The recent Ontario provincial budget probably doesn't sound like exciting summer reading to most people, but British Columbians might want to pay close attention. The political message from the budget is clear: Mike Harris' so-called "Common Sense Revolution" is nearing the end of the road-just as BC's "New Era" is getting going.
Government finance
Of all the many questions raised by the Romanow Report, the one most often asked is "Where's the money coming from?"--and it's the one question that should not be asked at all.
The money needed to "fix" Medicare--whether it's the $15 billion over the next four years called for by Romanow, or even double that amount--is readily available.
Where will it come from? The answer may be found in the following statistics:
For the last 18 years I've fought alongside countless Canadians to protect the least advantaged members of society from losing the little they have.
In the mid 1980s, after the most profound recession since the Great Depression, we fought for full-employment policies, and lost.
In the late 1980s we fought to improve training opportunities for the unemployed, and lost.
In the early 1990s we fought to prevent cuts to unemployment insurance benefits and welfare, and lost.
In the mid 1990s we fought to preserve social housing programs, and lost.
For several years now, many observers of the BC economy have noted a split between the highly diversified and populous Lower Mainland (plus Victoria) and the rest of the province, which continues to be resource-dependent and highly vulnerable to swings in international market conditions. The gap between the "two economies" has been growing. But instead of an economic strategy to shrink that gap, BC's tax and spending cuts are making it worse.
Tuesday is BC Budget day. As the province stares down the largest deficit in its history, and braces for two more years of painful spending cuts, many British Columbians are wondering if it really had to be this way.
Could much of this hardship and red ink have been avoided? Could the school, hospital and child care closures have been prevented? Did the welfare cuts have to happen? Could we have done all this and still balance the budget by 2004/05?
Sound like wishful thinking? Not at all.
Budgets are perhaps the single most important policy moment in the life of a government. Budgets are about choices. They are about when and where, by how much and for whose benefit--to raise or lower taxes, increase or decrease spending, incur or reduce debt. What a government decides, what measures it takes, reflects its values and priorities. And the consequences of these decisions can decisively affect the lives of its citizens.
After all the hype, was yesterday's budget Jean Chretien's "legacy" budget? The answer is yes, though not in the way he may have intended, and the Prime Minister's real legacy is not one of which he should be proud.
The advance spin prepared us to expect a massive spending budget, one that would be consistent with the image that Chretien wants for his legacy--a budget that sets a long-term course for social reconstruction.
Many British Columbians were hoping that Tuesday's provincial budget would bring a compassionate re-think of the government's fiscal plan. Unfortunately, the pain and upheaval of spending cuts that have left the province reeling are set to continue.
Conservative Premier Ernie Eves today announced major revisions to his Government's 2003 pseudo-budget, released just last week.
In a move he described as "a significant new step in transparency and clarity" in policy for his Government, Premier Eves has introduced three new pseudo-bills which re-cast virtually every major action of his Government and that of his predecessor, former Premier Mike Harris.
The legislation was given first reading today on a specially convened internet video link-up of selected guys named Bill from all walks of life in Ontario.
It is more than a little mischievous for the provincial government and regional politicians to welcome the private sector contributing to the massive cost of the transportation infrastructure planned for the province in the coming years. The private sector does not 'contribute' -- it invests. And the amount it invests does not reduce the cost of the infrastructure to BC residents -- to the contrary it significantly increases the amount British Columbians will have to pay over time for the recovery of the projects' costs.