Budget '04: All in all, I'd hoped for better

Budget '04: All in all, I'd hoped for better
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - Less than an hour to tell you something useful about the shopping bag full of binders I got in the budget lock-up.
First, despite some huge problems, I'd prefer this to the NDP budgets I covered. Ministries have come in on budget; the government is on plan. There is much to praise when people do what they said they would do.
Second, the budget is balanced. A lot can go wrong, and Finance Minister Gary Collins hasn't left his usual plump cushion. But it's a real and reasonable projection, without trickery.
And third, the LIberals deserve credit for having cut government spending in many areas wisely and without serious harm.
That's the good news.
The bad news is that the budget has been balanced by chopping spending, not improving the province's economy. The Liberal vision - clearly set out in the New Era platform - was that tax cuts would lead to increased economic activity which would allow government to provide needed services. The reality was that tax cuts knocked a huge whole in government revenues and didn't provide the promised economic growth. The march to a balanced budget was made to the tune of spending cuts, some damaging.
The Liberals previewed their election campaign with this budget. It talked a great deal about how much money would be flowing to health and education over the next three years. But a check of the fine print revealed the benefits wouldn't start to flow until the end of the three-year plan - after the next election.
Meanwhile, things will be very tight.
Health care spending across government is actually projected to go down slightly next year. Even in the direct health ministry patients will be squeezed by a budget that is currently virtually frozen. Within the next two months about $130 million in new federal money will be added, but that's still only a 1.5-per-cent increase. It would take at least three times that amount to keep pace with rising costs and population growth. The health authorities - already on the edge - are going to have a desperate struggle to maintain services.
The money available for education is increasing by less than one per cent next year, and while public school enrolments are falling, there's huge demand for post-secondary training. Costs and demand are going up, and the government isn't providing enough money to meet the need.
In fact the Liberals tightened the noose around post-secondary education. B.C. had provided about $30 million in grants to needy students. But the government killed the program Tuesday. Universities and colleges will get the money instead, with their existing budgets cut to offset the increase. Despite all the talk in the Throne Speech about increasing post-secondary places, the budget for the coming year has not been increased by one dollar.
The children and families Ministry also faces both a tough budget cut and major uncertainty. Another $70 million is to be lopped from spending this year, almost entirely from support for abused and neglected children. And the budget reveals that the shift to new regional authorities - which former minister Gordon Hogg thought could start in 2003 - may be delayed until 2007.
Finance Minister Gary Collins said the budget was "a turning point."
I don't buy that. The turning point will come when the B.C. economy becomes one of the strongest in Canada and throws off enough government revenue to allow creative investments in our long-term future. The problem with focus on cost-cutting - for government or business - is that you can cut your way to disaster. A company that doesn't invest in its new products, a province that doesn't invest in the next generation - both are foolish.
Politically, the challenge may be trust. Gordon Campbell has to go to the voters and convince them that he's ready to make their lives better when he gets the chance.
It's a tough sell.
Footnote: Sorry Heartlands, you're out of the picture. This budget offered little to indicate an awareness of the problems of the province's regions. A small amount for pine beetle and fire harvest, some money for offshore oil work, but much more for the Olympics and no time commitment on forest tenure reform.

Ottawa scandals stink, and smell's on Martin too

Ottawa scandals stink, and smell's on Martin too
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - The federal government stole from you, just as surely as some petty criminal who breaks a window and takes your TV.
And Prime Minister Paul Martin's claim that he couldn't have known anything about all this is impossible to take seriously.
The scandal revealed by Auditor General Sheila Fraser was stunning, even if details have been trickling out for several years. The federal government shovelled out $250 million under a phony program aimed at promoting Canadian unity.
A huge amount of money -- perhaps $100 million -- went to Liberal friends and insiders, who were paid millions for doing no work, according to Fraser.
The RCMP, Canada Post, Via Rail, senior politicians and bureaucrats were all part of the rip-off. The scam continued over four years between 1997 and 2001, with every rule in the book broken, according to Fraser.
"Rules for selecting communications agencies, managing contracts and measuring and reporting results were broken or ignored," Fraser found.
"These violations were neither detected, prevented nor reported for over four years because of the almost total collapse of oversight mechanisms and essential controls."
Martin reacted with shock and horror. He fired former public works minister Alfonso Gagliano, linked to the scandal, from his post as ambassador to Denmark and announced a judicial inquiry.
And then he started to offer his defense. Martin claimed this was all the result of a conspiracy by rogue criminal bureaucrats who set out -- for reasons unknown -- to shovel millions out the door so cleverly that no one knew what was happening.
But Martin was the finance minister. He was vice-chair of Treasury Board, the powerful cabinet committee that approves all government spending.
He was a political force, and a Liberal main man in Quebec, where most of the money was flowing. He had a network of operatives across the country.
Far be it from me to challenge Martin's claim to ignorance. But if he didn't know what was going on, he should have.
This wasn't some incredibly complicated computer fraud, or "a very sophisticated cover-up," as Martin described it. It was people crudely ripping off the taxpayers, faking invoices or sending out cheques for millions of dollars with no approvals at all.
Liberal-friendly companies were paid millions in commissions for tasks such as cashing a cheque and forwarding the money on to some organization.
And remember, this is the man who claims a keen business mind and sharp eye for waste. That doesn't reconcile well with his apparent blindness to the scam while he was the man running the government's finances.
Even $250 million isn't a large amount given the size of the federal budget. (Though Martin was also at the table as the gun registry cost climbed over $1 billion.)
But it's not small change, either. And it's the kind of expense that should send off alarm bells for any competent manager or director, in government or the private sector.
I'm not alone in my doubts. A poll taken in Quebec last week found 75 per cent of those surveyed believe Martin knew of irregularities in the sponsorship program. Only 13 per cent believed him when he says he was in the dark.
The record indicates Martin has hardly been a champion of openness and honesty. He voted against reforming the Access to Information Act to improve accountability; he voted against an independent ethics counsellor; he voted against an independent inquiry into the Human Resources Development scandal.
The question isn't just what Martin did or didn't know. It's what he could be reasonably expected to know, or ask about, as an experienced senior cabinet minister with a vast political network and a strong party base.
Until those questions are answered, it's offensive to think that the Liberals would go ahead with plans for a spring election. The public needs the facts before they vote on who will run the country for the next five years.
Footnote: The best political news for the Liberals is that the opposition remains in its own state of disarray. The new Conservative party is tied up in a clunky leadership campaign, and the New Democrats are still struggling to make a national impact. The scandal has handed both parties a golden opportunity.

Fish farm probe, forest deal new worries for Liberals
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - Mark March 26 on your calendar as the next potentially bad day for the Liberal government, and remember that you heard about the Lannan Forest here first.
Not, of course, if you live in spectacular central Vancouver Island, where you've followed the saga of the sale of a lovely plot of forest, owned by the government, to a Courtenay golf course developer.
It's a long, tangled story. But on March 26 we find out how well the government's willingness to sell Crown land without any public notice or bidding serves the taxpayer.
Land and Water BC was ready last year to sell the Lannan Forest to Crown Isle Golf and Resort Community, the neighbouring development. The land wasn't advertised; no one else knew it was available; bids weren't sought. The government and the developer agreed on a price, which has so far remained secret. (The minister responsible then was Stan Hagen, also the MLA for the area.)
But the sale didn't play well in the Comox Valley. The Lannan Forest was lovely, criss-crossed with well-used hiking trails. Residents weren't ready to see it become private property.
They couldn't block the sale. But the deal was conditional on the land being annexed into the city of Courtenay. The council said OK, but community groups launched a petition drive that drew more than enough signatures to force a referendum. The annexation was off.
And that's when the government decided - belatedly - on a competitive bidding process.
That closed in February. Crown Isle won, offering $1.1 million. A group of local residents, along with the Comox-Strathcona Regional District, offered $621,000 to save the land for the community.
And most taxpayers will likely think that's OK. The area isn't starved for parkland, and if the land can be sold that may be more useful for people living in the rest of the province. It's a local issue, and the people who live there will decide how much they miss the forest.
What I want to know is how much Crown Isle would have paid for the property under the deal negotiated quietly before the public got involved.
Competitive bidding got us $1.1 million for our land. If the negotiated price was less than that - and published reports have suggested $300,000 to $400,000 - then we would have lost a lot of money.
Land and Water BC plans to sell $65 million worth of our land this year. A spokesman said about five per cent of sales have been through direct contact, like the first Crown Isle deal. The perception of unfairness led the Crown corporation to change its policy and virtually eliminate the direct sales, he said.
The new Lannan Forest deal closes March 26, which is when the government should release the transaction details.
We should expect the details of the original deal at the same time. Beyond potential embarrassment, there's no commercial reason to keep secret what is effectively the preliminary bid of the ultimate buyer.
Meanwhile, Land and Water BC faces some other problems.
Auditor General Wayne Strelioff has just decided to review a government decision forgiving $2.3 million in back rent and penalties levied on aquaculture companies that moved outside their tenures without approval. Land and Water BC cancelled the debts and returned some payments in 2001, months after the Liberals were elected.
Sierra Legal Defence Fund uncovered the deal through a freedom of information request.
Premier Gordon Campbell says the penalties were cancelled because the NDP government had allowed a big backlog of tenure applications. It's not that convincing, given the companies' own slowness in filing even basic reports a the same time.
Strelioff is going back through the paper trail, to find out why the companies got the money back and if the rules were followed.
Neither the fish farm fine review nor the Lannan Forest disclosures are likely to bring good news for the government.
Footnote: The week's most bizarre news was the revelation that the government is investigating allegations a senior health ministry bureaucrat choked a staffer in a workplace dispute. Charges have been filed; the health deputy minister is investigating; and the government has yet another problem to explain.

