Table of Contents BRITISH COLUMBIA: THE CUTS BEGIN Introduction The Campbell Plan Idiosyncratic Politics Discussion, Research, and Essay Questions BRITISH COLUMBIA: THE CUTS BEGIN Introduction On February 13, 2002, British Columbia pay for a measure they viewed as short- Premier Gordon Campbell delivered a sighted and ill-timed. Others were outraged televised address to the province, shortly that he had ordered the province’s striking after introducing his Liberal government’s teachers back to work, and that he had first budget. Clad in a sombre black business threatened to impose a salary settlement on suit, Campbell did not have much good news them that most viewed as unsatisfactory. to report to B.C. residents, the vast majority Labour groups were incensed at his decision of whom had given his party a huge majority to reopen signed contracts affecting health- in the May 2001 election. He apologized for care workers and others in the public sector, the difficult and quite likely unpopular steps in order to roll back their wages and benefits. his government believed it was necessary to Community groups servicing the needs of the take in the months to come. He claimed they homeless and other marginalized people in were necessary in order to wrestle down the Vancouver and elsewhere looked in vain for $4.4-billion deficit that he asserted had been any indication from the government that inherited by his government from its NDP funding for their activities would be in- predecessor. Acknowledging that cuts to creased. Environmentalists were deeply education, health care, and social programs, troubled by what they regarded as along with a significant reduction in the Campbell’s lack of sympathy with their public sector and a reopening of contracts concerns for preserving the province’s with civil servants would arouse resentment forests. Within days of Campbell’s budget among many, he claimed that there was no speech, a broad coalition of groups was alternative course available to him. He planning a huge protest rally outside the reiterated his government’s election pledge provincial legislature in Victoria, to drama- to balance the province’s budget by 2005, a tize public opposition to the government’s commitment it had actually passed into law policies. shortly after the election. But he admitted On February 23, a crowd of at least 20 000 that erasing the deficit was going to be a people descended on Victoria, calling for huge undertaking that would require patience Campbell’s government to reconsider the and sacrifice from British Columbians over cuts. Meanwhile, smaller gatherings were the next few years. held in other communities throughout B.C., The reaction to Campbell’s speech was suggesting that the opposition was not instantaneous and dramatic. While most concentrated only in the province’s large business groups hailed his determination to cities. B.C. had seen this kind of anti-govern- wipe out the deficit and reduce the cost of ment protest before. In 1983, a huge mass government, B.C.’s powerful labour unions movement known as Solidarity had galva- and social and community organizations nized a similar coalition of labour and social denounced the budget as mean-spirited and groups in opposition to spending cuts the heartless. Many critics were especially Social Credit government of Bill Bennett had appalled by the fact that Campbell had implemented. But despite large, noisy rallies slashed provincial taxes after winning the and even a province-wide general strike, election, and as a result was now contemplat- Solidarity had not been successful in deflect- ing serious cuts in social spending in order ing the government from its charted course. News in Review — 5 — March 2002 Since then, provincial administrations But by the beginning of the new century, with a similar right-wing approach to there were some signs that this view of the government spending and social programs role of government in society was beginning had been elected across Canada, most to come under serious question. Particularly notably in Alberta and Ontario. They too after the tragedy of September 11 in the had faced down, and apparently overcome, United States and the collapse of the giant the concerted opposition of many groups energy company Enron, many people were who felt that their policies were harsh, coming to recognize that government and wrong-headed, and would lead to a serious public institutions did have an important erosion of public services that governments responsibility to play in guaranteeing the provided to their citizens. Throughout the health, safety, and security of citizens. Con- 1990s, budget cuts, deficit reduction, versely, the ability of the private sector to privatization of public enterprises, and an provide these kinds of services more effi- overall shrinking in the role of government ciently and cheaply than government, which had almost become a mantra for political had once been a neo-conservative article of parties of various stripes across Canada, at faith, was also being increasingly challenged. both the federal and provincial levels. In The B.C. Liberal government of Gordon general, most of the public appeared to Campbell may well have been one of the last concur, or at least acquiesce, and govern- to ride the wave of anti-government, low-tax, ments that embraced this neo-conservative sentiment in Canada, and the backlash its philosophy were not generally punished at policies appeared to have triggered might the polls. also be an indication of an important change in the public mood. March 2002 — 6 — News in Review BRITISH COLUMBIA: THE CUTS BEGIN The Campbell Plan INTEGRATED VIEWING: Watch this News in Review report once, then, after reading the information below, watch it a second time and formulate answers to the viewing questions. Since winning a crushing election victory over the NDP in May 2001, the B.C. Liberal gov- ernment of Premier Gordon Campbell pursued an ambitious economic agenda, determined to undo what it viewed as the incompetence and overspending of its predecessor in power. Throughout the election campaign, Campbell was quick to blame all of B.C.’s woes on what he alleged was the inability of the NDP to manage the province’s economy responsibly. External factors such as the Asian economic crisis of the late 1990s, which severely impacted on B.C.’s markets for natural resource products, and the ongoing trade dispute with the United States over softwood lumber exports, were brushed aside as mere trivialities. Campbell and his Liberal team presented a clear message to the voters: it was the “tax and spend” policies of the NDP, coupled with its overly friendly stance toward labour and environmental groups and its hostility to business, that were the roots of B.C.’s malaise. The remedy, in their view, included much lower personal and corporate taxes, a major downsizing in the size and cost of government operations, and a set of economic stimuli designed to promote greater business investment and activity to kick-start the province’s moribund economy. VIEWING QUESTION ONE: Identify a moment in the video in which, in your opinion, Gordon Campbell gives a rationale for the cuts. Describe how this conflicts with his pre- election promises. In its first provincial budget, announced in February 2002, the B.C. government introduced a set of policies that were completely in keeping with the general approach it had advocated during the election. It had already kept its promise to reduce taxes, even though it faced a fiscal deficit of $4.4-billion dollars, which it had committed itself to erasing within its first term in office. With revenues declining, the government decided to raise the provincial sales tax from seven to seven-and-a-half per cent, and also hike tobacco taxes, making them the highest in Canada. Critics of this measure pointed out that while the personal and corporate tax cuts mainly benefited high-income earners, the increased consumption taxes penalized all B.C. residents irrespective of income, and were thus regressive and unfair. However, the rise in tobacco taxes did receive some praise from health and environmental groups. Increases in residential school property taxes, medical services plan premiums, and gas and transit taxes in Vancouver also formed part of the budget plan to hike revenues in order to deal with the deficit. VIEWING QUESTION TWO: Describe how the video depicts and explains the various reactions to Campbell’s cuts. Pay close attention to images, editing, language, and juxtaposi- tions. Even before tabling its budget, the Campbell government had aroused considerable opposition by its decision in December 2001 to slash the size of the provincial public service by almost 12 000 jobs. This measure was designed to reduce the cost of government operations by News in Review — 7 — March 2002 almost $2-billion over the course of the following three years. It also declared that it would reopen signed contracts with many of its unionized public employees, particularly in the health-care sector, that it was reducing welfare payments, ending the freeze on tuition fees, and contemplating the closure of some hospitals, all in the name of reducing spending in order to balance the budget and eliminate the deficit. The fact that this was very much a long-term plan that the government intended to commit to during its term in office was underlined by provincial Finance Minister Gary Collins, who stated in his budget speech, “We are a govern- ment that is trying to clean up a mess that we inherited—10 years of decline in British Colum- bia. We will not be able to do that overnight.” Predictably, the budget announcement was greeted with a mixture of praise and denunciation.