BC Budget

[inane]

My problem with this line of thinking is that while it's certainly a "-" for the Liberals, it's not a "+" for the NDP. Neither party deserves any "+" credit for the mishandling of the HST but they both deserve "-"...so how does that equate to supporting/voting for EITHER of them?

[Langdon Algur]

As Michael Smyth points out in a column on the BC NDP reaction to the budget - a breathraking Adrian Dix Two Step Shuffle.  

Adrian Dix attacks budget, but offers non-answers

Adrian Dix, the man who would be premier, took a sledgehammer Wednesday to the Liberal government's newly balanced budget.

The NDP leader slammed the modest 2.6-per-cent increase in health-care spending, saying it won't meet public demand for services, so it's effectively a cut.

He attacked the $800-million "fire sale" of government assets, criticized the four-per-cent hike in MSP premiums and accused the government of tabling a "bogus budget" that's not really balanced at all.

So how would Dix do it differently if he wins the May election?

Let's run them down one at a time, shall we? But I'll warn you now: the guy is slipperier than a greased weasel.

MEDICAL SERVICES PLAN: Dix called the increase in MSP premiums "a problem" and said the government "is increasingly addicted to middle-class tax increases." So would he cancel the premium hike? Or perhaps bring in a smaller increase instead?

"We have to assess what's in the budget, the impact that might have on a platform," he non-answered. "We're going to have to make some difficult choices."

HEALTH CARE: The Liberals are increasing health-care spending by $2.4 billion over the next three years. Dix says it's not enough. So would he spend more?

"We're going to have to look at exactly those questions," he said. "What we have here is a budget that doesn't fund even basic initiatives put forward by the premier. We have to review that and draw the appropriate conclusions."

ASSET SALES: The government plans to sell $800 million worth of Crown land and buildings, which Dix called "very problematic."

Will he cancel the asset sales if he becomes premier in May?

"It's not a question of cancelling them — they haven't happened," he said."The question is: Is the government going to come through? Is it a serious commitment to sell assets? That's the question we have to look at."

A BALANCED BUDGET: Sounds like Dix wants to spend more money than the Liberals. He's critical of revenue measures like the asset sales. And he thinks the Liberals' "balanced" budget is really a deficit, anyway.

So would he bring in a deficit budget? How many deficits would he bring in before balancing the budget? How big would his deficits be?

"We're going to review this. If we come in, we'll have to assess the situation we have. What we have is a budget that is obviously not a balanced budget. We're going to have to deal with the very serious fiscal situation."

Translation of all the above gobbledygook: Dix plans to win the election by saying as little as possible, accuse the Liberals of lying about the province's finances, and then bring in a series of deficit budgets.

http://www.theprovin...l#ixzz2LZD4xa1f

It is hilarious for Dix to claim the Liberals are not being truthful when as Glen Clark's Chief of Staff he piloted through the BC NDP's infamous fudge-it budget.  Remember that?  

It was discovered after the election, that the balanced budgets for the 1995-96 and 1996-97 fiscal years on which Clark had campaigned were not, in fact, balanced but actually deficits.  And  that there had also been a bookmaking sleight of hand that was undisclosed at the time of the election whereby the Clark government took a large amount of debt and shifted it onto Crown Corporations so as to create a perception of "surpluses".  

And who was there up to his elbows in those shenanigans?  None other than Adrian Dix.

[inane]

The whole 'who lied worse' debate is ridiculous. Both sides have. Ok, so they are all liars. Then let's go based on their ideas/platform. It's pretty obvious the Liberals have run out of ideas seeing as they are now forwarding the oppositions ideas.

What we really need is an actual alternative

[Wetcoaster]

The whole 'who lied worse' debate is ridiculous. Both sides have. Ok, so they are all liars. Then let's go based on their ideas/platform. It's pretty obvious the Liberals have run out of ideas seeing as they are now forwarding the oppositions ideas.

What we really need is an actual alternative

[Wetcoaster]

The reporter refers to Dix as "a greased weasel", yup seems like a fair unbiased article to me

[aGENT]

What we really need is an actual alternative

[RUPERTKBD]

The NDP was well aware that the HST was good tax policy and made eminent economic sense but worked behind the scenes to undermine it using NDP insiders and resources and assisting The Zalm in his campaign of misinformation.

[ahzdeen]

As Michael Smyth points out in a column on the BC NDP reaction to the budget - a breathraking Adrian Dix Two Step Shuffle.

Adrian Dix attacks budget, but offers non-answers

Adrian Dix, the man who would be premier, took a sledgehammer Wednesday to the Liberal government's newly balanced budget.

The NDP leader slammed the modest 2.6-per-cent increase in health-care spending, saying it won't meet public demand for services, so it's effectively a cut.

He attacked the $800-million "fire sale" of government assets, criticized the four-per-cent hike in MSP premiums and accused the government of tabling a "bogus budget" that's not really balanced at all.

So how would Dix do it differently if he wins the May election?

Let's run them down one at a time, shall we? But I'll warn you now: the guy is slipperier than a greased weasel.

MEDICAL SERVICES PLAN: Dix called the increase in MSP premiums "a problem" and said the government "is increasingly addicted to middle-class tax increases." So would he cancel the premium hike? Or perhaps bring in a smaller increase instead?

"We have to assess what's in the budget, the impact that might have on a platform," he non-answered. "We're going to have to make some difficult choices."

HEALTH CARE: The Liberals are increasing health-care spending by $2.4 billion over the next three years. Dix says it's not enough. So would he spend more?

"We're going to have to look at exactly those questions," he said. "What we have here is a budget that doesn't fund even basic initiatives put forward by the premier. We have to review that and draw the appropriate conclusions."

