy
I'll be much more interested in what Chris Trumpy has to say when and if he's called as a wittness in the Basi, Virk BC Rail trial.
As for his bona fides as a financial officer, please, give me a break, he was appointed deputy minister of finance and Secretary to Treasury Board on July 9 2007.
jimmy_laroux
18-02-2009
@realisticman
This is a joke, right?
http://tinyurl.com/aeatlx
realisticman
18-02-2009
Economic predictions are a waste of energy
Who knows? Gigantic companies pay people gigantic salaries to predict the future and all they can do is plot it, try and throw in some variables but ultimately the phenomenon called the herd mentality renders it all just a guess.
This one could take some time to turn around but I'm glad I live here, I could live elsewhere if I thought it was better there but I'm optimistic. That's my contribution to the herd.
Luke Skywalker
18-02-2009
Will McMartin...
Good point. But I was under the impression that "forecast allowances" were additional "built-in" budget items when the budget was already in forecast surplus position, but not in forecast deficit position.
Just look at a couple of key forecasts as a test in terms of whether they are either on the liberal or conservative side.
1. GDP: -0.9%
As Vaughn Palmer succinctly stated in his column today:
Compare that to the latest revision by the Independent Forecasting Council indicating negative growth at a slightly lesser level of -0.3%.
2. Natural Gas Prices/Royalty Revenue:
BC's budgeted natural gas price estimates for fiscal year 2008/09 was pegged at $5.65Cdn/GJ. Alberta in its same fiscal year pegged same at $6.75Cdn/GJ. That's over $1.00 more in Alberta, which would represent ~ another $300 million+ in BC coffers at that estimate.
For 2009/10, BC has pegged the price at $5.87Cdn/GJ.
From those two tests, I gather that Vaughn is correct in ascertaining that the finance Ministry tends to "lowball" its estimates as we've seen over the past few years.
That said, since October, 2008 forecasting is a bit of a crap shoot - too many uncertainties still swirling around.
freebear
18-02-2009
Snake Oil anyone?
No wonder they have to keep upping the salaries of MLAs and MPs to attract better (re: smarter) politicians-the current ones are idiots!
Its a good thing they do not have a license to print money!
Fish-counter
18-02-2009
The budget again ignores the biggest industry in the province
Marijuana grow-ops.
I do not touch the stuff, but I do believe it is time to tax it. Working away at my usual fish-counting job today, I ran into yet another crowd of high schoolers on a spare break. They were enjyong the fresh air, which is good for them, and passing round a fat one, which is not. I do not judge these kids (they could be up to much worse things) and I sure do not want to make them criminals. They should be paying taxes when they buy their weed. Maybe they could buy it at the liquor store. It just sounds right to me and the hell with the Americans.
Rod Smelser
18-02-2009
Why will Gateway increase pollution?
jimmy_laroux
Wrong again. This highway will encourage sprawl (i.e. auto-dependent housing) in the Fraser Valley, which will, in the long run, dramatically increase GHG emissions. And since so much money is blown on highways, transit funding will have to take a back seat (pun intended).
How is the Port Mann-Highway 1 project, or other elements of Gateway going to "encourage sprawl"? Will the Golden Ears and Pitt River Bridges, now nearing completion, encourage sprawl. What about a replacement for the Patullo Bridge? The municipalities which surround Hwy 1, from Burnaby to Langley, have all said that they will not be changing their OCPs if these projects are built, so where it the additional "sprawl" to be located, except on lands already designated for development?
If transit were improved, would that not allow for additional housing and population in these areas as well, and if so, would that consitute sprawl or not?
How would the completion of these projects increase GHGs or other pollution for a given volume of traffic? And if the argument is that a wider road magically encourages more traffic, how does it do so, except by decreasing travel times which is an economic and social benefit.
Surely everyone must realize that the reflexive opposition to these projects, all of which originates in the Cities of Vancouver and Burnaby, among their politicians, bureaucrats, and property owners, has to do with a desire to maintain high residential property prices (untaxed capital gains) and to prevent competition in the placement of new industrial and commercial properties which these municipalities rely on to keep the residential tax burden at tolerable levels despite extremely high housing prices.
notamused
18-02-2009
@realisticman re post-secondary $
If you take the time to read the service plan for the Ministry of Advanced Ed, you'll see that the govt is not putting an additional penny into post-secondary but is rather counting on increased tuition revenue of more than $500 million per year over the next three years (and then only spending $228 million of this on education). This is just another good example to illustrate McMartin's argument that the govt is making egregiously optimistic predictions on the revenue side.
jimmy_laroux
18-02-2009
@ Luke Skywalker
Who's to say they're lowballing? Just because they have in the past means nothing. Nobody knows how bad the recession will be, least of all the Economic Forecast Council.