Not the Throne Speech Campbell expected
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - It had to be kind of a bummer for Gordon Campbell to have to sit through the Throne Speech this week.
Not that Lt.-Gov. Iona Campagnolo mumbled or anything.
But after almost three years in power, Campbell likely expected things to be going much better. If the Liberals' plans had worked - and if they hadn't been hit with a lot of bad breaks - the economy would be humming now, government would be remade and the province's revenues would be growing enough to allow more spending on services.
It hasn't worked. So a government that faces an election campaign in 14 months finds itself doing a lot of talking about sacrifice - hardly a popular re-election plank - and how great things will be by 2010.
I'm oversimplifying, of course, but criticizing me for that would be like attacking the speech for vague optimism. Throne Speeches offer such a tremendously upbeat look at the world that if you could bottle the essence no one would ever bother with Prozac again. (Where else but a Throne Speech would you read about "the incredibly successful Action Schools program," apparently a better form of PE.)
There are some intriguing ideas. Campbell is going to host a series of roundtables "engaging B.C.'s families in a discussion about their hopes and aspirations." The idea is that participants will be chosen at random to sit down and talk with the premier about where the province should be going. It could be fascinating. (And it certainly can't hurt.)
The government plans a better effort on literacy, and pledges to create 25,000 more post secondary school places by 2010, the idea being that any high school grad with a 75-per-cent average will find a space. But the speech doesn't indicate whether the future grads will be able to afford tuition, given recent increases.
Last year's speech was big on the Heartlands. This year, two things leaped out.
First, the claim that only now "The New Era has begun." The election was apparently a false start, and the Liberals would like you to begin assessing them now.
And second, the appearance of the "Spirit of 2010," a ghostly spectre that's supposed to be leading us to the light.
A Spirit of 2010 tourism strategy is to be introduced later this year.
And Campbell will host the "Spirit of 2010 Business Summit" this spring, pulling businesses, investors and community leaders together to discuss Olympic development strategies and what needs to happen to cash in.
Both those things are great. The Olympics are a big opportunity, and it will take a lot of work to make sure the benefits spread beyond Vancouver and Whistler.
But it's tough to evoke a faint image of the province six years - and two elections from now - as a rallying point. I'm not sure if it's fair to expect fundamental change on a tighter schedule, but I don't make the rules.
Most of the rest of the Throne Speech was routine. The forest policy changes will finally get done; the land use plans for Lillooet and the Central Coast will finally be approved; the government will work harder at encouraging mining; funding for forest campsites is restored. Great, but this is what's expected from government. It's their job.
The Spirit of 2010 was one ghost. Another was the disillusionment lurking in the background, the people who wonder about tax cuts made with too little information, a children and families ministry in chaos and falling incomes. And a third was the knowledge that in a week Finance Minister Gary Collins is going to bring in a budget with deep cuts to most ministries.(Three ministries will cut more than 20 per cent of their spending. Another five must cut more than 10 per cent.)
It will be a testing year for Campbell and the Liberals. The most significant test comes on Tuesday, when they must demonstrate a sound plan to produce the first balanced budget since they were elected.
Footnote: Look for a quick rush of legislation from the Liberals, especially in the economic area. They need to grab the agenda or the NDP will be able to focus attention on the government's many problems.


LIberals right to abandon welfare time limits
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - Give the Liberals credit for dropping their ill-conceived plan to start arbitrarily chopping people off welfare.
The government changed the law to bar people from collecting welfare for more than two years in any five-year period, with the first people to be cut off April 1.
They've been secretive about the impact, refusing to release their estimate of how many people and families would lose benefits.
Now, with six weeks to go until the first people are cut off , new Human Resources Minister Stan Hagen has released the estimates. In the first year 172 will be cut off welfare under the time limit rule; another 167 couples or families with children may have their welfare rates cut by $100 to $300 a month. (The sins of the father being quite literally visited on the children.)
But wait, you say, didn't I read that thousands of people would be cut off?
Indeed you did, and those estimates were probably accurate at the time.
The Liberals' plan started out with exemptions for a half-dozen categories of people who were considered unable to find work. Since then, the list of exempted groups has been steadily growing. By the time Hagen revealed the estimated impact, the exemptions had grown to 25.
Most critically, anyone who had an employment plan and was following it and looking for work wouldn't be cut off under the two-year rule, Hagen said. Since rules already allowed the government to cut off people who weren't looking for work, the reality is that noting has actually changed.
It's welcome about-face from the initial plan. (Although it means the government went through a great deal of time and money, created widespread fear and set communities into panic, all for a change that will save less than $300,000.)
Why the big change in plans?
Two factors are likely at play.
First, some Liberals started with the genuine belief that many welfare recipients are happy freeloaders choosing the dole over work. Time in government introduced them to the real world.
Welfare means a terrible life of struggle and suffering. People want to work to escape that life. But in a competitive job market, many simply can't find work. A person with the kind of problems that led them to welfare is often not the first choice of an employer.
We can do much more to help people on welfare find work, and even to push them forward. But the Liberal review should help help kill the myth of the welfare bum.
Out of 115,000 welfare recipients in the province, the government thinks about 350 people aren't making a good enough effort to find a job. (The Liberals had the same concerns about disability payments, and spent $3.5 million on a massive review that found 98 per cent of recipients were receiving appropriate benefits.)
And second, the government simply listened to those on the front lines who warned that cutting benefits to people who can't find work would just create crime, homelessness and problems. For that, they deserve credit.
The retreat creates some new problems though.
The Liberals' plans called for a major reduction in the number of people on welfare. The budget for people on temporary assistance was chopped by 35 per cent, from $699 million to $451 million this year. The plan calls for an even larger reduction in the budget due next week, part of the push for a balanced provincial budget.
But those savings would only have realized if a great many people had been pushed off welfare because of the time limit. And that is now apparently not going to happen.
The Liberals deserve credit for abandoning a bad idea. We're governed best by people who are willing to acknowledge mistakes, change course and move on. The process was inefficient, even destructive. But in the end, the government did the right thing.
Footnote: Credit should also go to the NDP government, and the Liberals, for successful efforts to help people make the transition from welfare. Increased emphasis on training and career support has proved effective in reducing the welfare rolls steadily since the mid-90s. Any investment in helping people escape welfare will be quickly repaid.

Forget Janet Jackson's breast, worry about Jerry Springer
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - I tried to avoid writing about Janet Jackson's right breast, I really did.
I mean, how big a deal is it when a pop star flashes a breast for a few seconds, especially in the middle of the Superbowl, an event celebrating excess in every form, from the size of the players and the violence of their crashes to the outrageousness of the TV commercials and the ludicrousness of the half-time spectacle?
It was a real big deal, apparently.
I watched much of the game, even the half-time show, but was puttering around at the same time. Driven to inattention by Justin Timberlake, the ex-boy bandster, I missed the flash seen round the world. (Although as a man of the world I have seen breasts, both right and left, before.)
And then everyone went nuts. Timberlake and Jackson started talking about wardrobe malfunction, as if NASA had been involved. Jackson's name became the most searched Internet topic of all time, showing that a lot of people missed the flash and wanted to see one of her breasts. CBS and MTV started running for cover. Cameron Diaz, Timberlake's current steady, was supposedly peeved.
The American government acted the wackiest. FCC chair Michael Powell - the chief broadcast regulator - promised a quick investigation into the half-time show for violating indecency rules. "I personally was offended by the entire production, and I think that most of the complaints we have received are much broader than just the final incident," he said. A team of experts will be digging into the whole affair to find out just how far the rot has spread, he said.
I don't think people should flash during a football game, even the players. After all, the scantily clad cheerleaders don't deserve competition.
But anyone who thinks Janet Jackson's right breast is the big outrage on TV either hasn't been paying attention or is crazier than a loon.
I'd rather any children of my acquaintance sit through 100 Superbowl hide-and-go-peep shows than watch one day of Jerry Springer and his assorted companions on afternoon TV. (Shows that have drawn not a single investigation from Powell and the other guardians.)
Janet Jackson taught the kids at home that pop stars wear strange clothes, and are willing to shed bits of them for the sake of a career boost. Hardly shocking, or damaging.
But every afternoon Springer and company teach them that people are cruel, stupid, abusive, dishonest, mistrustful and violent. Worse, the shows teach them that a really good time can be had by dragging the most wrecked people on a stage and shrieking abuse at them. (Moms who are angry because their daughters dress like sluts, dads who get paternity test results on stage, people who regularly rip off their own clothes, or someone else's, are restrained by a beefy security guard and left to alternately sob hysterically and swear wildly while the audience boos.)
The daily damage to any sense of human dignity - at a time when kids are watching TV - is astonishing.
Likewise, I'd sit a class of kids down in front of Jackson's finale several dozen times before I'd let them watch pro wrestling, which celebrates an ultra-violence and sex fantasyland out of A Clockwork Orange. I'm not a prude, and am fiercely anti-censorship, but I'm astonished parents haven't boycotted WWE and its ilk into late-night time slots. Implants for the women, steroids for the men and a steady routine of sexism and merciless beatings - aimed at kids.
Jackson flashed one breast, out of some 12 billion out there. Inappropriate for afternoon TV, sure, even in an event so insanely over the top as the SuperBowl, which opened with a tribute to the space shuttle crew that burned up on re-entry last year.
But cause for this kind of global uproar? Not a chance.
Let it go. It's just a breast.
Footnote: Meanwhile in Canada more viewers were worried about a beer commercial that showed - oh, the horror - two women kissing, according to the CRTC. That may be a sleazy way to try to get guys to down more beers, but it doesn't seem like a major crime. Kisses are, when welcomed, a good thing. (I missed that commercial too, proving, that it makes more sense to advertise in your local newspaper.)

