The requirement for tabling three year budget projections was part of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act brought in by the Dosanjh government. In the hands of the Campbell government the projection for two years beyond the current year is used to claim that cuts aren't really cuts because they were previously announced. For example, in February 2002 the "service plan" for the Ministry of Children and Family Development projected a cut of $202 million in 2004-05 relative to 2003-04. At the June 2003 staged cabinet meeting, Minister Hogg announced that the cut would be "only $70 million" - hence they claim they are putting money back because they aren't cutting as deeply as originally planned even though there will be $70 million less in services next year.

The Ministry of Forests has taken this shell game to a new height in a September 22nd email to all employees from the Deputy Minister. In discussing cuts for 2004-05, it said "Going into the last year of the planned three years of reductions we have $25 million dollars of unfunded pressures." Anyone who takes the time to look at the Ministry's "service plan" that was tabled with the budget last February can see that it called for $28.5 million in cuts in 2004-05 (down from $42 million in cuts scheduled for that year according to the 2002-05 plan), so it is not clear whether the Deputy's email really means that there are $25 million in "cost pressures" in addition to the planned $28.5 million in cuts, or whether he is saying the cuts will be $3.5 million less than planned. In an attempt to lay the blame for the "cost pressures" on anything but the forest fires, the Deputy wrote:

"The pressures are the result of the fact:
-- we have yet to complete the last of the three years of scheduled reductions;
-- we did not cut as deeply as was originally planned in years one and two of our budget cuts;
-- we have tasks that were unanticipated at the time the budget cuts were set;
-- we are being charged more than originally anticipated for services such as legal advice, shared services, etc.; and,
-- we continue to carry out functions we had planned to eliminate or reduce significantly."

Following those excuses the Deputy's email goes on to say that it all means that a further 128 positions will be eliminated. He then says "Obviously, I regret the impacts our reductions will have on people and the Forest Service. I don't like doing this, but it is something we have to do to meet the Service Plan targets assigned to us three years ago." Most people can understand the "impacts reductions" have on those who are laid off, but the Ministry has provided no information on what the Deputy means in his reference to impacts on the Forest Service. The "ready, fire, aim" approach to managing public services was reinforced when the email continued with the remark that "We will move as quickly as possible to identify the specifics." In other words, the fiscal plan dictates a further $25 million in cuts, and they will be made regardless of the consequences. That makes it hard to believe claims that resources will be available to reduce the threat in the forest of another disastrous fire season in 2004.