The GDP growth estimate has been dropping monthly. Last February it was 2.4%, then it was ~1.5% last September, then 0.6% a month ago, now -0.3%. Maybe Hansen just extrapolating. Remember that not so long ago Campbell and Hansen said BC wasn't even going to have a deficit this year:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/10/20/bc-campbell-economic-statement.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/11/24/bc-november-economic-update.html
How quickly the economy can change, eh? One housing bubble bursting here, one global commodities price collapse there, and before you know it your in a recession.
In regards to their estimates, according to Jon Kesselman, SFU Professor in economics ...
http://www.straight.com/article-200862/federal-budget-based-crystal-ball-ubc-professor
So for example, Helmut Pastrick (on the forecast council) made the prediction this time last year that
http://www.cucbc.com/newsandevents/displayjob.php?sp=35&type=SB&jid=11
Yikes!
As for the comparison between BC's natural gas price estimates and Alberta's, so what? Perhaps Alberta's Finance Minister is even more "optimistic" than BC's.
sunshine coast girl
18-02-2009
These guys will say anything...
absolutely anything. They have no pride, no shame, no compassion. They lowball everything they tell us and when they get caught they whine and snivel and beg for forgiveness and tell us that no one could possibly have known that it would end up costing THAT much more.
Please, please, please!!! Has everyone finally seen and heard enough from these liars?
jimmy_laroux
18-02-2009
@ Rod Smelser
It's not obvious? These highways will allow easier automobile access to land at the edge of the city. This, in addition to lax zoning and cheap land to build on, results in sprawl.
Yes. They already are. Have you been to Maple Ridge recently?
Hmm... Not sure.
Even if this is true, plans can easily be changed. And some of the land might not be developed without highways. But anyway, if you believe that no new housing will be built as a result, I've got a bridge for you to buy.
Yes.
No.
I don't think that it would. I certainly never wrote that it would.
Not magic, sadly all too real. Changes in land use, in particular auto-oriented development, and induced demand all cause traffic volumes to rise.
Surely everyone everyone must realize that the reflexive support for these projects, all of which originates in the Cities of Surrey and Langley, among their politicians, bureaucrats, and property owners, has to do with a desire to maintain increase the value of land which may be developed and increase prices of existing residential property.
See what I did there?
That being said, not all Vancouverites want higher property values.
Vancouver is competing for industrial development? Vancouver is developing much of it's industrial land for condos. And as for commercial properties, I'm not sure that there are all that many businesses that Vancouver and Langley are fighting over.
But any way, your argument (if it can so generously be called this) ignores the obvious environmental and land-use impacts of auto-oriented development. And these impacts are the important issues in regards the Gateway Program.
sirjohna
18-02-2009
...and only a foolish
...and only a foolish politician would oppose the port mann project. do you realize how many votes cross that bridge every single day?
what is carole who? doing?
quarry bay
18-02-2009
Sir Johna........
To answere your second question.......
"what is carole who? doing?"
She is working on her election night victory speech.
Will McMartin
18-02-2009
Luke Skywalker...
You wrote... "I was under the impression that "forecast allowances" were additional "built-in" budget items when the budget was already in forecast surplus position, but not in forecast deficit position."
Really, Luke? Do you mean that fiscal prudence and discipline are needed only during good economic times, when the cash is cascading into the provincial treasury, and completely unnecessary during tough economic times? You're smarter than that.
Besides, why did the BC Liberals use forecast allowances in 2001/02, 2002/03 and 2003/04 when they were wracking up enormous deficits?
Could it be because those were post-election years and they didn't really care what voters thought of budgetary shortfalls?
Now, of course, the Campbell Libs will soon face the electorate, and want to be seen as tough economic managers presiding over a tiny deficit while other jurisdictions are overflowing with red ink.
Where have we seen this trick before? Oh, yeah, it was here in B.C. with the Socreds in 1991 and then again with the NDP in 1996. Some things never change, eh?
Will
quarry bay
18-02-2009
Just a little.........
Sidenote,in Colin Hansen`s budget,the BC Liberals claim to have found 1.9 billion over 3 years in waste,fat,inefficiencies,hmmmmm.....
