BC Budget

[Wetcoaster]

Perhaps that poorly worded then...

It was more like:

We've looked in to it but we're not hearing anything close to what we need to hear from the Feds to even consider it. As such, at this time it's not on our radar.

But that would be pretty obtuse and splitting hairs to make a federal case of that difference...

[Wetcoaster]

Let's stay on topic shall we. Talking about the NDP to mask how horribly the Liberals are doing is a great trick, but this is about the Liberal budget.

[inane]

You are a new Moderator? Congratulations. I guess they will take anyone these days.

[Wetcoaster]

Stop being a hypocrite.

[inane]

VICTORIA, BC – The 2013 British Columbia budget introduced this afternoon shows little movement on climate action or environmental protection with regard to the oil and gas sector.

The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations took a significant hit in the area of “resource stewardship” with funding going down by a third—from over $100 million to approximately $67 million. Additionally, the Live Smart Program appears to have disappeared.

“The environment was largely notable by its absence in the 2013 BC Budget,” said Gwen Barlee, policy director with the Wilderness Committee. “Here we have a government wanting to dramatically ramp up the liquified natural gas (LNG) industry as well as the natural gas sector, but the numbers today show they want to do it on a shoestring budget. They promised us world-class environmental oversight but the reality is that we have lax, inadequate and weak environmental standards in BC, and today’s budget won’t change a thing.”

The government also projected that the number of full time government employees (FTEs) would decrease by four per cent this year, and by an anticipated one per cent the year after. Budget documents no longer provide the FTE numbers for each ministry.

“Given the emphasis on expansion in the resource extraction sector, the stagnation in environmental monitoring is appalling,” remarked Torrance Coste, Vancouver Island Campaigner with the Wilderness Committee. “It’s clear from this budget that there is no priority in having people on the ground to regulate industry.”

The 2013 BC Budget also shows that the government is relinquishing its role as a leader in tackling climate change. The carbon tax, currently at $30 per tonne of CO2, will not increase and large industrial emitters such as natural gas processing plants continue to be exempt from the tax.

“This government seems to have lost its way in terms of taking action on climate change,” said Coste. “This is an issue that needs to be at the forefront of our political discourse, and now the government is continuing to shirk responsibility on climate despite the overwhelming desire of British Columbians that it take action.”

Given the dramatic weakening of federal environmental legislation and the concurrent cuts to the budgets of federal regulatory agencies, the environmental community in BC was looking for the provincial government to step up to the plate and increase the Ministry of Environment's budget to ensure adequate environmental oversight of resource extraction industries in BC.

Comments?

[heysoulsisters21]

VICTORIA, BC – The 2013 British Columbia budget introduced this afternoon shows little movement on climate action or environmental protection with regard to the oil and gas sector.

The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations took a significant hit in the area of “resource stewardship” with funding going down by a third—from over $100 million to approximately $67 million. Additionally, the Live Smart Program appears to have disappeared.

“The environment was largely notable by its absence in the 2013 BC Budget,” said Gwen Barlee, policy director with the Wilderness Committee. “Here we have a government wanting to dramatically ramp up the liquified natural gas (LNG) industry as well as the natural gas sector, but the numbers today show they want to do it on a shoestring budget. They promised us world-class environmental oversight but the reality is that we have lax, inadequate and weak environmental standards in BC, and today’s budget won’t change a thing.”

The government also projected that the number of full time government employees (FTEs) would decrease by four per cent this year, and by an anticipated one per cent the year after. Budget documents no longer provide the FTE numbers for each ministry.

“Given the emphasis on expansion in the resource extraction sector, the stagnation in environmental monitoring is appalling,” remarked Torrance Coste, Vancouver Island Campaigner with the Wilderness Committee. “It’s clear from this budget that there is no priority in having people on the ground to regulate industry.”

The 2013 BC Budget also shows that the government is relinquishing its role as a leader in tackling climate change. The carbon tax, currently at $30 per tonne of CO2, will not increase and large industrial emitters such as natural gas processing plants continue to be exempt from the tax.

“This government seems to have lost its way in terms of taking action on climate change,” said Coste. “This is an issue that needs to be at the forefront of our political discourse, and now the government is continuing to shirk responsibility on climate despite the overwhelming desire of British Columbians that it take action.”