Doctors and government head to June chaos
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - I staggered home in despair after last week's dueling press conferences by government and doctors.
The two sides are fighting about money again. Doctors say the budget for their services needs to increase over the next three years. The government says no.
And since there is no reasonable process for resolving the deadlock, the two sides are heading for a health care wreck in June.
Once again the big losers will be regional centres, which are both the most obvious targets for doctors' job action and the most seriously damaged. If doctors withdraw services from one hospital in the Lower Mainland, there are others just down the road to take up the slack. That's not true in Prince Rupert or the Kootenays.
The two sides are so far apart, and the mistrust so intense, that this dispute has the feeling of a disaster.
I sympathize with Health Minister Colin Hansen. His position is that there is no more money for health care, doctors are already well-paid (they got a 21-per-cent increase over the term of the last three-year agreement) and other government workers have accepted three-year contracts with no increases. Tax cuts and a balanced budget are both, in his view, more important than finding extra money for health care, because they will create economic growth which will eventually fund better care.
Doctors say the last increase was a catch-up, and that if the government wants more operations done to cope with a growing and aging population, it needs to put more money into the budget for doctors. And the BC Medical Association warns that B.C. will lose doctors unless there's a raise.
Hansen says the doctors' proposals would cost about eight per cent a year; the BCMA doctors says are looking for about 3.5 per cent a year, matching an increase just given to Alberta doctors.
The dispute is familiar. The consequences are always damaging. And governments pretty much always lose.
What's painful is that two supposedly mature organizations still haven't managed to agree on a way to resolve disputes without hurting patients.
Hansen's position is that he and the government are in charge, they write the cheques and they'll decide how many doctors are needed and how much money they get. (It is the same position that's led to the Nanaimo emergency room virtual shutdown.) It's the dream role for every manager who wishes for a free hand in running a business or organization.
But it's not realistic. People don't accept the right of the boss to make those decisions. They form unions to increase their clout in the process, or find ways to enhance their individual bargaining power. Doctors - mobile, publicly supported, politically critical to government - have all the tools they need to press their case.
At this point it's the government that has twice agreed to, and then reneged, on processes that were supposed to avoid these kind of disputes.
First the government agreed to binding arbitration, but the Liberals tore up the award when they didn't like the outcome.
This time, the premier signed an agreement which promised see any dispute ultimately go to a conciliator, who would hear both sides, consider the facts and the government's ability to pay, and prepare a recommendation. The government could accept it or reject. Only then would job action happen.
That was supposed to be the deal. But now the government has told doctors in advance that it will reject any deal that provides any extra money. It's a clear betrayal of the commitment to conciliation, another indication that this government is careless about breaking its word.
Conciliation holds political risks for the government. Reject the report - if it's reasonable - and the public will be angry about the resulting disruption. But it holds no economic risks, because government can always reject the report.
Conciliation is what the government promised. And it's the only alternative to chaos.
Footnote: It's also time to consider long-term solutions. The obvious one is to find ways of reducing the level of conflict with doctors without rolling out wheelbarrows of cash. But government could work more aggressively at reducing demand for services, and increasing supply by shifting more procedures to non-doctors and finding innovative ways of producing more doctors quickly.


No more Heartlands, but good news for resource towns
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - Ding, dong, the Heartlands are dead.
Or at least the Liberals' Heartland strategy is dead, mocked mercilessly out of existence by the very people it was supposed to be placate.
The cabinet shuffle marked the official end of the Heartlands' strategy. Last year, the phrase seemed to work its into every government news release. By the time of the shuffle, not a word was heard about it.
But in fact the cabinet shuffle was good news for B.C.'s regions.
First of all, Premier Gordon Campbell blew up the competition, science and enterprise ministry, created after the 2001 election. The ministry has been a flop, unfocused and widely criticized by the businesspeople who were supposed to be its supporters.
In its place, we're back to a ministry of small business and economic development, names familiar from the NDP years. Chilliwack MLA John Les was jumped from the backbench to the job, a big promotion.
What's in a name? Partly, it sends a signal about a government's approach. Competition, science and enterprise didn't suggest much of a role for government. In fact back in 2001, Campbell promised a smaller role for government and different approach to the economy. "We're committed to creating a competitive environment that allows B.C. entrepreneurs, small business and B.C. industries to thrive and to prosper,'' he said. Government wouldn't help make things happen. It would reduce taxes and regulations and stand back while the investment rushed in.
It didn't work. Job growth has been good in the last year; investment hasn't.
A competitive business environment isn't enough anymore. Lots of places have already got there, and are out promoting their advantages. Sadly, if you build it, they will not necessarily come.
The new ministry acknowledges that reality.
It still needs money. The competition ministry has budgeted $3 million for marketing and promoting B.C. this year, a 40-per-cent from last year. Alberta is spending seven times as much. (B.C. has other marketing budgets, like the forest marketing funds. But so does Alberta.)
This isn't just criticism from a grouchy columnist. Tourism BC examined government tourism expenditures as a percentage of industry revenues in B.C. and Alberta, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. The other provinces spent four times as much. To match the spending level in Alberta, our nearest rival, the Liberals would have to double the tourism budget.
And it's not just tourism. Economic promotion generally has been weak, partly because of budget cuts. The competition ministry budget - or its equivalent - was $69 million when the Liberals took over. Since them it's been cut by 30 per cent, with another cut coming in next month's budget.
That aside, the new ministry is still an encouraging move. B.C.'s regions particularly need help in attracting small business and investment, an area where they have lagged far behind the Lower Mainland. And the economic development ministry should provide leadership across government.
That wasn't the only good news in the shuffle for B.C.'s regions. Campbell created two new junior minister's roles, with Skeena's Roger Harris taking on forests and Prince George's Pat Bell responsible for mining. Harris worked in the industry, and should help push needed reforms forward and ensure progress on key initiatives like the 20-per-cent tenure takeback.
And Bell can bring a needed focus to mining, while Energy Minister Richard Neufeld pushes oil and gas.
Just as importantly, the North now has two stronger voices at the cabinet table. Both Bell and Harris are part of a group of Liberal MLAs from resource communities who could push for more action on rural issues over the next year.
There are still going to be serious problems caused by budget cuts to economic development efforts.
But the Liberals have belatedly acknowledged their poor performance in encouraging investment and growth, and taken a significant step towards improvement.
Footnote: The cabinet is still weighted heavily with guys from the Lower Mainland. MLAs from Victoria, the Lower Mainland and the Okanagan get 22 out of 28 seats around the cabinet table. Women are also in short supply - only six cabinet ministers are women, and only Christy Clark has a key post. Not surprisingly, the Liberals actually trailed the NDP among women voters across the province in the last Ipsos-Reid poll.

Where's the money for promoting B.C.?
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - It's great the Liberals have killed the clunky competition, science and enterprise ministry, created in the heady days after the election.
But its replacement -small business and economic development - is going to need more money if new minister John Les is to do the job.
Premier Gordon Campbell denied the competition ministry was a failed experiment, pointing to good job growth. But it's tough to make that claim with a straight face after you've just shut the ministry down.
The old ministry name sounded like a slogan for a Soviet five-year plan. But it also revealed a big Liberal misjudgment.
The NDP government - like most provinces - had a ministry for employment and investment, and another for small business and tourism. (Both ineffective.)
But the Liberals wanted a smaller government role and a different approach to economic development, Mr. Campbell said then. "We're committed to creating a competitive environment that allows B.C. entrepreneurs, small business and B.C. industries to thrive and to prosper,'' he said. Government would cut red tape, reduce taxes and the investment would rush in.
It was a serious misjudgment. A competitive business environment is just the starting point today. Many jurisdictions have already got there, and are out aggressively promoting their advantages.
Not B.C. The competition ministry has budgeted $3 million for marketing and promoting the province this year, down 40 per cent from last year. Next door, much smaller Alberta is spending seven times as much. (B.C. has other promotional efforts, like the forest marketing funds. But so does Alberta.)
It's just not enough. Tourism BC looked at government tourism expenditures as a percentage of industry revenues in B.C. and Alberta, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. On average, the other provinces spent four times as much. Just to match Alberta's spending level the Liberals would have to double the tourism budget. The Premier's own Progress Board also called for more spending on tourism promotion.
It's not just tourism. One business leader recalls walking into a Toronto biotech conference in 2002. B.C. had a tiny booth, staffed with one person. Manitoba had a set-up five times as large, with a full staff courting companies. "When it come to business promotion and marketing, we are not in the game," he says.
Nor are we likely to get there fast given the way the ministry is being starved. The budget was $69 million when the Liberals took over; it's been chopped by almost one-third since then, with another 10-per-cent cut in the next budget.
The new ministry is still a positive change. It should have a much clearer focus on economic development, and be able cut across government. Mr. Les assumes big responsibilities - from the Olympics to tourism to economic strategy to international trade - and the chance to develop a co-ordinated strateey. But without the resources, B.C. won't going to be able to compete.
There was other economic good news in the shuffle.There was no mention of the Heartlands at the announcement, last year's buzzword apparently mocked out of existence.
But B.C.'s regions will benefit from the appointment two junior ministers - Skeena's Roger Harris for forests and Prince George's Pat Bell for mining. Energy Minister Richard Neufeld has rightly devoted a lot of his time to the booming gas industry; an added focus on mining is welcome. And significant progress on forest reform is desperately needed before the election.
The two Northern MLAs also add needed regional representation to cabinet, although 21 of the 27 ministers are still from the Lower Mainland, Victoria and the Okanagan. (Only six ministers are women; with only Christy Clark in a major role. It's not surprising that the Liberals trail the NDP among women voters.)
The Liberals' overall economic track record has been disappointing to voters, especially to the party's supporters.
With this shuffle Mr. Campbell has made some overdue changes to sharpen the government's focus and improve its execution.
But without the money needed to do the job, the effort will come up short.