Makes me think and wonder how they do dat,I mean Gordon Campbell talks about being a mean lean goverment,but apparently the Gordon Campbell has been wasting ......
600 million dollars a year in fat,who would of thought that,Hansen states all service levels will be maintained,well isn`t that something.
So if the Campbell goverment can run goverment for 600 million a year less while maintaining service levels means that the ........
Gordon Campbell is/was the most inefficient goverment in BC history,it meand Gordon Campbell has overspent 2 billion dollars in the last few years.
Excellent,Colin Hansen has conceded (stated) that there is 600 million dollars minimum of waste each year with the Campbell goverment!
Dan the socialist
18-02-2009
Isn't Hanson going to have
Isn't Hanson going to have another Budget in the fall?
We will see more cuts in that one to various social programmes as it is after the election and will be the 'real' budget.
Dam the NDP for not having a better leader. Too bad Carole James would not step down now so the NDP can pick a better competent leader.
The NDP will be lucky to win 25 seats come May. It pains me to say that as a life long Socialist-Marxist but Carole James does not cut it.
Luke Skywalker
18-02-2009
Will McMartin...
Point well taken and understood.
As an aside, the BC portion of the Olympic security budget seems to be situate within Table 1.23 regarding "$856 million" of "unallocated contingencies" regarding the 2010 Olympics. Seems like everyone in the media has missed that point.
PS. Enjoyed your weekly (bi-weekly?) reports during the 1996 election inclusive of polling and analysis. Will never forget your line to the effect that "Glen Clark is akin to a speeding freight train that appears unstoppable". ;)
SharingIsGood
18-02-2009
Doubts about Dan
Dan the Socialist,
When one votes for the NDP it is a vote for the party. When one votes for the Liberals, it is a vote for Gordon Campbell. Campbell's party is Campbell-centric. The NDP is citizen-centric. Yes, James is the leader and you find her weak, but she has proven in the past that she is a team player and that she will take a team approach.
You must recognise that CanWest-Global and CTV are big business and they have always been soft on Campbell. They love the millions of BC taxpayer's dollars he spends on the Main Stream Media. Campbell promotes their hard-right business models. The MSM do little to publish/broadcast anything James has to say. They do not give her even a small fraction of the time they have always given to Campbell. Baldry, Good, Darling, Michael Campbell (Gordon's brother) are just a few of the newscasters I see and hear on TV and radio that cheer for the Liberals and sneer at the NDP. These people are far from impartial; they are ultra right-wing suck-ups. Even with the world economy in the toilet because of neo-liberal thinking, they refuse to give up the Gordon is der good Fuhrer mantra.
Certainly, nothing can be as bad as drunk with power Campbell running the ship. Campbell is nothing more than a silver-tongued BC version of George Bush. He speaks well, but all of his actions show that he is only out for himself and his neo-Liberal Campaign-donating pals. Better to give what is left of the province over to the NDP: one more term with Campbell at the helm will mean there will be nothing left for good hard-working British Columbians. I believe that anyone who truly cares for their fellow British Columbians can easily see that Carole James has more of their needs in mind than Gordon Campbell. Besides, she will have a stong cabinet to back her up.
Click here to see what the NDP stands for verses the Campbell Liberals:
http://www.bcndp.ca/why-ndp/compare
brg61
18-02-2009
The Trap Has Been Set.
The deficit estimates in the budget are wrong. The premier and his cabinet know this. Thier biggest backers in the business community know as well. The people in mainsrteam media wont challenge the premier or finance minister for various reasons, including being fired.
For fifty years voters in B.C. opted for a right of centre party during a recession fearing the NDP will make things worse. BCliberals have set the trap and thier candidates have the talking points.
It will work. The polls reflect this early and history shows it works. The NDP hasn't
hinted an economic strategy is being developed. If they don't offer a reasonable fiscal policy soon the result of May 12 is a third term, and more seats delivered by a low turn-out of voters.
The budget is a joke. The next four years however, won't be funny.
billybud
19-02-2009
gateway
I haven't noticed any comments on how many homeowners and renters,will be displaced by the gateway project.I am waiting for word from my landlord(the City of Burnaby)about, when i will have to find new housing because, they will be bulldozing my home and a few others to make way for a new entrance or exit ramp.Has anyone found any numbers on this subject?Forget about the green side,what about the human side.
alive
19-02-2009
Silly savings
I find it interesting that governments of every level talks about getting people back to work, but at the same time tries to save money by letting staff go?