Given the dramatic weakening of federal environmental legislation and the concurrent cuts to the budgets of federal regulatory agencies, the environmental community in BC was looking for the provincial government to step up to the plate and increase the Ministry of Environment's budget to ensure adequate environmental oversight of resource extraction industries in BC.

Comments?

[Hyzer]

why wont government cut back spending on transportation which is really really useless for most of the time and use that for preserving some of the environemtn so we dont have to extract oil to earn revenues in this province ?

[nucklehead]

The people believed they had been lied to. They knew it would cost more to switch back but chose to force the government to undue the lie. They did this because it is better to be doing the right thing, even if it now costs you more.

you don't let your kids lie, or shoudn't anyway. Why let the government get a way with it?

[Gross-Misconduct]

I can see by reading some of your posts that some of you are smitten with Christy Clark's smile and are drinking the kool-aid. What a shame. She was a very partisan politician her first time around (with very shady dealings, can you say BC Railgate?) Then after she lost her bid at Vancouver mayor (voters back then actually saw her for what she is) she went into media, got the Oprah thing going then helicoptered back into the Liberal party as the boss. Anyone not blinded by partisan politics and look at her for what she is should be very afraid of this woman. Don't believe me? Look at the massive Liberal exodus since she dropped in. When she ran for Liberal party leader, not one credible and respected Liberal politician backed her. She had one lousy supporter in some back bencher clown who turned out to be a rambling idiot and got the boot. I can't even remember this clown's name but Christy gave him a Minister position for backing her. (Nice judge of character Christy)

The brightest people in the Liberal party are all going or already gone.

George Abbott

Kevin Falcon

Pat Bell

Blair Lekstrom

Kevin Krueger

and on and on...

George Abbott and Kevin Falcon had some good ideas and were both ready to lead this province into the future but both decided to quit. Why? One reason....

Christy Clark

The NDP have worked hard to move to the center. It might still be the center-left but I'm okay with that. They will get my vote. Far too many people just drink their party's kool aid and are blinded to the facts.

And the fact is the current Liberal party in power is full of inept, corrupt and tired people who are running this province into the ground.

[Wetcoaster]

If you liked Glen Clark you are going to love Adrian Dix (aka Glen Clark V.2.0). As Michael Smyth writes -

Meet the new NDP boss - same as the old NDP boss?

History seems to be repeating itself as Adrian Dix follows Glen Clark's example

The government has unveiled its pre-election budget and political battle lines have been drawn.

The Liberals call their budget "balanced." The New Democrats call it "bogus." And for veteran political watchers in Victoria, it all has a rather familiar ring to it.

Travel back with me now to 1991, the last time the NDP topped the pre-election opinion polls, and a distrusted government was reeling on the ropes.

Back then, it was the scandal-plagued Social Credit government gasping for breath. An unpopular premier (Bill Vander Zalm) had resigned, and a new premier (Rita Johnston) had taken over, but the change at the top made little impact with resentful voters.

Sound familiar so far? (Just switch the names to "Gordon Campbell" and "Christy Clark.")

Then came budget day. With the 1991 election looming, the Socreds unveiled a modest budget deficit of just $359 million, and warned against turning the economy over to the tax-and-spend NDP.

But the New Democrats told the public: Don't believe the government's numbers.

"A fantasy budget by a fantasy government," said Glen Clark, then the NDP finance critic, insisting the government was hiding a large deficit from voters.

Now flash ahead to last week, and the Liberal government's newly unveiled budget surplus of $197 million.

"Pure fudge," said NDP Leader Adrian Dix, insisting the government was (you guessed it) hiding a large deficit from voters.

Here's where the déjà vu really kicks in: Who was Glen Clark's right-hand man way back then? None other than Adrian Dix.

And the parallels continue: Clark in 1991: "They have again resorted to dishonest bookkeeping to hide that deficit."

Dix last week: "What we have is a budget that is obviously not balanced. It's the Liberals' fifth deficit budget in a row."

Both men said they wanted to balance the budget. Glen Clark called balancing the budget "the easiest thing I could imagine doing" and Dix said last week that "getting to a balanced budget is a priority."

But what can you do when the charlatans in power have cooked the books and hidden the real numbers?

Glen Clark in 1991: "Social Credit have left the province's finances in a mess. They have created a very difficult situation."

Dix last week: "It's very difficult - the massive problem the government is leaving us. Whoever is elected is going to be dealing with a very difficult fiscal situation."