Reality check: We've already decriminalized drunk driving
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - That was a weird little media frenzy over a government report proposing - shock and horror - decriminalizing some drunk driving offences.
How could they even think of such a thing, demanded critics. Don't they know how seriously we view impaired driving? Tougher penalties, that's what needed, said New Democrat Joy MacPhail.
Solicitor General Rich Coleman moved quickly to deny the government would decriminalize drunk driving, dousing the brief fire.
But it was all a load of rubbish.
What the reports didn't say was that we've already decriminalized almost all drunk driving. The changes proposed in the discussion paper - which was released six months ago - would have increased the real penalties and consequences of impaired driving, not reduced them.
In 2002 police in B.C. stopped about 50,000 drivers and found that they were impaired.
And 90 per cent of them faced no criminal charges. Police handed out a 24-hour roadside suspension, the driver caught a cab home and picked up his car the next day, and that was that.
And when nine out of 10 offenders who are caught by police aren't charged, we have effectively decriminalized the offence.
Which makes it bizarre that people got all worked up about a proposal that would have acknowledged the current reality and resulted in tougher penalties for most offenders.
We seize on the idea of tougher penalties and stricter enforcement as the solution to most problems in the justice system, in spite of their proven ineffectiveness in many cases. And we're happier with our fantasies than we are with reality.
In fact, the continuing push for tougher penalties is a main reason that so few people are actually charged with impaired driving.
In response to public concern and lobbying Parliament made the impaired driving penalties, especially the provisions for licence suspensions, more punitive and less flexible. The theory was that the threat of tough punishment would impaired drivers off the road.
But instead the changes made the consequence of a criminal conviction so serious that more and more people decided it was worth pleading not guilty, hiring a lawyer and going to trial. Even if they weren't successful, they would have 18 months of creeping through the process, leaving them time to prepare for a stint without a licence.
The increased chance of a trial, and the likelihood of a tough defence mounted by a lawyer specializing in impaired cases, meant police had to put more time into gathering information and making a case before charges were laid. The growing number of cases crowded the courts, with 25 per cent of provincial court trial time now taken up with impaired driving offences.
Tougher penalties meant more not guilty pleas and trials, more than the police and courts could handle. So they started using the 24-hour suspension as an alternative to laying charges. The number of impaired charges dropped, and for 90 per cent of offenders who were caught by police the offence was decriminalized. The supposed move to tougher penalties actually produced lighter consequences.
Enforcing the law would cost more than government wants to pay. If every impaired driver was charged, we'd need hundreds of extra police officers, and more prosecutors and judges.
Instead, the B.C. government was considering creating provincial offences that would carry penalties that would be tougher than a 24-hour suspension, but less severe than the Criminal Code sanctions. Fines might be lower, and licence suspensions shorter and more flexible. Judges would have the option of allowing offenders to keep driving to work, for example. The penalties would be serious, but would be eased enough that more people would plead guilty, the government hoped.
Repeat offenders or drivers in accidents could expect Criminal Code charges. But most would face lesser charges.
Despite the uproar - and Coleman's rejection of the idea - it makes sense, certainly more sense than our current approach.
Footnote: The paper proposed other changes. It suggested that people who receive two 24-hour suspensions could automatically lose their licence for 90 days, regardless of whether guilt or innocence is determined in court. That's too severe. Other changes -- mandatory education or rehab programs, already the rule in every other province -- make such obvious sense it's amazing they haven't yet been introduced here.

Finding the key changes in the big shuffle
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - Five things you should know about the Liberals' cabinet shuffle.
First, good news on the economic front. The competition, science and enterprise ministry created by the Liberals after the election is gone, and minister Rick Thorpe demoted. The ministry has been a failure.
It's been replaced with a small business and economic development ministry, headed by Chilliwack backbencher John Les. He doesn't have a lot of business experience, but Les has impressed observers.
Mining and forestry also get a boost. Prince George's Pat Bell becomes junior minister for mining; Skeena's Roger Harris does the same for forestry operations. Good news for both industries, especially forestry. (And good news for Liberal candidates in the north and northwest, who can now point to more representation at the cabinet table.)
Second, be very worried about the ministry of children and families. The cabinet swearing-in was at Government House, where the Lieutenant-Governor lives. (Great views across to Washington, amazing gardens, pool, but kind of cold living quarters really.) The ballroom's silence was shattered by Hamish Clark, Christy Clark's two-year-old, shrieking 'mummy,' in the most horrified voice as she stood on the stage with the rest of the cabinet gang. Which shows that even a two-year-old recognizes that it's a bad thing when mom gets made minister of children and families, the most challenging job in government these days.
Clark got off to a poor start. The ministry is a mess. Former minister Gordon Hogg resigned last week; his deputy was fired. But the Liberals still want to transfer about 40 per cent of its operations - about $500 million - to a semi-independent authority June 1. An internal government report last month said the process was far behind schedule and warned that it was impossible to know if the reduced ministry budget would provide the needed services.
But Clark, minutes after being appointed, said the budget won't be changed and she wants to push ahead with the changes planned for June 1. It is a formula for disaster.
Third - and by way of contrast - watch how new Education Minister Tom Christensen handles the jump from the backbench to the second-largest ministry. It's a big vote of confidence for the Okanagan MLA, who impressed Campbell as the head of a Liberal education committee. Unlike Clark, Christensen said he plans to find out what's going on in the ministry before acting. Good idea.
Fourth, pay attention to how veteran Stan Hagen handles the mandatory welfare time limits which are to come into effect April 1. Murray Coell, the last human resources minister, has moved up to community women's and aboriginal services. Now Hagen has to deal with the fallout of the Liberals' secretive plan to become the first Canadian province to introduce arbitrary welfare time limits.
Fifth, watch how this whole cabinet comes together, and whether any of the new ministers makes the jump into the inner circle. Campbell added six ministers, dropped five and left barely one-third in their original jobs. (Although that one-third includes most of the inner circle and key posts.)
The new ministers are taking over with the plans and budgets already set by the people they replace, leaving them with little room to make changes or alter course. Some may chafe at the limits. Watch also whether ministers use the shuffle to duck questions on past problems by claiming it wasn't on their watch.
There are other areas to keep an eye on. Joyce Murray was bumped from environment - enviros thought she did too little, Liberal MLAs thought she did too much - and was replaced by Bill Barisoff, a minister with a profile so low he's almost been invisible. Kevin Falcon makes the jump to transportation, a major promotion the likable but untested Surrey MLA.
Campbell says this team will lead the party into the next election. They've got a lot of work to do.

Hogg deals blow to children and families cuts
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - The wreck of the children and families ministry is a disaster, one that should prompt an immediate freeze on budget cuts and restructuring.
Trust us, the Liberals said. We know what we're doing. Even though every responsible observer says it's reckless to launch a massive restructuring while chopping the ministry budget by $238 million, we can pull this off.
Now it's clear that they didn't know what they were doing. Children and Families Minister Gordon Hogg's resignation, and the firing of the ministry's top bureaucrat, only confirm what's been obvious. The ministry is in a mess. Trust has been betrayed.
Hogg quit because his ministry is under investigation for a questionable financial deal. It appears $400,000 owed the government was written off without proper approval. The lucky debtor was a company linked to Doug Walls, a former Liberal riding association president. Walls is also related to Premier Gordon Campbell by marriage.
Walls' relationship with the ministry - and Hogg's judgment - had already been questioned. Walls, who has worked as a volunteer in the community living field for 20 years, received a string of untendered contracts worth $65,000. Contracts worth more than $25,000 are supposed to be awarded through an open competition. These were split into seven smaller contracts, avoiding the limit. Hogg was warned of the problem. He said he asked ministry staff, and they said everything was fine.
Walls was then named CEO of the interim community living authority, again with no competition. It's a big deal. In four months the semi-independent authority is to take over about 40 per cent of the ministry's operations - some $500 million worth of programs.
Hogg was warned of again of a problem. Walls had been managing the family's Ford dealership in Prince George when it went bankrupt in 1998. The CIBC - out more than $1 million - accused the company of 'kiting' cheques. Police investigated and the case was open. (That's why a special prosecutor was appointed, to decide if charges should be laid.)
This time, Hogg's investigation consisted of asking Advanced Education Minister Shirley Bond about Walls. Walls had backed her campaign and served with her on the school board. She vouched for him in a brief conversation.
Which brings us to the current situation.
The transfer to the new community living authority is already in trouble. An independent review said that unless major decisions were made by the end of this month the June 1 launch date should be scrubbed. It criticized the lack of a permanent CEO, staff or board, and warned of the need for management focus.
Now the minister is gone, the CEO is gone and the ministry's top bureaucrat is gone. And the interim authority is part of the investigation by auditors.
It would be foolish to believe that the June 1 launch date for the new authority can be met, or to ignore the fact that more than 9,000 mentally handicapped British Columbians depend on these programs.
The date will have to be put off, and that raises another problem. The provincial budget due in three weeks will include about $65 million in cuts to the ministry. Hogg said those savings were partly based on the move to the new authority, and that's not going to happen.
The budget needs to reflect the new reality.
The problems spread throughthe ministry. Plans to hand child care and protection services over to 10 new authorities are more than a year behind schedule. The ministry's budgeting has been hopelessly unrealistic. And now its credibility has been dealt a hammer blow.
This isn't a criticism of staff, or the families and volunteers who have worked so hard on plotting a new direction. They have been let down.
The Liberals promised competence, more funding for the ministry and an end to constant re-organization.
They delivered mismanagement, chaos and cuts.
Footnote: The tough work now goes to Alison MacPhail, the new deputy minister, who moves over from the solicitor general's ministry. She was a senior attorney general's staffer under the NDP and worked for the federal government for 13 years.


