Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Little to cheer for B.C. in budget

VICTORIA - Finance Minister Carole Taylor was quick to offer enthusiastic support for the federal budget.
It’s a little hard to see why.
The quickness was understandable. Radio reporters are always looking for fast reaction for their next newscast and the two Caroles - the NDP’s James and the Liberals’ Taylor - were ready to deliver first opinions an hour after the federal budget was released.
But the support was a little harder to fathom. On balance the federal budget seemed to merit a best an OK rating from the province’s perspective. Some good news, some bad news and nothing defining either way. (That’s not surprising from the first budget from a spanking new minority government.)
Start with the most obvious good news. The budget includes $400 million over two years to deal with the pine beetle crisis. That may not be enough, but it’s a welcome start and an improvement on the $100 million a year coming from the former Liberal government.
There are still a lot of questions about how the money will be used, especially in helping communities prepare to cope the post-beetle crash in the timber supply. But the money is a welcome downpayment on what is needed.
Taylor also praised the Harper budget for maintaining the Liberals’ promise of $591 million for the Pacific Gateway project, a major effort to improve transportation - road, ports and the rest - to help build trade with Asia.
But the Liberal government had promised the money over five years, working to a timetable that reflected the urgency of seizing trade opportunities.
The Harper government has pushed the commitment out over eight years, a significant watering down of the commitment.
Then there’s the bad news.
The biggest disappointment for the B.C. government is the Conservatives’ repudiation of the Kelowna Accord on First Nations. Premier Gordon Campbell travelled the country to win support for the agreement, which committed $5 billion over five years to improving conditions for natives across Canada. He championed it as a moral and economic obligation to end a shameful situation. The deal won the unanimous agreement of premiers and then prime minister Paul Martin in Kelowna last fall and was supported by First Nations leaders.
And the Conservatives blew it up within 90 days. The accord promised about $1 billion a year to improve housing, education and social conditions for First Nations. The Harper budget has committed less than one-quarter that amount.
The Conservatives complained that the Kelowna Accord lacked substance and was simply an attempt to throw money at a problem. That’s a serious rebuke to the Campbell government and setback for dealing with a national disgrace.
(The decision drew quick fire from First Nations’ leaders. Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs said it showed the Conservatives couldn’t be trusted - he actually accused them of speaking with “forked tongue.”)
The budget also failed to provide any money to cover Olympic construction cost over-runs.
The cost of Games venues is forecast to be $110 million over budget. The B.C. government has already agreed to pick up half the extra costs.
But despite a big lobby effort from the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee, Ottawa hasn’t said it will contribute any more money.
If it sticks with that position B.C. taxpayers could be squeezed for more cash. (B.C. has agreed to take responsibility for all Games cost over-runs or revenue shortages.)
Taylor said she’s confident the federal government will come through. Trade Minister David Emerson is responsible for the file, she said, and understands the seriousness of the issue.
But if he does, where’s the money?
Details of the budget - good and bad - are still to come. The Conservative plan offers a vague indication of an army presence in B.C., which could offer benefits to a community. There are details of specific provisions for targeted industries still to come.
But so far this looks mostly like an adequate budget for B.C. There are few reasons for cheerleading.
Footnote: James seized on the expected lack of child care funding as a significant problem. The Conservatives’ decision to cancel the federal-provincial child care deal in favour of a $1,200 child allowance was expected, but it leaves B.C. without a clear plan for child care.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

'The honour of the Crown is at stake'

"The biggest disappointment for the B.C. government is the Conservatives’ repudiation of the Kelowna Accord on First Nations. Premier Gordon Campbell travelled the country to win support for the agreement..."

"And the Conservatives blew it up within 90 days."


Aah... The worm turns...
I wonder if gordo now regrets tearing up all those union contracts?

The honour of the crown was at stake then too.

Anonymous said...

The Conservative budget makes a lot of sense. Before spending more money on the Olympics or on aboriginal development, they want to make sure it's going to be spent effectively. In both of the above cases, it's clear that there are problems with governance and transparency. I'm willing to give the Conservatives time to see if they actually implement some reforms. If they opt to simply do nothing, though, then there's a problem.

Anonymous said...

Carole Taylor simply revealed the Campbell government's deep alliance with the Harper Conservatives. Gordon Campbell usually is the first one to speak in support of things Harper is doing to our country.

Someone should start a BC Conservative party whose platform reads like the NDP. Maybe that would wake voters up.

Anonymous said...

Is Harper a treaty-breaker, like Bush?

A valid question, given his giveaway with respect to NAFTA (the softwood surrender), and now his brushing aside of the Kelowna Accord, which Premier Campbell rightly calls a "moment of truth". The Premier was right: The honour of the Crown is at stake. It was at stake with the NAFTA dispute over softwood.

Does Prime Minister Harper have the same view that President Bush has as regards the duty of the head of a state to honour treaties and accords?

Or are we seeing the beginning of Harper's agreement with Bush that he, as Prime Minister, is above the law?

Anonymous said...

What facinates me is the fact that a guy with a very slim minority government seems to believe the average tax payer will accept his method of doing things. To remove things, some long standing and some pretty new as he forges ahead sort of like Joe Clark did so many years ago.All those NAFTA decisions going our way seem to mean nothing to him. Maybe it's time to remove ourselves from NAFTA as we seem to want to get a deal, no matter how lousy. Climate change. What climate chnagess seem to be his position. I guess he figures while the LIberals find a leader he has the steering wheel. Taking it away from him as soon as possible should be the job of the opposition .Campbell going along with him fills me with contempt of the New Era leader.

Anonymous said...

Curious that the real conservatives seem to be those advocating the government programs that have been in place for the past 30 years. The big "C" Conservatives are the ones actually trying to change something (i.e. non-conservative.) Anytime the government does anything, there should be some way of measuring how it works and determining whether it produces value for the money spent. Science, engineering, medicine, and business tolerate nothing less than that sort of intellectual rigor - why do we give the government a pass on it when they're spending our money? I wish people like the commenters here would spend more time learning about how programs actually work instead of clinging to their preconceived notions of how they think they work. You want to address climate change? Kyoto is probably the dumbest possible method to do it. Spend the money on mass transit and alternative energy production instead.