Although Dix has said he wants to achieve a balanced budget "as soon as possible," I expect the NDP will soon admit they plan to run a series of deficits if they win the May election.

That's why undercutting public confidence in the Liberals' balanced budget is a critical pre-election tactic for the NDP. The message to voters: Yes, we'll bring in deficits, but don't be fooled by the Liberals' "balanced" budget - it's really a deficit, too.

It's an effective tactic that already seems to be working. A new Ipsos Reid poll suggests only 12 per cent of British Columbians believe the budget is truly balanced, while 72 per cent believe the books are cooked.

Just like in 1991, the government's credibility is in tatters. And I have a feeling history may keep repeating itself, even after the election is over.

The NDP won the 1991 election, Glen Clark was named finance minister, and Dix was named as his ministerial assistant.

One of Clark's first acts was to order an audit of the government's finances. Can you guess what it uncovered?

"The Socreds lied about the finances and the size of the government," Clark announced, as Dix looked on.

"It's pretty clear it was a scam, a sham." Suddenly, balancing the budget was no longer the easiest thing Glen Clark could imagine.

Instead, the NDP's first budget featured a shocking deficit of nearly $2 billion, which Clark blamed on the previous government's deception.

"The numbers we were operating under were not real numbers," he said.

More than two decades later, and Adrian Dix is already signalling another postelection budget shocker is possible.

Dix last week: "We know, as an opposition party, that we're going to inherit a very difficult fiscal situation. It puts more pressure on us. If we come in, we'll have to assess the situation."

I have a feeling that assessment would uncover the same thing his mentor discovered 22 years ago - "a scam, a sham" - and a large deficit will be inflicted on taxpayers again.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Meet+boss+same+boss/8008372/story.html#ixzz2Lrw9Xo4O

[inane]

Budget cuts announced for forest stewardship in British Columbia are signs of the government's short term thinking, a theft from future generations and evidence that recent commitments were lies, according to critics.

The minister responsible, Steve Thomson, acknowledges the ministry made sacrifices to help balance the provincial budget, but argues the key inventory work is being done to prepare for future years when the budget is restored.

"Significant cuts to budgets that were already inadequate," was how the NDP's forestry critic, Norm Macdonald, characterized the budget for the ministry of forests, lands and natural resource operations.

In the spring and summer Macdonald was among NDP and Liberal MLAs who participated on the Special Committee on Timber Supply that toured the province to find ways to support communities that depend on forestry. "Instead what we see is a situation that was bad, that we were told repeatedly was a crisis, and what the government has chosen to do is choose to make further cuts."

The budget announced Feb. 19 dropped the ministry's budget for resource stewardship by more than a third, from $102.2 million in the current year to $66.95 million in 2013-14.

According to the budget documents, that money is for various things including, "land based investments; timber supply planning and determination; tree improvement; growth and yield, silviculture, and forest genetics related research; forest health, forest inventory and monitoring the effectiveness of resource practices; land and marine use planning; and legislation, policies, and practices that support sustainable management of forests, water, fish, wildlife, and habitat."

'Very concerned': Sierra Club

Various observers noted the cut. The Sierra Club of B.C.'s acting executive director, Sarah Cox, said she is "Very concerned about that."

"I don't think they have practiced healthy forestry for a long time," said Green Party Leader Jane Sterk. "Silviculture has never kept up to the needs of the harvest."

The province has gotten to a point where there are few government forestry officials left in the communities their decisions affect, she said. "If you don't live in a community, if you're not the professional forester in that community, decisions about what to sacrifice are pretty easy to make."

For several years the government has been saying it would focus on intensive forest management as a way to mitigate the dropping timber supply, pointed out Bob Simpson, the independent MLA for Cariboo North and a former forest company executive.

The Strategic Plan released with the budget, for instance, referred to the Beyond the Beetle government report released in the fall. "The Action Plan focuses on reforestation, forest inventory, fuel management and intensive and innovative silviculture," it said. "New funding is increasing the area for re-inventory from 18 million hectares to 35 million hectares, with the highest priority being the areas impacted by the mountain pine beetle."

"They make pronouncements as if it's reality," said Simpson. "They lied to the public... It's all lies. There's no other way you can characterize it. The current government has elevated government propaganda beyond any reasonable test of honesty."

'Difficult decisions': minister

Minister Thomson said the government is following through on what it said it would do. "This is an amount that was signalled before in the budget last year in order to contribute to the balanced budget," he said.

