"An individual is deemed to have made an overpayment on account of the individual's liability under this Act for the 2006 taxation year if …"
Section 41, BILL 2 (2008), Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2008

It's not every day that the government admits that it overtaxed you. That's the way the legislation reads for the $100 per person "dividend" every British Columbian will receive in June, the same month US citizens will receive up to $1,800 for a family of four. In the US it's called an economic stimulus package or "Bipartisan Growth Package", while BC's version is called a "climate action dividend". It would be too much for the Campbell government to admit that the BC economy needs a stimulus package like the one the US introduced.

Finance Minister Carole is projecting a slight slowdown for BC's economic growth, but her Ministry nevertheless forecast a healthy real growth of 2.4% for 2008. Let's hope she's correct, since her Ministry's sensitivity analysis states that a 1% change in nominal GDP (with inflation) has a fiscal impact of $150 - $250 million. After allowing for a $750 million forecast allowance, the budget surplus is projected to be just $50 million (less than two tenths of one percent of revenue). If the $100 dividend was booked to 2008-2009, the year it will be paid, it would cut two thirds off Taylor's forecast allowance, and put her in danger of running a deficit. Recall 2001 when the Campbell government attempted to book tax cuts to the previous fiscal year. The Auditor General said no, and appropriately increased the 2001-2002 deficit. It is hard to believe that the Auditor General will accept booking $440 million in $100 cheques paid in June 2008 to the previous fiscal year.

The Campbell government claims that its budget is an exercise in tax shifting, raising carbon taxes and reducing business and personal income taxes. The purpose of a carbon tax is to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by reducing consumption of fossil fuels. Campbell's tax, 2.4 cents per litre effective July 1, 2008 was announced on the day the markets closed with oil priced at over $100 per barrel. Some believe that oil will reach $150 per barrel in the next few years and , if that is anywhere close to accurate, a 2.4 cents per litre tax won't make much difference. Page 20 of the budget documents admits that by 2020, with triple the initial carbon tax, the impact will be less than 3 million tonnes of CO2-equivalent annually; that's less than 8% of what is required to meet the Premier's GHG target. Perhaps that is why the budget document said that "After being phased-in, further tax rate changes will depend on a number of factors …" including whether BC is meeting its emissions targets. By 2020 Campbell won't be around to worry about it, but for 2008, cynics might suggest that the carbon tax is a way of pumping up revenue from a source where the tax will hardly be noticed, in a year when total revenue, even with the new carbon tax, is forecast to fall by $1 billion. The new found revenue, allows the Campbell government to engage in the buy-your-vote politics of sending cheques to every home and to cut taxes where they might have political benefits, but only a cynic would think the budget was an exercise in politics rather than a sincere effort to save the Earth.

NDP Finance Critic, Bruce Ralston, concluded his initial response to the budget saying:

"In economics they say that every decision has an opportunity cost. For every path taken, there is a path not taken. When we choose one option, we forgo another. The Finance Minister's choices in this budget also represent opportunity costs. There's the cost her government has off-loaded onto ordinary people in the form of increased fees and taxes. There's also a cost that our entire province will bear for the choices her government has made, for the path not taken by the Premier and this government - the decision not to invest in ordinary people, the decision not to invest in making life more affordable for low- and middle-income families."

The hard part of measuring opportunity costs is seeing what's not there. In BC that means seeing what is not there to help the homeless. According to Table 2.10 in the budget documents, the majority of the money slated to deal with homelessness is for keeping emergency shelters open 24/7; an emergency shelter is not a home. The word "poverty" does not appear in the budget speech or its documents, yet, as Ralston said: "For the fourth year in a row, B.C. has the worst child poverty record in the country. While other provinces such as Newfoundland and Quebec have long-term poverty reduction strategies, B.C. refuses to invest." Jimmy Pattison will receive the same $100 dividend as someone living in the Downtown Eastside; wouldn't it be good if those in need received more and those in luxury received less? Opportunity costs are sometimes hard to see, just like the poor and homeless.

The budget provides an opportunity for the NDP to advocate for those the Campbell government ignored. Many British Columbians share the view that they would rather see less poverty, fewer homeless and shorter hospital waiting lists than a 2% tax cut and a $100 cheque. It takes courage to say there is a better way than handing out money the way the Campbell government is doing it, but that courage is what British Columbia needs.