BC Liberals Urged To Deliver 'Bold' Budget

Friday, February 26, 2010 04:20 AM

Vancouver, B.C. - In anticipation of Tuesday's provincial budget, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives is recommending the BC Liberals take some bold, innovative steps...

CCPA Economist, Iglika Ivanova, is warning that there is no fat to trim from BC's public sector. Ivanova says the sector is already among the smallest in Canada and she says recent rounds of spending cuts have, "compromised much-needed social services and removed a potential source of stimulus at a time when the provincial economy needs all the help it can get."

"British Columbians need their government to come forward with a post-Olympic vision for the province that would articulate a new rural development strategy and address BC's persistent povery and growing income disparities."

Ivanova points out that the province's deficit is among the smallest in the country, when compared to the size of the economy. And she says, "An obsession with reducing the size of the deficit is misplaced and will only threaten the fragile recovery and push British Columbians into further hardship."

Ivanova authored a just-released report put out by the institute entitled, "BC's Shrinking Public Sector", in it, she recommends the liberals take some bold measures in next week's budget, including:

restore government spending to February 2009 levels at a minimum
repeal cuts to gaming grants and government ministries to ensure adequate funding for schools, literacy programs, services for children and families, environmental protection, arts and culture and other important programs and services
adopt a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy

The CCPA is an independent, non-partisan research institute with a provincial office in Vancouver. To view the Ivanova's full report click here.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Friday, February 26, 2010 04:20 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: acrider54 on February 26 2010 6:22 AM

Urged? They can't be "urged" or anything else, they do what they want and to hell with what the people of BC want. Be prepared! Hoard your money, they are coming to get it.

Posted by: seedling on February 26 2010 8:53 AM

Can't trim the public sector??!!?? Give me a break. It's amazing how the private sector suffers through layoffs and job loss while govt workers continue to collect their pay cheques. Not sure what the hell they do but I guess that doesn't matter.

Posted by: MrPG on February 26 2010 9:08 AM

They could trim the public sector, but people would likely scream bloody murder because service levels would go down.

I personally think that government at all levels does too much and it costs taxpayers dearly.

People seem to want the government to do everything, but don't want to pay for it. We can't have it both ways.

Posted by: seamutt on February 26 2010 9:25 AM

Ok seedling I'll bite you tell us what to cut? You seem to know. Where do we start?

Posted by: seedling on February 26 2010 9:35 AM

OK how about the Forest Service. Take a trip down to your local District office and observe our tax paying dollars at work. A hundred people sitting around discussing budgets and planning and replanning because they have 25 years experience and can't be let go.

Posted by: IMO on February 26 2010 9:58 AM

Seedling is absolutely right about the forestry part of government. 7 guys sitting around with nothing to do because 15 years ago only 3 people did the very same job. Our friend has 30 years in forestry and he is disgusted with the waste! $900,000.00 in office renovations in the past two years right here in Prince George. The best of all materials. Trucks for everyone. And this is just one part, think of what is being done in all other departments as well. The government has ballooned out of control and the ever shrinking group of tax payers are paying for ALL OF IT. The government has not trimmed the fat ON ANY LEVEL! I am sick to death of the waste digging deeper and deeper into our pockets! We are close to 60% of our hard earned money going to fees, taxes, medical and elite pensions for the government workers. Raises every year, even during a recession. Are we stupid or what? I do not think anyone expects government to do everything for them, the truth is the government wants it that way.

Posted by: Andyfreeze on February 26 2010 10:09 AM

It will be an interesting budget to say the least.
There is no doubt that the Campbell crew will be trying to save their own unpopular asses, which may make them inclined to leave out some of the really nasty stuff!
And that will be for self-serving political reasons... nothing more.
Keep in mind that what they leave out now,they will bring back later...as they did with the HST bomb.
Make no mistake about it...they WILL lie.
And they will not tell the whole story...only the parts that make them look good.
No matter how hard we get whacked by this budget,there will be more to come.
I also anticipate a lot of feel good bunk relating to the Olympics, even though we still don't know the actual costs to the taxpayers.
But that too will be pure spin, as was the entire Olympic marketing scheme.
All in all,I don't expect much other than more cuts.
The one single thing we should be aware of is that they have lied to us before and they WILL lie to us again.
They are fighting for survival and that makes these oportunists in Liberal clothing very dangerous.

Posted by: MrPG on February 26 2010 10:50 AM

I think the bloated staffing issues in government ministries have more to do with union power and senority than anything else. Trimming those positions isn't even an option, which is sickening.

Posted by: camoose on February 26 2010 11:26 AM

While the Liberals are busy cutting services and gaming grants they should be looking at cutting subsidies and grants to big business. The HST will shift over a billion dollars from business taxes to the general population. A huge waste of taxpayers money. Yes Mr. PG, unions on one side and Chamber of Commerce on the other.

Posted by: acopolympics on February 26 2010 11:50 AM

Mr. PG is right. Letting union get as powerful as they are is a huge problem in this province. Like politicians, if someone gets too much power they seem to lose all sense and get corrupted. The old adage "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" only gets more true as time goes by.

Posted by: ammonra on February 26 2010 1:02 PM

Anti-union people are contantly saying thast unions are too powerful, or that they are too powerful. Those people must live in a different world than I do. In the world I live in unions have no power, other than what they can convince managers to give them, that is.

let's not forget that union "power" comes from collective agreements. That means management have agreed to certain things, you know, signed a legally binding contract, just like the legally binding contract anyone who buys a house has to sign. There is little difference between the two, other than the specific terms and how the refusal to follow the legally binding provisions are enforced.

Usually enforcement is via a specified grievance procedure backed up by hearings before an independent arbitrator who decides what the contract actally meant. The arbitrator is the one with power, if anybody other than management has it.