ASSET SALES: The government plans to sell $800 million worth of Crown land and buildings, which Dix called "very problematic."

Will he cancel the asset sales if he becomes premier in May?

"It's not a question of cancelling them — they haven't happened," he said."The question is: Is the government going to come through? Is it a serious commitment to sell assets? That's the question we have to look at."

A BALANCED BUDGET: Sounds like Dix wants to spend more money than the Liberals. He's critical of revenue measures like the asset sales. And he thinks the Liberals' "balanced" budget is really a deficit, anyway.

So would he bring in a deficit budget? How many deficits would he bring in before balancing the budget? How big would his deficits be?

"We're going to review this. If we come in, we'll have to assess the situation we have. What we have is a budget that is obviously not a balanced budget. We're going to have to deal with the very serious fiscal situation."

Translation of all the above gobbledygook: Dix plans to win the election by saying as little as possible, accuse the Liberals of lying about the province's finances, and then bring in a series of deficit budgets.

http://www.theprovin...l#ixzz2LZD4xa1f

It is hilarious for Dix to claim the Liberals are not being truthful when as Glen Clark's Chief of Staff he piloted through the BC NDP's infamous fudge-it budget. Remember that?

It was discovered after the election, that the balanced budgets for the 1995-96 and 1996-97 fiscal years on which Clark had campaigned were not, in fact, balanced but actually deficits. And that there had also been a bookmaking sleight of hand that was undisclosed at the time of the election whereby the Clark government took a large amount of debt and shifted it onto Crown Corporations so as to create a perception of "surpluses".

And who was there up to his elbows in those shenanigans? None other than Adrian Dix.

[Gurn]

Every new government that gets in says" Ohh crap the books are worse than we believed" thus having the NDP say "We will need to look at the books" is actually very sensible.

[RUPERTKBD]

Every new government that gets in says" Ohh crap the books are worse than we believed" thus having the NDP say "We will need to look at the books" is actually very sensible.

[Wetcoaster]

It's also convenient. This way Dix doesn't actually have to run on a platform, he just has to criticize everything that the government does.

Good work, if you can get it...

[Gurn]

and it'll be the same when the ndp gets ousted as well. This is not new, nor the actions of only one party.

[Wetcoaster]

and it'll be the same when the ndp gets ousted as well. This is not new, nor the actions of only one party.

[aGENT]

Pretty sure I'm voting Green mostly out of spite and lack of a better choice.

[RUPERTKBD]

Pretty sure I'm voting Green mostly out of spite and lack of a better choice.

[Harbinger]

So, to sum up, Dix says "budget is crap, we need more spending." And when asked about it he responds with "we don't know enough about the budget to tell you what we'd do otherwise." Yup, sounds like the NDP to me. Screaming at the top of their lungs that everything the government does is wrong and corrupt, but offers nothing constructive.

[inane]

Related, in that the budget basically makes no mention of the environment...So this is in no way surprising. Short term wins again.

http://www.vancouversun.com/government+failing+protect+biodiversity+auditor+general+report/7998537/story.html

B.C. government failing to protect biodiversity:

The B.C. government is failing badly at protecting "Canada's most biologically diverse province," a report released Thursday by the Auditor General of B.C. concludes.

The report finds "significant gaps" in B.C.'s understanding of biodiversity, saying the government "does not know whether its actions are resulting in the conservation of biodiversity" and is "not adequately measuring and reporting on its progress" in the area.

The auditor general stresses the importance of biodiversity to all, saying it is "often compared to the health of the environment, and ultimately affects human wellbeing by supplying us with food, water, air, soil, and medicines."

The report found that the government has not completed establishing wildlife habitat areas for 36 of the 85 species it identifies as at risk from forest and range activities. Forty per cent of those areas designated are for grizzly bears, which means that a "large portion of government's efforts" have been dedicated to one species, the report noted.

"Habitat preservation is critical to the conservation of biodiversity and government's lack of implementation and monitoring is troubling," Auditor General John Doyle said in a statement.

Recommendations to government include:

-- commit long-term to collect sufficient and reliable information about the status of biodiversity in B.C.

-- review its legislative framework to ensure that any significant gaps or barriers to conservation of biodiversity are addressed.

-- assign responsibilities and timelines for conservation actions.

-- establish goals, objectives, and timelines for habitat designation and determine whether "other tools" are necessary to achieve biodiversity conservation.

-- monitor the effectiveness of government actions, and report periodically to the legislature and the public.

The report places the onus on two ministries as being primarily responsible for maintaining B.C.'s biodiversity -- forests, lands, and natural resource operations (Steve Thomson), as well as environment (Terry Lake).

On Wednesday, West Coast Environmental Law released a report saying that B.C.'s laws and policies are "hardwired" for failure. Jessica Clogg, the organization's executive-director said conservation efforts are stymied by "gaps and barriers such as caps on allowable protection, loopholes and exemptions in how land-use plans" are legalized, and failure to address the realities of climate change.

[aGENT]

Unless the Green party represenatative has a chance in your riding, it's pretty much a wasted vote (which is certainly your right, BTW)

I think the line from Rush's Freewill is apropos to this situation:

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice"...

[ThaBestPlaceOnEarth]

The "HST fiasco" was bizarre and clearly demonstrated why tax policy should not be an exercise in direct democracy.

The Zalm was aided and abetted by the BC NDP in a campaign of misinformation. I would put as much of the blame on the NDP as the Liberals.

[Wetcoaster]

If they'd said before the election that they were thinking about this possibility, instead of denying it was even a possibility, none of that would have happened. It was a good and arguably necessary policy that we will not have in B.C. for years now and it is the Liberals' fault, 100%, for not putting it in the platform and defending it during the campaign.