Stronach versus Martin in the political battle of the rich
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - I almost hope Belinda Stronach wins the Conservative leadership just so Paul Martin gets a chance to pitch himself as the candidate for the average working Canadian.
Martin is of course fabulously rich, although no one seems to have figured out just how fabulously. Figure something over $50 million, anyway.
But Stronach's family fortune - her 71-year-old dad controls Magna International, the car parts giant - is something over $600 million. She was being paid more than $10 million a year to run the company before she quit to seek the leadership.
Not that there's anything wrong with being rich. And in fact you have to give both of them credit. They could be doing anything they choose, but they opted for public life.
But the political rise of the uber-rich does bring to mind the famous image of George Bush the First staring in amazement at a grocery checkout scanning machine during a campaign stop. The machines had been around for ages; but in his world there were people to head off to the grocery store and buy a carton of milk. And unless you have stood in a grocery store checkout line, leaning on a shopping cart filled with stuff you don't remember picking out, how can you really lay claim to understanding the lives of ordinary Canadians?
It's way too early to judge Stronach's candidacy. The opening days of the campaign this week were a little ragged. She came across as someone trying too hard to remember the snappy talking points her handlers have been stressing. The modern practice of sticking to a few vague but clever talking points always forced and unnatural, but experienced politicians make it seem less clunky.
But she may well get better, or ideally may decide that speaking more freely and candidly may be worth the risk of an occasional gaffe. It would be a good move; Canadians are ready for a politician who actually says something, even if they disagree. (As Ralph Klein has proved.)
It's also too early to judge what she stands for, except ina few areas. Against marijuana legalization, because it would make the Americans mad. For same sex marriage, because it's a matter of choice. For tax cuts, which presumably - hopefully - means she is also for spending cuts, although that's unclear.
But so far it's hard to imagine Stronach, rival Stephen Harper and Martin finding much to argue about if they found themselves locked in a room together.
So far it's also hard to judge Stronach's overall suitability for the job.
Good business management skills aren't a bad indicator of success in government. It takes an adjustment - for one thing, in politics your cabinet is made out of whomever the voters elect. You can't send the executive search firm out to line up a better defence minister. But government is a large, complex organization that's difficult to get to do anything new or different, and so is a big company.
We don't know yet how great Stronach's business skills are. The reviews from her three-year stint at the head of Magna are generally good. But it is the family business; that's not quite the same as making your way in the real world.
Some political experience would also be nice as well. Most of us would be reluctant to hire someone to wire our houses who had never done electrical work before. Likewise, we should be nervous about someone who wants to be prime minister who hasn't even served on a school board.
Stronach has already helped the new party. A race between Harper and former Ontario health minister Tony Clement would have been soporifically low-key. There aren't many surprises likely from either man.
Stronach is an unknown quantity, and an interesting one - youngish in political terms at 37, rich, a single mother, new to the political frontrooms. She'll capture needed media and public attention for the new party's leadership race.
Footnote: Federal Liberals in Prince George are wondering what the party has learned from its membership scandals. The founding meeting of the constituency association for the new federal riding was expected to attract about 30 people. Then three busloads of Liberals pulled in from Williams Lake. They left with all the slots on the executive.

Resignation under cloud bad setback for Hogg's ministry
VICTORIA -- Another week, another special prosecutor and another set of big problems for the Liberal government and the ministry of children and families.
The latest special prosecutor is reviewing possible criminal charges against Doug Walls in connection with the bankruptcy of his family's Prince George car dealership.
What's that got to do with government?
Walls is an active Liberal. He was president of a Prince George riding association and was a likely candidate in the 2001 election, until the 1998 bankruptcy hurt his prospects. He's a relative of Premier Gordon Campbell -- their wives are cousins. And Walls has been working with the ministry of children and families, on contract and as the CEO of the interim authority that's taking over about 40 per cent of the ministry's services.
He resigned on the weekend, after news of the special prosecutor was released.
Being manager of a failed business shouldn't bar you from future employment, although this was a messy bankruptcy. The CIBC accuses managers at the Ford dealership of "kiting" cheques -- writing cheques on one empty bank account, depositing them and then writing more cheques based on the phony balances.
The bank, out more than $1 million, handed its information over to the RCMP, which investigated and recommended charges. The special prosecutor is deciding if there are grounds.
But given the potential concerns, why did Walls get the government job a year ago?
Sean Holman, editor of political newsletter Public Eye, broke the story and reported concerns about favouritism have been around for some time.
Holman also found Walls had received a string of untendered contracts from the ministry for $65,000 worth of consulting work before he was hired. Contracts over $25,000 are supposed to be awarded through a competition. But that didn't happen. Walls got a series of seven smaller contracts over six months, so no open competitions were held.
Mostly I feel sorry for Walls. For more than 20 years, since his own disabled daughter was born, he's been a tireless worker on behalf of disabled British Columbians. He's been the volunteer head of local and provincial organizations, including three years as head of the B.C. Association for the Mentally Handicapped in the '80s. He's served on the Prince George school board, and headed up its finance committee.
But common sense demands that under these unusual circumstances any contracts or jobs that went to Walls should have been clearly awarded based on merit, through an open competition.
Children and Families Minister Gordon Hogg had no answers about why this didn't happen. Hogg knew that the CIBC had made the fraud allegations six months before he appointed Walls to the critical job. He says he didn't investigate because Walls had an enthusiastic endorsement from Advanced Education Minister Shirley Bond, who had worked with him on the Prince George school board.
Hogg also knew about the untendered contracts. Members of the authority's transition board had complained to him about them. He said he asked his deputy minister about the contracts, and he said everything was OK.
Hogg's lack of vigilance has helped create a major problem.
The timing of Walls' departure is disastrous. The ministry hopes to hand community living services over to the new semi-independent authority June 1.
This is a huge change -- the services cost about $500 million a year, and are critically important to about 9,000 mentally handicapped people and their families.
But an independent review done for the ministry said the transition is behind schedule and the plan has major holes. Unless they're fixed by the end of this month, the review said, the launch date is too risky and should be scrapped.
Among the key tasks to be done by Jan. 31 was appointing a permanent board and CEO. Now, instead, the project has lost its key manager. It's a disaster, and one that could have been avoided.
Footnote: Appointment of a special prosecutor doesn't mean Walls has done anything wrong. Special prosecutors are appointed anytime it looks like government-employed Crown prosecutors could be asked to make a decision about a politically sensitive case. The move takes the pressure off them, and lets the public see that the decision on laying charges hasn't been politically influenced.


Disabled adults at risk in ill-planned ministry change
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - The Liberal government appears ready to take serious risks with services for thousands of mentally handicapped British Columbians.
The government wants to hand delivery of services for almost 10,000 people over to a new semi-independent authority, like the regional health authorities. There's wide support from people who believe the authority will be more flexible and responsive to the needs of the developmentally disabled. But with barely four months to go before the planned change, the ministry of children and families' plan still has huge holes, and the impact of budget cuts is unclear.
The risks in this major change are enormous. The ministry's community living programs serve more than 9,000 developmentally disabled children and adults, and make up 40 per cent of its $1.5-billion budget. Some of the people are institutionalized, and require intensive care; others are in supported living or day programs; in other cases, the ministry just provides a break for families that provide care.
And the risks are compounded by the fact that the government is trying to make the change without adequate preparation, and while it is looking to cut deeply into the ministry budget.
These aren't complaints from people opposed to the change, or the government's critics. The concerns were raised in a "transition readiness" review conducted for the government and posted on the ministry's web site, without notice, days before Christmas.
The review panel was recommended in an earlier consultant's report that found major problems with the ministry's restructuring efforts.
The panel came back with bad news, finding critical holes in the ministry's plans. The gaps are so serious that the panel said unless they're fixed by the end of this month, the June 1 transition date should be scrapped.
The panel found that there's still no agreement on who will be accountable for what services, or how services will be delivered under the new model.
As a result the panel is also concerned that there won't be enough money to provide services after more cuts required by the Liberals are made. That's logical - if the government doesn't know how services will be delivered, there is no way to know what they will cost. (Community living services cost about $655 million in the Liberals' first full year. The new authority will have about eight per cent less - some $52 million - to spend.)
The panel also warned that the failure to appoint a permanent board and hire a CEO and staff has created major problems. The review noted that the new board will want time to review the issues and decisions already made, and hiring a CEO will take until May. That will create "an ongoing lack of stability in the new organization," and the authority will move through the critical months ahead without a management team.
And on top of that, the agencies that deliver the services face their own uncertainties. The government wants to cut the money they get; they are in turn looking for concessions in contract talks with some unions representing about 15,000 employees. Talks are continuing, and the employers are taking a lockout vote.
Minister Gordon Hogg promises the change won't go ahead if there is any risk to health and safety.
But he won't accept the panel's recommendation that the transition be delayed if key decisions aren't made by Jan. 31. The review panel said, for example, that unless the permanent authority board is in place by Jan. 31 the change should automatically be delayed.
Hogg says he'll decide whether the change will push ahead even if the deadlines set by the panel are missed.
The ministry has been through a chaotic year. Budget plans have been proven unworkable. Change is far behind schedule. And now it looks as if the ministry is on the verge of pushing ahead with huge change without adequate planning or money.
Footnote: The problems have been made worse by the sudden resignation this week of Doug Walls, CEO of the interim authority. Walls quit because a special prosecutor is looking into the bankruptcy of his family's Prince George Ford dealership. His departure creates more problems for the implementation plan.