"We made some difficult decisions, but what we ensured in this process is that the key priority in terms of strategic inventory work is retained within the budget numbers," he said. "We'll be increasing our investment in inventory work, particularly in the key inventories that need to be done in the mountain pine beetle impacted areas."

That way, when "all the funding is restored" next year, the ministry will have the information it needs available, he said.

"In addition to that, because we had the uplift last year we're in a position next year where we'll be re-planting over 22 million trees, which is a 50 per cent increase from the amount this year, and 22 million in the following year as well," said Thomson.

Asked what the cuts will affect, he said, "The process, there will be some delays in some of the reforestation preparation work and things like that for the following years in the out years."

Groups including the Association of Professional Foresters have called on the government to do the inventory work, he said. "That's where we get the best investment, bang for the dollars that are being spent in a time of difficult fiscal circumstances as we are bringing forward a balanced budget."

The government had been waiting for the pine beetle die off to run its course before doing the inventory work, and now's the time to proceed, Thomson said. By the end of the month he hopes to release a 10-year strategic inventory plan, he said.

Making crisis worse, says NDP

The NDP's Macdonald said the government has been under funding forest stewardship for a long time. For some 74 per cent of the land base, the government is using data that is 30 years old, he said.

"Over the past 10 years, the consistent under funding of inventory has meant that we don't know what's happening on the land," he said. "You can't manage what you haven't measured."

Nor has treeplanting kept up with need or past promises, he said. By 2012, the government was to be planting 50 million seedlings a year, he said. "This guarantees we're going to get set back further."

There are between one million and two million hectares of logged land that are known to be not sufficiently restocked, Macdonald said. (Some estimates put the figure as high as nine million hectares.)

"There's a crisis in NSR and the government's response is to make it worse," he said. "The NDP did it. The Social Credit did it. Any competent government, and it comes down to competence, any competent government looks after its most valuable asset."

The current government has failed to manage public lands in a way that will keep them productive in the future, he said. "These guys consistently see the public assets that we have as something you sell off and degrade."

Nor does the government's failure help the forest companies who market their products as coming from sustainably managed forests, he said. "They're selling a brand and that brand has to be backed up with a reality... That's the province's responsibility."

Bill Routley, the MLA for Cowichan Valley also sat on the Special Committee on Timber Supply. The committee visited 16 communities, received 650 submissions and heard from various experts including three former B.C. chief foresters. It came up with recommendations that included a focus on inventory, tree planting and forest health that members unanimously endorsed.

"I was optimistic," said Routley, adding he felt proud of the committee's work. "I feel shot through the surrender flag now... To have it not only abandoned, but cut the budget, is outrageous."

The cut puts the BC Liberals' short-term political needs ahead of the long-term needs of the forest, he said. "They're actually stealing from future generations of forest communities," he said. "It's really using it as a cash cow for the province and they are stealing from our forest communities in B.C."

http://thetyee.ca/News/2013/02/22/BC-Silviculture-Funding/

[inane]

Yes, this is written by an NDP'er so it's obviously biased, but the part regarding not counting your chickens before they hatch is certainly relevant...

The B.C. Liberal government’s

budget

tabled last week is not a balanced budget. It is a bogus budget, filled with accounting tricks, unrealistic revenue projections, and unsustainable expenditures in areas that support British Columbians like health care, postsecondary education, and skills training.

In reality, this is the fifth deficit budget in a row tabled by the Liberals.

This budget relies on nearly $800 million from a fire sale of B.C.’s valuable land and assets. Never mind how short-sighted that plan is, most of the properties they are banking on aren’t even for sale yet. Since they first announced their fire sale in the 2012 budget, they’ve completed no sales.

Respected economist Don Drummond wrote a report for the Ontario government that addressed the issue of asset sales. He advised, “Do not count chickens before they are hatched. If assets are to be sold, never incorporate any revenue from such planned sales into a budget before the fact.”

But that’s exactly what the Liberals are doing.

The Liberals’ projected expenditures are unrealistic and unsustainable. Just look at the health care budget. They cut the projected increase to health care by $233 million, but failed to tell British Columbians the truth about what that will mean to them.

Either the $233-million drop in health spending isn't credible, or the Liberal government is planning more service cuts to health care.

