All British Columbians have known since 2001 that the next election will be held on May 17, 2005. Premier Gordon Campbell boasted about bringing about legislative reform with a legislative calendar and fixed election dates; he knew the election date when he set the calendar. He didn't tell the public that a major factor in fixed election dates is automatic closure. A few days before the scheduled end of the session the government house leader announces what Bills it wants to pass and time allocation is then applied so that they pass regardless of how long the opposition would like to debate. While closure or time allocation is controversial it is routinely used in other parliaments and it can be made to work without abuse as long as the time allocation is reasonable. There is no time allocation for debating the 2005 budget estimates; that is not reasonable.

When he was Opposition Leader, Bill Bennett coined the phrase "not a dime without debate" in response to Dave Barrett's attempt to implement time allocation for the 1975 budget debate. During one of his recent shows on 600 AM, former Social Credit cabinet minister Rafe Mair admitted that the issue was a political trick, given the way they filibustered most of the debating time.

Opposition Leader Carole James and Opposition House Leader Joy MacPhail have offered to apply time allocation for the 2005 budget estimates so that they would pass before the house is dissolved on April 19th for the formal commencement of the election campaign. The government has responded with what appears to be attempts to confuse the public over the difference between "budget debate" and "estimates debate". Budget debate takes place over six days of legislative sitting. MLAs get up and deliver pompous speeches that are later mailed out to their constituents. It is the same as Throne Speech debate; it is a travesty that the word "debate" is used to describe that abuse of legislative time. The real debate takes place when estimates are called; that is when a vote is taken on the budget for each ministry. Before the vote the minister sits on the floor of the legislature, or in committee room, surrounded by key staff and is cross examined by the opposition on the details of the budget. For example, this year the Minister of Health would probably be asked to explain precisely where in the budget anyone could find the operating and capital costs for 5,000 additional long term care beds by 2008. Even though all of the monies are not included for 2005-06, the fiscal year that begins April 1, 2005, the budget includes projections for the next two years. A lift of over $680 million in capital costs and $200 million in annual operating costs for the 5,000 beds should be apparent in the budget documents, but the monies are nowhere to be seen. That needs to be debated in the legislature with the Minister obliged to answer under rules that find the minister in contempt if inaccurate answers are provided. That penalty is very important as it does not exist on the campaign trail, nor does any minister get cross examined on the campaign trail while being surrounded by government experts who hold the secrets of each ministry.

The arrogant Campbell government is attempting to defend its refusal to hold estimates debate by pointing to former governments which went directly into election campaigns without debating their budgets. Former governments did that under different rules, and when they did it, the vote was 28 days after the legislature ceased to sit. In Campbell's case, the fixed legislative calendar calls for the legislature to sit until it is dissolved 28 days before the election. Hiding from legislative scrutiny he is expected to adjourn the legislature and not recall it before it is dissolved on April 19th. That means that MLAs will be paid for an extra month of campaigning when they should be debating the budget estimates. It means that Campbell will pass a supply bill to give himself the power to spend billions without debate. "Not a Dime without Debate" is an issue for the 2005 campaign; it was made an issue when Campbell violated the legislative calendar and tried to confuse the public over what constitutes debate. The government that promised to be open and transparent is anything but!