Kitimat takes on Alcan and the government
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - It's time to start a pool on how many seats the battle between Kitimat and Alcan will cost the Liberals.
Kitimat has just gone to the BC Supreme Court to try and limit Alcan's sale of power. The town says the company was given the electricity from the Kemano power project more than 50 years ago to smelt aluminum, not to sell at a big profit. And the people of Kitimat are angry at the provincial government for not fighting to enforce the original deal that gave Alcan the public resource.
Kitimat has a good case, according to lawyers who have reviewed the file. Certainly anyone who reads the original 1949 agreements handing over the water rights to Alcan finds the government's intent clear. The power was to be used to make aluminum or for other industrial projects "in the vicinity of the works."
But since then things have changed.
In the '90s, the town says, Alcan was allowed to sell power "surplus to its needs." And when the California energy crisis hit in 2001, the company was selling power - very profitably - while running the smelter at 65-per-cent capacity.
Now neither the company nor the provincial government is prepared to acknowledge any limits on Alcan's right to sell power, or any requirement that it produce aluminum.
It's strange, this spat. Kitimat is a company town, and Alcan is the company. They've been united - mostly - for half a century, and the people of Kitimat and the company have done very well out of the relationship.
And the people taking on the provincial government aren't the usual critics. Kitimat's council and business community are pretty united on the issue. Long-time Mayor Richard Wozney, leading the legal challenge, was even a Liberal candidate in 1996.
The court challenge is a last resort. The town has been trying unsuccessfully to work with the company and the government almost since the election. Now it's asking the BC Supreme Court to review all the agreements with Alcan, and rule on whether the company is breaking them by selling power.
It's a daunting prospect - a small town taking on a massive global corporation and a government. But Wozney says it's a matter of life and death for Kitimat, where property values and population are plummeting, and two of five elementary schools have already closed. Alcan can produce power from the Kemano project for under under $5 a megawatt hour, and sell it for 10 times as much. Energy sales may make more business sense than expanding or maintaining aluminum production. (Alcan told the Liberals' energy task force that it hoped to reduce electricity use at the smelter, acquire other power sources and move into the electricity business.)
Alcan is just looking after its shareholders. And the company notes not one job has been lost due to power sales, and says it is honouring all agreements with the province.
But Kitimat has tough questions for the government about why it isn't enforcing the agreement, making sure that a public resource was being used for the good of British Columbia. When did that requirement change, the town has asked
The answers have been weak. Attorney General Geoff Plant says only that the government has reviewed all the agreements and actions between 1950 and the present and concluded Alcan is acting appropriately. But he won't say when or how the original agreement was changed. And he adds that that the government also fears repercussions from Alcan if it pushes the issue.
So with no satisfaction from government, Kitimat has turned to the courts.
Power issues are already a hot political topic in B.C., and rural B.C. has already stored up grievances against the government.
Now the Liberals are standing alongside a giant corporation in opposing a community that's fighting for public benefits from a public resource.
It's a bleak way for northern MLAs to begin the countdown to next year's election.
Footnote: Alcan and the government both suggest the community needs to work harder at diversifying its economy, as major industries like Alcan will inevitably reduce employment. But Kitimat, built as a company town, has few natural advantages in the fight to attract small business.

Auditor should answer real questions about BC Rail deal
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - Judith Reid is right. The legislature raids don't mean the BC Rail sale should be stopped.
But taxpayers should still ask for an independent review by the province's auditor general.
Deal opponents got a boost when police raided the legislature offices of Reid's aide Bob Virk and Finance Minister Gary Collins' powerful assistant Dave Basi. Police also searched the office of Erik Bornman, a federal Liberal wheel and a lobbyist who worked for OmniTrax, one of the unsuccessful BC Rail bidders. Virk was heavily involved in the sale. Basi worked closely with Collins, who co-chaired the sale steering committee with Reid. Bornman's company lobbied both ministers.
That's all we know. And it's not enough to suggest wrongdoing, or any reason for delay.
But there are still questions about the deal, separate from the investigation. And given the likelihood of more asset sales, it makes sense to make sure this one was done right.
Premier Gordon Campbell points to a review of the sale by a U.S.-based consultant and says it provides all the answers. That review, by Charles River Associates, found the process was fair and the price paid for the railroad was toward the top of the range you would expect. It is, overall, a positive report.
But it also raised questions suggesting that the way the sale was handled could have been unfair and cost taxpayers' money.
And with all respect to the company, it was paid $300,000 for the review, and likely hopes for more work. Its expertise is unquestioned - the consultants have helped governments around the world auction off assets and establish markets. It's reputation is important. But it was still paid by the government.
The consultants' report raised several questions.
They found that the $750 million CN Rail paid for the company was at the top of the expected range - good news for taxpayers. But Charles River didn't do any in-depth review of the fairness of the $250 million CN Rail paid to acquire the past tax losses of CN. Taxpayers don't know if fair value was delivered.
The consultant also found significant leaks. One of the finalists leaked information in violation of confidentiality agreements.
Another public leak revealed BC Rail management's forecast of the effects of the sale on the company and communities. That politically embarrassing leak sparked a big internal review, complete with forensic auditors, to find the source.
And in a third leak, the consultant said, information was sent to someone who shouldn't have had it. The report is irritatingly unclear about details. It says only that the lawyers involved promised the documents were returned or shredded. But were they forgotten? Were they important? The consultant says no, but doesn't give enough facts to support the conclusion.
Finally, the consultant raises concerns about the basics of the deal. The Liberals said they would evaluate proposals based on price and a range of other factors, from economic development to job preservation to benefits for First Nations.
But the fairness review says it was really all about the money. CP Rail and Omnitrax - unsuccessful bidders - complained that they couldn't get a handle on what the government really wanted. They put more emphasis on the entire package. After the decision, they realized the auction really focused on price. If they had better information, they might have offered more money.
These are all real concerns. And to make sure the mistakes aren't repeated - and to determine if taxpayers got a fair price for the tax losses - the auditor general should be provided with the funding needed to review the deal.
That's a problem. The government has foolishly chopped the auditor general's funding, despite warnings that critical reviews would be sacrificed. (The Alberta auditor receives almost twice as much money.)
Restore the funding. Support the review. We need the information.
Footnote: It was Gordon Campbell's birthday this week. Here's his horoscope. "Stop trying to be perfect and start being yourself. That, in a nutshell is the message of the stars on your birthday, and if you heed it the next year could be one of the best of your life. Once you stop comparing yourself to others you will find the happiness you seek."

Liberals vulnerable for chopping crime-fighting
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - NDP leader Carole James has picked a political winner in challenging the Liberals on organized crime.
James launched her attack on the weekend, calling on Premier Gordon Campbell to spend more on crime-fighting and demanding a public inquiry into our enforcement efforts. The move was opportunistic, reminding the public of the current mysterious scandal swirling around the federal and provincial Liberals.
But it's also a good issue for the NDP. The gap between the Liberals' get-tough rhetoric and their actions is wide, and criminals are getting a break from Liberal budget cuts.
The NDP can't be accused of fear-mongering. Solicitor General Rich Coleman has warned repeatedly of the growing threat from organized crime. And after the raids on the legislature offices of top Liberal aides and senior federal Liberals, the RCMP warned that orgainzed crime's tentacles were reaching into every corner of the province.
James pointed out that the gobenrment's tough talk hasn't been backed up with action. Specificially, she called on the Liberals to lift a three-year funding freeze imposed on the Organized Crime Agency. The agency is the main police weapon against gangs and organized crime.
But its budget has been frozen by the Liberals since the election. The agency warned in its last annual report that the freeze has left it unable to do its job.
The Liberals have also failed to deliver - so far - on an election promise to give municipalities 75 per cent of the revenue from traffic fines. That would be a $50-million boost for their policing efforts. (Premier Gordon Campbell said the Liberals only promised the change during their first term, and they will deliver before the 2005 election.)
James also called on the government to abandon plans to cut the solicitor general's budget, which is slated for a 19-per-cent reduction in next month's budget . That includes $20 million from the budget for public safety.
It's a good issue for the NDP.
The Liberals have said crime - particularly organized crime - is a serious problem. They've called on Ottawa to come up with more money and tougher laws. So it's hard for them to come up with a logical defence of why they are cutting or freezing budgets for the people who are on the front line. Even those who don't agree that more enforcement is the best solution have to wonder about the Liberals' lack of consistency.
James also called for a public inquiry into organized crime, by someone like Justice Wally Oppal. She thinks we could examine our current efforts, look at what people are doing in other places and come up with a new plan in time for the 2005 budget.
There is a need for some sort of review of our response to organized crime, but it needs to be broader and more informal than a public inquiry, and move us way beyond the usual responses.
Take drugs. The marijuana trade is considered a key driver of the current crime world. Our solution tends to be more police, more raids and a wish for tougher sentences.
But a study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal last year suggests we waste most of the $465 million we spend on drug enforcement in Canada. Big arrests or seizures make headlines. But they change nothing for the producers or consumers. Back in 2000 police claimed a major victory in the war on heroin when Vancouver police seized 99 kilograms of heroin and Toronto police grabbed another 57 kilos. Some six million doses snatched from the supply chain.
And nothing happened on the street. The supply stayed the same. Heroin prices actually fell slightly. Users didn't cut back. Crime didn't go down. Attacking the supply - as the U.S. has shown - isn't the answer.
It's past time for a major rethink.
But meanwhile, James has shown a deft touch with a damaging issue for the Liberals.
Footnote: The problem for the Liberals - again - is that their tax cuts and balanced budget deadline have left them unable to respond. There is no room to come up with significant money for policing or victim support or the Organized Crime Agency, without offsetting cuts in other areas of the government already facing their own belt-tightening woes.


