MLAs' budget hearings a magical mystery tour

VICTORIA - That was a weird report from the legislative committee that toured the province getting ideas for the coming budget.
They were supposed to listen, and report on the results of the consultations.
But the committee - 14 Liberal backbenchers and New Democrat Joy MacPhail - seemed to get lost between the time they listened to people across the province and the time they wrote their report.
"During the public consultations, the finance committee heard another loud and clear message from rural British Columbia for the provincial government to invest more money in economic development," the MLAs dutifully reported. "Most of the public’s suggestions stressed the importance of enhancing opportunities for smaller, traditionally resource-based communities to diversify their local economies."
Since lots of the MLAs, including chair Bill Belsey of Prince Rupert, hail from those communities, you would think they would heed that "loud and clear" message.
Nope. Their 19 recommendations don't include coming up with economic development help for resource communities. Maybe, the committee suggests, the government could restore funding cut from a program that mapped geological formations. Oh, and it could keep building roads. But no proposal for an economic development plan targeting the needs of B.C.'s regions.
It's not just economic development.
"One message the committee heard in regards to K-to-12 education was the importance of having a class size that is optimal for both students and teachers. Parents and teachers from both rural and urban parts of the province, as well as local chambers of commerce, called for government to reduce the teacher/student ratio," the committee reported. Surely that message got through.
Nope. The committee recommended more money for special education, but offered nothing on class sizes.
How about health care? "Another plea heard by the finance committee was for funding to upgrade or, in some cases, utilize existing diagnostic and other equipment more effectively. The need for more magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) equipment was mentioned repeatedly."
But alas, the committee didn't recommend more funding for needed equipment. Instead it called for the health ministry to "encourage the health authorities to utilize existing diagnostic equipment and surgical facilities more efficiently." (A prize awaits a reader who can explain what that means.)
The committee's task was to listen to British Columbians and "report on the results of those consultations." It heard from almost 2,000 people and organizations. While it is obviously not going to act on the demands of every presenter, you'd expect some reflection of what they heard in the recommendations.
Yet in each of these three critical examples there was a consensus about what needed to happen to improve life in B.C. And without explanation the committee blew those people off.
The committee did have concrete recommendations.
It called for a debt reduction plan, which is useful enough but didn't seem to be a big theme in public presentations. (B.C.'s debt is easily manageable, but it's just common sense to pay down your debts.)
The committee says the government needs to increase funding for intermediate and long-term care beds for seniors, and provide more care and respite help services for people who are staying in their own homes. (The Liberals have failed to deliver on their promise for 5,000 new beds in this sector.)
It called for an end to the cuts that have reduced community living services for people with disabilities and more support for people with multiple barriers to employment.
And - after cuts to women's centres across the province - the committee recommended more services for women and children leaving abusive relations.
I like and admire MLAs for their willingness to take on a tough job and serve.
But despite the usefulness of some of the recommendations, this is a lame report. British Columbians went to some effort to tell the committee what they wanted for the province's future. Their commitment and passion and hope aren't reflected in the committee's recommendations.
Footnote: Based on the committee's findings, the sales tax cut should be the last tax reduction. People who used an on-line form thought only six per cent of expected surpluses should be used to fund tax cuts. They said thought 28 per cent should to health care; 34 per cent to education; and 18 per cent to other spending priorities. They said 14 per cent should go to debt repayment.