Remember that before the 2009 election the Liberals said they would protect health care, but right after the Liberals were returned to office, they forced health authorities to make cuts to the services British Columbians rely on.

British Columbians also haven’t forgotten that the Liberals promised before the 2009 election that their deficit budget would be in the red by $495 million “maximum”, which ballooned to almost $2 billion after the election.

The Liberals also promised, in writing, that they wouldn’t implement an HST before the 2009 election. Yet they have squandered their entire term in office on the HST, creating uncertainty in the B.C. economy with a massive tax shift from big corporations to working families and small businesses that voters eventually rejected.

While the Liberals spend nearly $17 million of taxpayers’ money on pre-election partisan ads to promote the premier’s record on skills training, their budget reveals the truth: they have again cut the budget for postsecondary education, a decision that will negatively affect our province's long-term prosperity.

This budget predicts a reduction in the number of student spaces in college and university, provides less money for student assistance and less support for advanced education. There is no new investment in apprenticeship and industry training.

In contrast, New Democrats will present a practical plan connected to the priorities of British Columbia and its regions. Priorities like improving access to skills training and postsecondary education. Our plan will focus on key priorities that will reduce inequality and improve our economy. And we’ll show how we will pay for our priorities.

For example, New Democrat leader Adrian Dix has proposed a nonrepayable student grant program for young British Columbians and workers in transition to gain access to postsecondary programs, which we will fund through the reinstatement of a tax on big banks.

The Liberals’ budget is not balanced and it promises to saddle the next government with a very serious fiscal situation. It shows the Liberals are not up to the challenges facing B.C. today. It’s time for a new and better government that is more connected to British Columbians.

Adrian Dix and B.C.’s New Democrats are offering change for the better, one practical step at a time.

http://www.straight.com/news/355891/bruce-ralston-bc-liberals-table-bogus-budget-filled-accounting-tricks

[Wetcoaster]

Yes, this is written by an NDP'er so it's obviously biased, but the part regarding not counting your chickens before they hatch is certainly relevant...

http://www.straight....counting-tricks

[inane]

More to the point it was written by Bruce Ralston - B.C. New Democrat finance critic and the MLA for Surrey-Whalley.

[aGENT]

More to the point it was written by Bruce Ralston - B.C. New Democrat finance critic and the MLA for Surrey-Whalley.

[ronthecivil]

Budget cuts announced for forest stewardship in British Columbia are signs of the government's short term thinking, a theft from future generations and evidence that recent commitments were lies, according to critics.

The minister responsible, Steve Thomson, acknowledges the ministry made sacrifices to help balance the provincial budget, but argues the key inventory work is being done to prepare for future years when the budget is restored.

"Significant cuts to budgets that were already inadequate," was how the NDP's forestry critic, Norm Macdonald, characterized the budget for the ministry of forests, lands and natural resource operations.

In the spring and summer Macdonald was among NDP and Liberal MLAs who participated on the Special Committee on Timber Supply that toured the province to find ways to support communities that depend on forestry. "Instead what we see is a situation that was bad, that we were told repeatedly was a crisis, and what the government has chosen to do is choose to make further cuts."

The budget announced Feb. 19 dropped the ministry's budget for resource stewardship by more than a third, from $102.2 million in the current year to $66.95 million in 2013-14.

According to the budget documents, that money is for various things including, "land based investments; timber supply planning and determination; tree improvement; growth and yield, silviculture, and forest genetics related research; forest health, forest inventory and monitoring the effectiveness of resource practices; land and marine use planning; and legislation, policies, and practices that support sustainable management of forests, water, fish, wildlife, and habitat."

'Very concerned': Sierra Club

Various observers noted the cut. The Sierra Club of B.C.'s acting executive director, Sarah Cox, said she is "Very concerned about that."

"I don't think they have practiced healthy forestry for a long time," said Green Party Leader Jane Sterk. "Silviculture has never kept up to the needs of the harvest."

The province has gotten to a point where there are few government forestry officials left in the communities their decisions affect, she said. "If you don't live in a community, if you're not the professional forester in that community, decisions about what to sacrifice are pretty easy to make."

For several years the government has been saying it would focus on intensive forest management as a way to mitigate the dropping timber supply, pointed out Bob Simpson, the independent MLA for Cariboo North and a former forest company executive.