Nice tan, but few answers from the premier
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - Premier Gordon Campbell landed after his flight from Maui, traded his travel jeans for a dark suit, crisp white shirt and bright tie, and headed to his Victoria office to face reporters.
It didn't go well.
Not that anything terrible came out about the police raids on the legislature.
But crowded in with about 30 reporters and cameramen, I was left mostly puzzled by what the premier did or didn't know and why he chose to act as he did.
You couldn't expect him to be entirely forthcoming. As he pointed out, the worst thing that could happen would be a careless comment by a politician that somehow wrecked a 20-month police investigation.
But his answers on some critical questions were confusing, and close to contradictory.
Reporters were interested in the different treatment for two ministerial aides whose legislature offices were searched by police. Dave Basi, a key aide to Finance Minister Gary Collins, was fired within hours of the raids. Bob Virk, aide to Transportation Minister Judith Reid, is suspended with pay. The decision was made by Martyn Brown, the premier's top advisor, and approved by Campbell from Hawaii as police carried boxes from the legislature.
Campbell said Basi's job was more sensitive. That's true. Basi took a major role in scheduling legislation, working with other cabinet ministers, MLAs and the opposition. He was a much bigger player in the government than Virk.
So why not move him, or suspend him with pay like Virk until the facts are in?
"In view of the information we have, we acted appropriately," Campbell said repeatedly.
What information? No answer from the premier.
Not that he had to answer. He could have said he wasn't prepared to reveal what he knew that the public didn't.
Except that he had taken pains to plead ignorance through much of the press conference. "I don't think I know more than anybody else does," he said. "I can't tell you what's involved in the search warrants."
And that would mean Basi was fired because his office was searched, before he had actually been found to have done anything at all wrong.
It looks odd. (And, as one reporter noted, it suggests a double standard. The premier faced criminal charges this time last year, but rightly rejected calls for his resignation. But now he whacks an aide for no reason beyond a search of his office.)
It also looked odd that Campbell said he hasn't tried to get any answers to the obvious questions about this case, or asked for a review. Again, no one wants the politicians asking questions that could compromise the case, or be seen as interference.
But there's nothing wrong with asking Education Minister Christy Clark what documents police sought when they visited the home office of her husband, a key federal Liberal organizer. (Campbell doesn't have to share the information with the public.)
Campbell also said he know nothing more about the search warrants than the public. But while the information supporting the warrants is still sealed, the warrants - with information on the specific documents or objects they cover and the alleged offences involved - had to be shown to government officials before police entered the building. Campbell has every right to ask what the documents said.
Campbell said he also didn't know Basi and Virk were active in federal Liberal politics. The only party political appointees are supposed to work for is the BC Liberals, Campbell said, and he's made that clear to them all.
But their activities on behalf of Paul Martin were no secret.
The press conference was likely an indication of how difficult this is all going to be for the Liberals. The information is sketchy; the process extremely slow; and the cloud over the government will cast a shadow for the next year.
Not a great way to start this long election campaign.
Footnote: If the premier wants to make a good start at clearing the air, he could restore the budget cuts to the office of the province's auditor general. That would allow, among other projects, an independent review of the BC Rail deal. And that, under the current circumstances, would be money well-spent.

Liberals decide two-tier health care OK after all
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - The Liberals' bizarre flip-flop on private health care raises some serious doubts about the soundness of their plans.
Health Minister Colin Hansen took criticism from his own backbenchers for his bill upholding the Canada Health Act. But it's important for the law to be enforced, he said, pledging to end two-tier care which allows families with money to get treatment, while those without wait.
The bill was drafted by ministry staff, made it onto the legislative agenda, was debated, passed and given Royal Assent by Lieutenant Governor Iona Campagnolo.
Doctors were angry when the legislation was introduced. They even talked about a "medical Gestapo" being created by the Liberals. Hansen maintained repeatedly that this law would not affect any doctor or clinic operating legally under the Canada Health Act. The act says access to medically necessary care shouldn't depend on ability to pay. That's all B.C. was ensuring, he said.
But then the legislative session ended before Christmas, and everything changed.
Premier Gordon Campbell said the government will likely never put the law into effect. Less than three weeks earlier, this had been vital legislation, needed to preserve equal access to health care. Now it was dumped.
It takes money to prepare and pass a bill. Why did the Liberals spend your money if they didn't really want the law?
This particular act also worsened already rocky relations with the province's doctors. And it resulted in hundreds of scheduled procedures in private clinics being cancelled, during the brief period when clinics thought they might have to follow the Canada Health Act.
There's been no real explanation. Some Liberals are claiming the bill was only passed because Ottawa threatened to withhold transfer payments unless B.C. moved against two-tier health care. Maybe Paul Martin won't be so tough, says Campbell.
But that's not really an explanation. Martin's leadership win wasn't a shock. (And in any case, he rejects Campbell's claim. "We are never going to two-tier health care," he says.)
What did happen?
Maybe the government wrote and passed a law that it didn't understand.
Maybe it didn't realize just how far two-tier medicine had spread in B.C., and wasn't ready to cope with the problems caused when people were no longer able to avoid waiting lists.
Or maybe, under pressure both from those people and the clinics, the Liberals are abandoning their commitment to equal access to health care.
The Canada Health Act is simple. Provinces must have health care systems that incorporate four principles" - public administration, access to needed medical care in a reasonably timely way, fair payment to doctors and equal access for all Canadians.
We've made it law that a family's chance for needed medical care shouldn't depend on how much money they have.
The kind of two-tier care that Campbell now supports violates that principle. If you have money, you can get quick care. If you don't, you suffer, both physically and economically. Last month, the Liberals thought that was wrong. This month, they don't.
We all make mistakes. But this odd exercise came as the BC Supreme Court found the Liberals broke the law by trying unilaterally cutting payments for medically necessary lab tests.
It all suggests a certain panic and lack of long-term thinking. That's now what's needed.
The health care system is not in any short-term 'sustainability' crisis. Real per capita health spending has risen an average four per cent per year in B.C. since 1990, substantial but not a crisis. We spend about the same as the Canadian average. And across Canada health care spending this year will be 10 per cent of GDP, virtually unchanged from a decade ago.
Few would dispute the need for reform. But we have the time to do it right. Passing laws, and then abandoning them days later, suggests that's not happening.
Footnote: Quick - what's NDP leader Carole James' position on health care? Her ability to answer that question will do much to determine the NDP's fate in next year's election. Health care will go badly for the Liberals this year. But James still has to show that the NDP can do better before voters have any reason to leave the Liberals.
willcocks@ultranet.ca

Political games, power and money a dangerous mix
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - Five years ago Erik Bornman was playing at politics, the prime minister in the model Parliament held at the B.C. legislature during Christmas week.
Now he's a big wheel in the federal Liberal party's B.C. wing, safely snuggled in the Martin camp. He's worked in Ottawa as a political aide, and has a day job as a lobbyist in Vancouver.
Bornman is also among those whose offices were searched as part of the criminal investigation that's touched both the federal Liberal party and the provincial legislature.
Just because police search your office or home doesn't mean you've done anything wrong. Bill Cunningham, federal Liberal party president in B.C., said he's disturbed by speculation that the party is somehow involved.
The speculation isn't surprising. It is troubling.
There's little surprise partly because the links with the federal Liberals are so strong. Police searched the offices of Dave Basi, a top aide to Finance Minister Gary Collins, and Bob Virk, who does a similar job for Transportation Minister Judith Reid. Both men are also key federal Liberal organizers.
Bornman was Martin's chief B.C. organizer and is on the party's national executive. Police also asked for documents from Mark Marissen, another Martin organizer and head of the federal Liberal election campaign. (And the husband of Education Minister Christy Clark.) And they searched the home of Bruce Clark, the education minister's brother and a big Martin fundraiser.
Besides being federal Liberal workers and Martin supporters, they've got a lot in common. They're all youngish men who started off in politics as student Liberals; most have never really done anything else.
I admit to a prejudice against young Liberals. (Not as sharp a prejudice as an editor I worked with, who claimed their motto should be "No shirt too young to stuff.") At 17 or 18, I expect people to be passionate about changing the world, not career politics. I always fear young Liberals are people with a bit too much of an eye on the main chance.
But I worry much more about the way the destructive ethos of student politics - it is, ultimately, just a game - is being carried over into the real world. The federal Liberals in particular have turned politics into a big-money, high-stakes slugout, with the spoils - jobs and power - going to those who are the most clever and ruthless at twisting the democratic process.
So riding associations anticipating a normal candidate selection meeting suddenly find themselves facing 600 instant Liberals, all backing the same candidate, all signed up by the same aggressive young men. Someone like Herb Dhaliwal gets too outspoken and a team of Martin operatives swoop down and take control of his riding association.
All clever. All legal. All damaging.
The people who thrive in such a world are the clever, ruthless and power-seeking.
The federal Liberals didn't invent such practices. But they used to be kind of shameful. Now, they're seen as tactical triumphs, with stories of outrageous behaviour taking on the quality of folklore.
The trend has been accelerated by the vast amounts of money now swirling around politics, which have allowed more people to make backroom politics a career. They choose a party and a patron early on, then move through a succession of government, party and lobbying jobs.
Paul Martin had a paid staff of more than 40 for his leadership campaign. He raised $12 million, primarily from big business and the wealthy — about $11 million more than he needed. His fund-raising total for an effectively uncontested leadership campaign was greater than the party's fund-raising for its 2001 national election campaign.
That kind of money changes politics, and not for the better. And given the public's willingness to suspect something is rotten before any real facts about the current investigation are available, there's a lesson emerging from this for the Liberals and every other political party.
Footnote: The provincial Liberals misjudged the reaction to the raids, with Campbell, Collins and Reid all trying to stay on holidays out of the country as the searches made national headlines. Collins eventually changed his mind and came back. Campbell's absence, in the face of a major crisis in public confidence, was a mistake.