My local postoffice is being eliminated meaning that I now will have to drive an extra 10 KM to pick up a parcel. That will cause more pollution and the loss of a few jobs!
The ferry now has reduced staff, meaning that it has a reduced capacity to accomodate passenger, and at times cars are left behind because the passenger number limit has been reached by walk-on's.
Seem to me to be poor choices that only infuriates people and saves little if anything!
don quixote
19-02-2009
It's a Setup
I'm with For a Better World on this one. We're being set up for a fall here. I for one wouldn't be the least surprised if, the day after they get re-elected (assuming they do), the Liberals will awaken to discover an economic crisis that will require major budget cuts, public sector wage roll-backs, government downsizing, sell-offs of public assets and crown corporations, and further privatization of public services. This is disaster capitalism at its best, folks.
Albert Camusoff
19-02-2009
The Fudget
(Please note this letter was also attached to another Tyee article on the budget. Meant to atach it to this one in the first place. Dang.)
Since every reasonably critical reader/observer knows that Campbell will do ANYTHING to be re-elected so that he can preside over his obscene sports orgy, and the jailing of the poor, are any of us surpried that he has lied, as is his wont, yet again, by concealing, (in his era of open gov't) the truth? I'm always amazed that we even ask him or Hansen or Falcon questions of any import at all, since we know the answer will be a condescending, self-serving lie. Might as well check with Steven Harper and the tooth fairy while we're at it. For those of us outside the kept mainstream media in BC (just wait for the forthcoming cheerleading from our local typists), this budget is yet another example of Campbell and his band of thieves doing far worse with the people's money than the NDP ever did (check the FOI-obtained data on what the NDP left on the books), with, we expect, far less criticism from the media. Clark was practically executed in public by Campbell and the local media for suggesting that deficits might be necessary in a fiscal crisis, and now the drunk driver brings in deficit legislation, expecting that we won't notice. Must all be a part of Gordo's highly-touted Deficit-Free Zone. Campbell's contempt for people (those who are not property developers or his close friends) in this province, and everywhere else, if it is not already obvious, is reflected in his blatant, and far from unnoticed hypocrisy. Thankfully, we have the advantage of reading the careful analysis of posters like Jimmy Laroux so that we don't have to rely on the new-order journalists in The Province, The Sun,those inane Skytrain papers, and some of the posters (Lukey?) who write like they are on the liberal payroll. Security costs for the Olympfix are unknown, as are most of the financial details, since the Fiberals have chosen to keep the books sealed against inspection by the public footing the bill. Though I cannot criticize the choice to avoid cutting already woefully inadequate health and education funding, there is little else here except another set of obfuscations and creative accounting to remember at the ballot box in May. What's it going to be? Fiscal mismanagement with a human touch with the NDP, or fiscal mismanagement and death on the streets with the libs? Peace, fellow citizens.
Luke Skywalker
19-02-2009
Alberta - Projected $1 Billion Deficit...
Well at least they have a fund that they can dip into to cover that shortfall:
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=1304642
sunshine coast girl
19-02-2009
why can't we let Gordo & Co know
that if they do win in May (god help us) and then if we discover they were lying about the budget and the direction that the province has to go in, that we WILL recall them? Do you think people might finally say "enough", grow some cojones and do it?
Albert Camusoff
19-02-2009
We have to let Gordo know
You're absolutely right Sunshine Coast Girl.
We can talk all we want but we must act, despite the kept media's insistence that we be obedient little sheep, and that we are criminal if we are not. Democracy is not just a synonym for doing as you're told.
Look at the carnage those supposedly in the know have created. How much more suffering are we willing to endure for the benefit of the few? The taxpayers are bailing out the rich, and yet not one of us is being offered shares in the corporations we are buying out of well-deserved bankruptcy. Maybe democracy is just a pretty word for aristocracy or oligarchy or plutocracy.
Campbell, Harper, and their ilk must understand that we will not be held accountable for their refusal to lead. What is a leader anyway if not a really able follower (read boot-licker)? Leadership? Campbell? Harper? C'mon.
We will recall this gov't if (god forbid) they are re-elected by people who refuse to care about the suffera, and we must ensure that the people responsible for this crisis pay for their arrogant greed before one citizen loses one more job or one more home.