The Strategic Plan released with the budget, for instance, referred to the Beyond the Beetle government report released in the fall. "The Action Plan focuses on reforestation, forest inventory, fuel management and intensive and innovative silviculture," it said. "New funding is increasing the area for re-inventory from 18 million hectares to 35 million hectares, with the highest priority being the areas impacted by the mountain pine beetle."

"They make pronouncements as if it's reality," said Simpson. "They lied to the public... It's all lies. There's no other way you can characterize it. The current government has elevated government propaganda beyond any reasonable test of honesty."

'Difficult decisions': minister

Minister Thomson said the government is following through on what it said it would do. "This is an amount that was signalled before in the budget last year in order to contribute to the balanced budget," he said.

"We made some difficult decisions, but what we ensured in this process is that the key priority in terms of strategic inventory work is retained within the budget numbers," he said. "We'll be increasing our investment in inventory work, particularly in the key inventories that need to be done in the mountain pine beetle impacted areas."

That way, when "all the funding is restored" next year, the ministry will have the information it needs available, he said.

"In addition to that, because we had the uplift last year we're in a position next year where we'll be re-planting over 22 million trees, which is a 50 per cent increase from the amount this year, and 22 million in the following year as well," said Thomson.

Asked what the cuts will affect, he said, "The process, there will be some delays in some of the reforestation preparation work and things like that for the following years in the out years."

Groups including the Association of Professional Foresters have called on the government to do the inventory work, he said. "That's where we get the best investment, bang for the dollars that are being spent in a time of difficult fiscal circumstances as we are bringing forward a balanced budget."

The government had been waiting for the pine beetle die off to run its course before doing the inventory work, and now's the time to proceed, Thomson said. By the end of the month he hopes to release a 10-year strategic inventory plan, he said.

Making crisis worse, says NDP

The NDP's Macdonald said the government has been under funding forest stewardship for a long time. For some 74 per cent of the land base, the government is using data that is 30 years old, he said.

"Over the past 10 years, the consistent under funding of inventory has meant that we don't know what's happening on the land," he said. "You can't manage what you haven't measured."

Nor has treeplanting kept up with need or past promises, he said. By 2012, the government was to be planting 50 million seedlings a year, he said. "This guarantees we're going to get set back further."

There are between one million and two million hectares of logged land that are known to be not sufficiently restocked, Macdonald said. (Some estimates put the figure as high as nine million hectares.)

"There's a crisis in NSR and the government's response is to make it worse," he said. "The NDP did it. The Social Credit did it. Any competent government, and it comes down to competence, any competent government looks after its most valuable asset."

The current government has failed to manage public lands in a way that will keep them productive in the future, he said. "These guys consistently see the public assets that we have as something you sell off and degrade."

Nor does the government's failure help the forest companies who market their products as coming from sustainably managed forests, he said. "They're selling a brand and that brand has to be backed up with a reality... That's the province's responsibility."

Bill Routley, the MLA for Cowichan Valley also sat on the Special Committee on Timber Supply. The committee visited 16 communities, received 650 submissions and heard from various experts including three former B.C. chief foresters. It came up with recommendations that included a focus on inventory, tree planting and forest health that members unanimously endorsed.

"I was optimistic," said Routley, adding he felt proud of the committee's work. "I feel shot through the surrender flag now... To have it not only abandoned, but cut the budget, is outrageous."

The cut puts the BC Liberals' short-term political needs ahead of the long-term needs of the forest, he said. "They're actually stealing from future generations of forest communities," he said. "It's really using it as a cash cow for the province and they are stealing from our forest communities in B.C."

http://thetyee.ca/Ne...ulture-Funding/

[inane]

What cuts to other programs or tax increases should we be making to dump money into this?

All I ever hear is how funding for just about everything is too low and how taxes are too high.

[Wetcoaster]

Yeah, like I said. But his point re: chickens hatching remains.

[Wetcoaster]

How about you argue the points of the article rather than point out the already noted author? It's disingenuous distraction from someone I would hope wouldn't stoop to that level.

Also, it's not like 99% of the articles you quote/link aren't written with a heavy pro-Liberal bias.

The Liberal budget has many holes in it as reiterated by that article.

[Wetcoaster]

How about you argue the points of the article rather than point out the already noted author? It's disingenuous distraction from someone I would hope wouldn't stoop to that level.

Also, it's not like 99% of the articles you quote/link aren't written with a heavy pro-Liberal bias.

The Liberal budget has many holes in it as reiterated by that article.