The real life fact is that management can do almost whatever it wants, and the union is restricvted to making a fuss or going to an arbitration. Even then, management has been know to refuse to accept the arbitrators decision.

I would remind all the people fixated on blaming unions for the problems caused by governments, banks and other corporations that a union is only a group of employees concerned about their jobs who join together to get something done. Companies do that all the time, doctors do it, storeowners do it, international corporations do it, oil companies do it. Apparently it is a good thing when anybody else does it, jut not when it is the low man on the totem pole, the employee, does it. Well, its here, its part of Canadian working life, suck it up and get used to it!

Posted by: acopolympics on February 26 2010 1:40 PM

"let's not forget that union "power" comes from collective agreements" ... you are simply full of BS. Policies are put into place constantly that the collective have no say in, as an example, the latest policy of CNC saying 50 aboriginals are to be hired before other nationalities if both are qualified equally. This is a policy that was not ratified by the collective, saying it was supported by the "union" was a bold faced lie.

"a union is only a group of employees concerned about their jobs who join together to get something done" ... really? One what planet?

How do you explain upwards of $30.00/hr jobs at the city for a secretaries starting salary? Or $27-$30.00/hr for a janitor who basically sweeps and polishes floors? Or the $40.00/hr CNC staffer who only makes that because they have been there for 15 years and not because thier jobs call for a high level of experience or knowledge.

I explain it as Unions being out of control. Where will it end? With the meltdown of the whole economic system, which is what we are on the cusp of now.

Posted by: seamutt on February 26 2010 2:20 PM

Good post ammonra and acopolympics must not have the skill sets to get a good union job. Its all the NDP's fault right.

Posted by: acopolympics on February 26 2010 2:40 PM

Not everyones' desire is to be an overpriced underachieving union robot. There would be very few dues paying union members if qualifications was the number one prerequisite to getting into a union instead of connections. Yes, those garbage pickers the city hired to beautify our boulevards were certainly highly qualified to earn that $20.00/hr.

Posted by: ammonra on February 26 2010 2:58 PM

I actuallyn knew some of the secretaries at City Hall. Considering the way they were treated they certainly deserved the pay they got. At least one senior manager used to refer to the employees as "peons", not meaning they were Mexican, I might add. He was never disciplined for that. That's just a minor example of the intellectual and social skills that some management people at the city exhibit.

You are not seriously contending that CUPE unilaterally set the pay rates, and the City Manager, Personnel Director, Treasurer, Mayor etc, said, "Yes Sir, No Sir, 3 bags full, Sir" are you? I would have thought that all those Management types would have negotiated with CUPE when the contract was due and eventually reached a mutually acceptable agreement to pay the amounts the contract specifies, whatever that is. If they thought it was unreasonable, then why did they not say so? Why did they agree to the contract? The Treasurer has rsponsibility for the money, after all, so all he has to do is say, "No", and they wouldn't be paid that amount. Obviously the Treasurer and the others said, "Yes" and the contract was agreed to and signed. Why do you blame the union for those persons' decisions? They have no control over management, do they?

However, what precisely is wrong with someone being paid a fair wage? You may want to perpetuate low pay along with demeaning attitudes towards people whom you consider inferior and not worth their salt, but why should City employees not keep up to the rest of society with their income. They are, after all, as Canadian as you are with the same right to earn a liviung wage as you have. As I said, its here, live with it.

Posted by: acopolympics on February 26 2010 3:08 PM

How many private sector secrataries make $30.00/hr with nothing more than a basic business course under their belt? So your argument about "keeping up with the rest of society" is far and away bogus since most civil servants get paid far more than thier private sector counterparts. If being treated menially or disrespectful was a criteria for getting increases in pay, then waitresses and other salesmen who serve the public should be millionaires by now. The same people who decide raises or negotiate contracts are the same people who need to justify thier huge salaries, the best way is to let everyone elses' get overinflated as well to disguise thier own greed.

Posted by: ammonra on February 26 2010 4:37 PM

"most civil servants get paid far more than thier private sector counterparts".

This is absolutely false. Many health care workers, paid out of the public purse, get paid far, far less than in private industry. Check pharmacists as an example.

Even so, once again, so what? just because private corporations have been successful in keeping their employees underpaidm so they can line the pockets of senior managers with million dollar salaries is no reason why the public sector should be compelled to do the same. Employees deserve to benefit from their employment by receiving a reasonabel wage, one that is comparable to other incomes in society.

Posted by: ammonra on February 26 2010 4:41 PM

Incidentally, if unions are so powerful, how come the provincial government as part of Campbell's philosophy have limited pay raises for most of the time he has been in power. What was it 0,0,0, or 2,2,2. You tell me. Suurely, a power4ful union would have stopped that, wouldn;t it? How come he was able to have so many health care workers displaced and their jobs taken over at substandard pay rates, with no benefit to society, no saving of costs, but oodles of money stuffed into investor's pockets? Please do explain.

Posted by: acrider54 on February 26 2010 5:56 PM

I'd sure like to know what company a secretary works for that gets $30.00 an hour or a janitor 27 to 30. Show me! I want to see! I think acopolympics is not well informed.

Posted by: cougs78 on February 27 2010 9:33 AM

It matters not!! The Chinese will probably own or at least dictate how much we make within 20 years. Probably sooner!!!

Posted by: MrPG on February 27 2010 2:32 PM

Think unions aren't powerful? Try to fire someone for poor performance, or try to trim staffing levels due to budgetary constraints. Good luck with that.

Posted by: dow7500 on February 27 2010 2:51 PM

ammonra, can you remember the day when your take on reality became a union fantasy?