Why aren't Harper and our own little drunk concerned about their jobs or their homes? Why aren't Bush and Campbell concerned about prison? The people standing in the rain waiting for buses to get to work 5, 6, and 7 days a week will not be forced to suffer for the liars we are fooled into selecting. In the US, many governors and senators are counselling their constituents to stay in their homes despite foreclosure proceedings. Hell will freeze over before a Canadian politician would suggest the same. So we suggest it. And then we do it. My hard-working brothers and sisters in this country and in others will not lose one more minute's sleep out of fear that liars are going to take from them what they work so hard for. The politicks are our servants, not vice-versa. I am ready to act, and would be happy to be a part of any movement to recall or impeach any government or leader who lies to keep his or her job. I'm not allowed to lie to keep mine. Campbell will do anything to keep his job. It is well past time to make sure he loses it. The problem with power is that we give it to people who want it.
dave49
19-02-2009
Olympic security budget
Thursday, Feb 18 4:00pm
I've just heard on the news that the Olympic security budget will be FIVE times what was originally forecast. Guess who's gonna make up the shortfall? We, the taxpayers of The Best Place on Earth (TM).
Gordo & Co. are all liars. It reminds of the crew of paid lairs who promised minimal impact from the cut-and-cover construction of the CANADA Line. They were paid, but not accountable. Our politicians are paid, but accountable come May.
Solution: Vote strategically! Bite your tongue and vote NDP as the Green Party has no hope. Vote for the "bad thing you don't know" as opposed to bad thing you do know (Gordo & Co.)".
Also, remember all the deficits run up across Canada by supposedly conservative, right of centre parties over the last 24 years. They all talk restraint but spend like crazy, accumulating record deficit after record deficit.
realisticman
19-02-2009
Feds pay $647.5 million
Did you read the release dave49? Perhaps you're thinking selectively?
"Under the new agreement, B.C.'s total contribution will be $252.5 million, which includes $165 million in new money that was announced Thursday.
The province's new funding will be go toward infrastructure and will involve capital spending spread over three years."
quarry bay
19-02-2009
Rman.......
Get your facts straight,there is no NEW SPENDING.
The federal goverment is short-changing us 165 million dollars in infrastructure money over the next 3 years.
In other words we are putting security before infrastructure.
Campbell would have to kick in 330 million dollars to make up the diffrence.
BC doesn`t get ENDLESS infrastructure money.
So Luke Skywalker states that 330 million is just 2% of proposed infrastructure spending,but I remind you Rman that the Campbell goverment doesn`t HAVE ANY infrastructure money,it is all to be borrowed,so that means we will have finance charges on the money,and what guarantees are there that Campbell kicks the money in?
I will remind you that when Campbell took office in 2001 he inherited a debt of 32 billion dollars,well according to the budget forecasrs by the year.....
2011-2012 the BC debt will balloon to 50 billion dollars! And that is not counting any P3s or energy agreements with private power.
And you want to call the Campbell Liberals good fiscal managers,don`t think the public will fall for this shell game,regardless of how you spin it,Sheesh
I guess the federal goverment has said no to the evergreen line funding in lieu of this "arrangement"
Now we know why there is NO CONSTRUCTION START DATE ON A PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR 10 YEARS.
Skeena Fisherman
20-02-2009
Education spending for K-12 part 2
Realisticman: Since I have lived in a school district that has had to close 9 schools, and run a four day week I'd say that the funding for education in this province since Goofball Gordon has been in power has not only suffered but has devastated this district. You may believe I swallowed the bait but you don't have to live with the consequences of an underfunded " essential service". But the next generation will.
ripponfalls
20-02-2009
It's going to be much worse
than we expect it now.
http://www.leap2020.eu/GEAB-N-32-is-available!-4th-quarter-2009-Beginning-of-Phase-5-of-the-global-systemic-crisis-phase-of-global-geopolitical_a2805.html?PHPSESSID=7f96eb38796490220a969131e624599e
Therefore, budget shortfalls will not exist because the Liberal government will cut out the middleman on the one segment of the economy that has kept us out of recession for the last year: Grow ops.
Yep, that's right, folks. They are gonna open a little grass shack in each and every LCB store. For medicinal purposes only, of course. Gordo is going to be pushing tea.
realisticman
20-02-2009
Skeena, Surely You Joke
When you have places like Kildala where the kindergarten enrollment is dropping by 20% in one year, like many others in the Coast Mountains School District, then what can you expect? As the administrators have said, you cant put 50 students in a school built for 250. Unless more people have more babies more schools will have to close. Throughout history cities have become defunct. It's a natural process.