Analyzing B.C.’s provincial budget
Last week, this year’s competition for excellence in fiction was greatly reduced when the new NDP government presented its first full-term budget. Gone were the “profits” transferred from both ICBC and BC Hydro along with other fairy tales that were features of Liberal fiscal management and their supposed “balanced” budgets.
This was a strategic budget with no creative labelling. The priorities were clearly stated, focusing on B.C.’s working families and their struggles to find affordable housing and reasonable daycare. Each of those issues will demand a concerted effort over a full four-year mandate and beyond, so it’s good to get started.
But at the same time, a range of other issues are crying for attention and so the finance minister, Carole James, sprinkled money on a host of areas with a promise of more in the future. She would no doubt liked to have attacked additional issues but the fiscal disaster the Liberals created at ICBC will absorb over $1.2 billion this year alone.
Undoubtedly the biggest change in policy was the sunset of individual MSP fees and the shifting of that burden to the corporate sector. For 16 years the Liberals did just the opposite and the squeals from business at this change are loud but not overly convincing.
Look closely at what the minister did with the minimal amount of discretionary spending she had available. She improved the Fair Pharma Care program for deductibles for families with incomes below $30,000 and she reinstated bus passes for people receiving disability assistance. There was just short of $700 million for improved healthcare for seniors and help for those without a family doctor. She set aside funds to hire more teachers thereby offsetting the disastrous policy of the previous government. There was money to at least begin addressing the dismal relations with First Nations.
There was money — not much but still more than the Liberals spent — for improving support for women and children suffering domestic violence and improving access to the justice system in the form of increased support for more sheriffs and court staff. There was help offered to communities impacted by the forest fires of 2017.
There were small but important amounts made available for removing fees on Adult Education and English language classes and a tuition wavier for former youth-in-care while they continue their education. Finally a modest amount was made available to work on developing a transit strategy for the lower mainland.
The long-term focus is clearly demonstrated in the $4 million to be spent over the next two years to “test the feasibility of a basic income in B.C..” Contrast that with the policies of the Campbell and Clark Liberals on poverty and its attendant ills where empirical evidence was often ignored in favour of ideology.
Another indicator of a longer-term outlook was setting aside more than $1.37 billion next year and $1.25 billion the following year to provide initial funding for priority initiatives to be included in future budgets.
These include the government’s reconciliation commitments to Indigenous peoples as well as the case load growth and new compensation mandate costs faced by the provincial civil service in areas such as child services. These admittedly modest efforts indicate a clear intent to improve the wellbeing of individuals.
What impressed me most was the straightforward manner in which the budget document spelled out the government’s priorities and the prudent fashion in which Ms. James addressed the forecast for growth and revenue and the provision of contingency funds.
Finally, if public schools are to regain levels of excellence existing before 2000, if the health care system is to be reformed, if aboriginals issues are to be resolved rather than deferred, more revenue will be needed and taxes will have to increase in future. If the government is honest and presents all their budgets in as straightforward a manner, I expect they will enjoy widespread support.
David Bond is a retired bank economist who resides in Kelowna.