The Liberals are heading into a nasty year
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - The bad news is that it was a pretty crummy year for the Liberal government.
And the worse news is that next year looks even tougher.
You can chalk up some successes. Premier Gordon Campbell survived the drunk driving conviction. Vancouver got the Olympics, a huge win for the government. There was some job growth in the Lower Mainland. The oil and gas industry did well. And there was more progress on relations with First Nations, through treaty talks and interim economic agreements.
After that, the good news gets skinny. Things didn't get worse in health or education, which is something.
But an awful lot did go wrong.
Campbell is less popular than ever. The Liberals are still doing well in the polls by B.C. standards, but have lost a lot of support.
The BC Rail sale could have been considered a triumph, if it wasn't so badly tainted by the broken campaign promise, and the premier's almost delusional denials.
The attempt to privatize the Coquihalla bought the Liberals a lot of grief, for no benefit. The botched liquor store privatization made them look both incompetent and untrustworthy, especially to people who invested big in private liquor stores on the strength of the the government's now broken promises.
And then there's economic development. This was supposed to be the year of forestry, but you sure can't see any results on the ground. The 20-per-cent tenure takeback, central to market-based stumpage, is stalled. The softwood dispute is unsettled, and the proposed deal includes quota provisions Forest Minister Mike de Jong said would never be accepted by B.C.
And despite all the talk about the Heartland, it's tough to see much activity beyond the oil and gas boom in the Northeast.
And on top of all that, there's the ugly sight of police raiding the offices of top staffers for ministers Gary Collins and Judith Reid.
But tough as it's been, next year looks much worse for the Liberals.
The economy should be better. Most forecasts have it growing by about three per cent, but good enough to jump B.C. up to the middle of the pack among provinces. The Liberals will bring in a balanced budget. And the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform is the best thing ever to happen to government in North America.
But the headaches for the Liberals are going to be enormous. And they are going to come in the final 12 months before the next election.
The biggest will be in health care. The regional health authorities still have major changes - unpopular changes - to make to meet the Liberals' spending limits. Meanwhile, doctors and the government are heading towards a war as the fee agreement with the BC Medical Association expires. Doctors want more money while the government says the wage freeze applies to them. The result will be more disruptions in the health care system. And no matter what the positions are, the public always ultimately sides with the doctors. (Nurses will also be in a similar position.)
The teachers' contract will also be up, and the government is going to try and have it rolled over for another year to allow for reform of the bargaining system. Teachers don't want that; again expect more conflict.
Then there's the new mandatory time limit on welfare, which will see thousands of people lose benefits, and the continued confusion in the ministry of children and families, where a restructuring is more than a year behind schedule and budget cuts are being pushed through despite significant risks to kids.
And on top of all that, there are the big spending cuts. Spending has actually risen by $870 million so far under the Liberals. But the balanced budget due in February will include $900 million in cuts. Three ministries must cut more than 20 per cent of their budget; another five must cut more than 10 per cent. It's going to hurt.
It's a tough way to start a prolonged election campaign.
Footnote: The unknown quantity is new NDP leader Carole James. If she champions issues of high public concern - health care, education, jobs and community stability - and demonstrates competence, she'll begin to appear as an alternative for some voters. If she is seen as defender of big public sector unions, or anti-economic growth - she's already burned bridges in some coastal communities by opposing offshore oil exploration and aquaculture - Campbell will look more attractive.

Ho, ho, ho. . .

Thanks, and a wish that will change your lives
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - It's time to thank you all, and offer you my one special wish, a way to change your life in less than a minute.
I sent some 36,000 words your way last year. If you stuck with me through all of them, it's as if we sat down and had a three-hour chat,
Thanks for that. Not just because if you didn't read, I wouldn't be able to do the column, and my children would be selling pencils on the street. (Though I invite you to keep that in mind anytime you consider skipping the column.)
I really wanted to thank you for letting me have this conversation with you.
Sure the work itself is fun and interesting much of the time, and there's no heavy lifting. And it's a living.
But that's not why I like to do this. The joy in this job isn't in cataloging what's gone wrong this week. It's in believing that people, given the facts and a chance to look at an issue, will generally do the right thing, and in being part of that process.
And I get to talk with you - or rant at you, sometimes - about things I think are important, or things you've told me you think are important. I get to try and provide some facts, and offer an opinion about what we should be doing to make things better.
That's why I write most often about things that have gone wrong, and am more often critical than kind. It's nice - and even useful - to take 30 seconds to think about something that's worked. But it's much more important to look at the things that aren't working, and figure out how to fix them.
I don't expect readers to end up agreeing with me. (Though of course, I always hope for that.) I've got information, and ideas to offer. But the ideas may be wrong. I'm just hoping that together we'll agree some issues are important, and worth our serious attention. (The most dangerous people in the world tend to be those who believe that their ideas and beliefs are certainly right.)
Which leads to my wish for you this year.
I'd like you to make one New Year's resolution. This year, pay attention.
Not to me, but to everything in your life.
It's racing by. That child who wants you to read a story today, she'll be gone before you know it. And you can't know where. Maybe she'll be your best friend, maybe she'll have developed a nasty crystal meth addiction. Maybe she'll be happy. Maybe she'll be dead. It's unknowable.
The only thing you do know is that you have a chance to pay attention now. To notice what her eyes are telling you, just before you turn off the lights. It's not just children - friends, strangers, lovers, the way the sun looks over the rooftops tomorrow morning. Just pay attention. You'll change their lives. You'll change the way you see the world.
it sounds kind of new age, self-absorbed even. but it's not. The first step to a better world is paying attention to the one we've got.
Go back to the reason why I like this work. It's important to me because everything I've seen of people indicates that collectively we want to do the right thing. We don't want people around us to be unhappy, denied dignity and opportunity.
If we noticed their suffering - if we paid attention - we wouldn't stand for it. We wouldn't let the government slash spending on children and families if we paid attention to the scared girl in foster care who is losing some of the meager support she had. We are not that kind of people.
So that's my wish. Pay attention. The beauty and power will amaze you.
Footnote: And further, to all the politicians I have written about this year, and will next, thanks. No matter how painfully critical columns may be, I recognize that you all have given up a lot for the simple chance to make your communities a better place for people to live. Actions can be criticized; not your motives.


Back-to-work deals bad deal for B.C. economy
By Paul Willcocks
VICTORIA - There's nothing to celebrate in the government's role in ending the BC Ferries strike or the walkout by some 10,000 coastal IWA members.
That's not to say the government was wrong. It faced a wretched situation, and given the economic importance of both operations a prolonged shutdown would have been disastrous.
But government intervention can't get at the root causes of a dispute, and often can't produce anything but the shakiest and shortest of peace.
First the ferries.
The ferry workers' union scored a huge win with their illegal, irresponsible strike. Instead of having to labour on under essential service legislation and negotiate a deal with BC Ferries, they can now wait for an arbitration award from Vince Ready. It won't be all they hoped for, but it will be much better than any deal they could have reached at the bargaining table. And the government promised not to seek any damages for their illegal actions.
The ferry workers' union learned - again - that ignoring the law and the contract they signed worked. For more than 30 years governments have taught the union that illegal strikes get results, and bring no consequences.
The blame doesn't all rest with the union.
The illegal strike was sparked by a dispute over which unionized workers would staff the ships. Since cafeterias were closed, the company didn't want to schedule people paid a premium for that work. The union disagreed. And the ships stayed tied up.
My reading of the Labour Relations Board's essential services ruling indicates the company' was right. But BC Ferries could have avoided the showdown, allowed the ships to sail with the higher-priced crew and headed to the LRB for a remedy.
Instead the service was shut down, things got ugly and Labour Minister Graham Bruce imposed an 80-day cooling off period - which the union defied until it won arbitration.
The company is seeking major clawbacks, especially in terms of contracting out language which would leave no ferries job safe. The stage was set for those demands by the Liberals' changes to BC Ferries. The company faces the possible loss of its $70-million annual subsidy in four years and will be forced to show lenders it can repay some $2 billion needed for new ships over the next 15 years. BC Ferries made about $25 million last year; it needs much bigger profits to deal with those changes.)
The IWA strike is a similar disaster. Again, the union blundered with an illegal walkout, breaking their own agreement. The company responded by imposing a new contract. And the stage was set for a hopelessly long strike.
IWA president Dave Haggard agreed to a government back-to-work order, standing alongside Premier Gordon Campbell and the companies' spokesman.
In this case, the union has lost. The deal calls for an arbitrated deal if mediation doesn't work. And it says that the agreement must consider the economic well-being of the coastal industry.
That almost guarantees major contract rollbacks.
Meanwhile, on the ground, IWA members are attacking their leadership and each other, in some cases physically.
The disintegration of the IWA as a functional union is a problem that goes beyond this dispute. It's distant from its members and unable to come up with workable solutions to the real problems faced by the forest industry.
And instead of addressing those issues, the IWA is selling out workers in the health care sector to keep its numbers up. The private health care companies taking over contracted-out support services are signing sweetheart deals with the IWA before they hire a single worker, in order to avoid HEU certification. Employees have to sign an IWA membership before they are hired. They get no say on who represents them, or the terms of their contract.
B.C. has a reputation for a lousy labour climate. The last week has done more damage.
Footnote: Much second-guessing about whether Bruce imposed the ferry cooling-off period too quickly. Probably. But based on the situation at the time, and the blockades by ferry travellers, it was not an unreasonable call. It's harder to justify abandoning any penalties for the illegal actions.