April 20, 2005

Who defines the debate?

"Alligators lie in a watering hole with just their eyes sticking out. The water buffaloes come down to drink. The water buffalo puts its foot in the water. The alligator grabs the foot. A tremendous struggle ensures. The water buffalo is defenceless if pulled into the water. The alligator, if pulled up onto the land, will get stomped."
Samuel Bowles, at a conference in Vancouver, October 20, 1983, sponsored by the Boag Foundation

Carole James and Gordon Campbell are each trying to define the terms of the debate. James seeks to hold Campbell accountable for his record. Broken contracts, with forest companies as well as with labour, the sale of BC Rail, cuts to the Ministry of Children and Families, the broken promise on 5,000 intermediate and long term care beds, larger class sizes and the doubling of gambling are reasons James says trust is the issue. Campbell responds with claims that he is trusted by business.

Campbell is trying to make the economy the issue. He and his allies exaggerate economic performance since 2001 and understate accomplishments of the 1990s. Few voters will research the raw data from Statistics Canada in order to form their own opinion on who is telling the truth. Most will receive their information from the news media which reports what others say, not what is necessarily true. The data show that BC has enjoyed average annual growth in real, inflation adjusted, GDP of between 2.8% and 3.0% for almost any five year period you can pick out of the past 15 years; between 1991 and 2001 BC's population increased by 21% while Canada's increased by 11%. The housing boom BC is experiencing today is the result of that phenomenal population growth combined with low interest rates. The Campbell government cannot take credit for housing construction due to population growth of the last decade, low interest rates and high commodity prices but it claims credit since the payoff is during its term. The government's allies are running ads about job growth, but Statistics Canada's Labour Force Survey shows that employment grew at an average annual rate of 2.2% between October 1991 and May 2001 compared to an average annual rate of 1.7% for Canada. Between May 2001 and March 2005, BC employment has grown at an average annual rate of only 1.7% (and it has grown by only 0.44% in the past five months). The hard data show that James can do as well as Campbell in the economic debate, but political campaigns are not about hard data. Some minds are made up and do not want to be confused by the facts. That is why determining the ground for the election debate, swamp or dry land, alligator or water buffalo, is more important than being accurate with one's facts.

Much of what passes for economic facts are nothing but forecasts from various economists. Statistics Canada will release is preliminary estimates for provincial GDP, investment and disposable personal income for 2004 sometime in the next two weeks. Watch the feeding frenzy as campaigns attempt to interpret the numbers. Economists know that the numbers will be revised in November and will probably be subject to further revisions over the next five or ten years. Various estimates for 2001 had BC bouncing back and forth between a slowdown and a recession, depending on which revision of the data one examines. BC's economic performance over the next four years will not be determined by who forms the provincial government as much as it will be determined by economic conditions in India, China and the US and whether interest rates remain low. Carole James wants those conditions to remain favourable for BC just as much as Gordon Campbell but don't wait to hear the Liberals admit that.

What is undeniable is that the Campbell government is responsible for cuts of up to 40% in many government services. With a windfall from the federal government and high revenues from natural resources, it is apparent that Campbell's cuts were far too deep. Will voters forgive and forget and give him another blank cheque, or is it time to hold him accountable? It's all a question of who frames the debate.