Section 196.2 of the School Act requires that: "On or before February 1 of each year, the minister must establish and announce the amount of Provincial funding to be paid to boards in the next fiscal year for the delivery and support of educational programs." Some cynics were quick to suggest that this year's education funding announcement was tied to the election rather than to the School Act. The cynics may be at least partly right when they notice that the British Columbia Chamber of Commerce issued a news release congratulating the Premier and Minister of Education within minutes of the government's announcement. Few would ever accuse the Chamber of being nonpartisan, but some might accuse it of being confused. Education financing is a lot more complicated than suggested in the latest government news release.

The Ministry of Education keeps two or more sets of books for school expenditures. Its January 30th, 2004, news release included a table showing operating grants that were approximately $300 million lower than the operating expenses shown in the Ministry's service plan. When asked to explain the difference, the Ministry responded by saying:

The January 31, 2005, announcement states that 2005/06 funding will be more than $4.025 billion - the highest ever - or an estimated $7,079 per student. The Ministry of Education Service Plan, which was released at the same time as the 2004-05 provincial budget, stated that operating expense for public schools was $4,147.46 million in 2004-05 and was projected to be $4,188.16 million in 2005-06 and $4,338.41 million in 2006-07. Little has changed since last year in terms of the multiple sets of books, but it is clear that this year's announcement is less than the figure given in the service plan. Perhaps the Ministry could publish a table of concordance or some other form of reconciliation to clarify the differences between its news releases, the requirement of the School Act and its Service Plan.

The New Era Document, the book of Gordon Campbell's election promises, did not say that they would protect education funding if you used the right tricky statistics. It simply said that education funding would be protected. In the first two full fiscal years of the Campbell government, operating expenditures for public schools, including distance education and other items enumerated above, declined; they decreased by $5.7 million in 2002-03, and a further $13.4 million in 2003-04 (as reported in the Ministry's service plans).

Education finance gets even more complicated when per student grants are considered. The problem is that student numbers are counted at different times of the year and the numbers used in the January budget announcement require subsequent revision. When enrollment numbers that school boards submitted to the Ministry as of the end of September are used, the government's claims about increases are seen to be exaggerated, per student funding increased by $71.81 in fiscal year 2002-03 from fiscal year 2001-02; that's an increase of 1.0% rather than the $127 or 2.0% increase shown in the Ministry's news release.

If it is true that the operating grant for the school fiscal year which begins on July 1, 2005, is increased by $150 million to $4.025 billion, then that would be an increase of 3.9%. The January 31st announcement is better than another cut, but it doesn't restore real funding to the 2002 level because the government imposed a wage adjustment costing $169 million in its third year. Other increases in costs further widen the gap in real funding.

Because of the difference in government fiscal years and school fiscal years, not all of the $150 million would be paid out in government's 2005-06 fiscal year. Once the new service plan is tabled on February 15th, it will be easier to determine whether money was simply shifted between years. The new plan can be used to see the changes made from last year's plan for the government's fiscal years 2005-06 and 2006-07, as well as what the plan is for 2007-08.