On party policies, voters should ask how and at what cost?

Written By Todd Corrigall
Published

During the leaders debate last week, David Eby threw out a quick barb about how Conservatives had not costed their platform, and that it should have been the minimum requirement to gain entry to the debate.

Well, this week, the Conservative Party of British Columbia released their costed platform, with some significant promises, not the least of which is eradicating the $9 billion deficit within two terms – something the NDP have not committed to doing.

With record high voter turnout in the advance polls, and Vancouver Island leading that charge, does a costed platform actually resonate with voters? Do voters care? 

It’s hard to know. But here’s a brief summary just the same.

On comparing the BC NDP and BC Conservative platforms, there are tremendous similarities, and significant differences. 

The differences largely focus on how to create opportunities so people can build a sustainable future for themselves. And they largely agree on what needs to be fixed. 

What they agree on

Both major parties agree that mental health and addictions have created challenging situations that need to be addressed immediately. Conservatives have promised an end to safer supply, while the NDP said they wouldn’t expand access. Both parties seem to agree individuals struggling with addictions, mental illness, and drug-induced brain injuries who are making our communities more dangerous require mandatory in-patient care.

Both agree more housing is needed, from affordable on up. The distinctions lie in the best route to get there and which strategies will be more effective in the short-term. 

I don’t believe the NDP approach of dictating processes to another level of government will be successful.

I don’t believe dictating processes to another level of government will be successful.

The NDP and Conservatives both agree affordability is at an all-time low, with the latter saying tackling the solution lies in more projects, with private businesses leading the economy. The NDP believes good-paying government jobs are the pathway forward.

They both agree the healthcare system is in shambles and needs to be overhauled. But diverge on how to tackle the problem, whether through partial privatization, sending patients to the United States, or some hybrid health delivery model.

The question is, how?

Agreement on what the challenges are is easy enough, it’ “how” that really matters. And if the electorate believes the candidate and party will deliver on their promises to get us there.

For example, the BC NDP want to expand medications pharmacists can prescribe and ensure communities have greater access to urgent and primary care facilities. Great ideas. 

However, as was noted yesterday, the urgent and primary care facility in Prince George is grappling with some significant issues in its dealings with Northern Health and currently do not have a contract.

Is healthcare red tape and bureaucracy the root cause?

When it comes to affordability, the elimination of the Carbon Tax is the single most pertinent issue – after all, it will frame the next federal election. 

The elimination of the Carbon Tax is the single most pertinent issue.

While the Conservatives say they will eradicate it, the federal program will immediately kick in. However, this will result in every person in B.C. receiving a rebate, not the wage tested model we currently have. 

And, while the NDP say they too would eliminate the carbon tax, they have actually proposed replacing it with an increased carbon tax on trucking, transport, and infrastructure projects.

You can be sure that those increased fees will be passed on to consumers, and not even wage tested households will be free of those increased costs.

While it’s true to say these issues are plaguing provinces and communities across the country, it’s a fallacy to say that each issue is the same. It simply isn’t. And they are being addressed differently.

B.C.’s affordability challenge is driving talent to other jurisdictions – jurisdictions with competing recruitment strategies that lower taxes, increase housing availability and provide the opportunity to live in a single-income environment while still enjoying a comfortable life.

At what cost?

The bottom line for me, a proud “northerner,” is that our economy needs to be resuscitated immediately. And I believe the most significant opportunities will come from increased private sector jobs and resource development. 

More government services are great. But at what cost? 

If we increase services, then increase government and Crown corporation workforces, we need to increase taxes and fees to accommodate for that. All the money you earn is diluted by paying these increased taxes. 

And rest assured, taxes and fees are the only lever that can be pulled if we aren’t approving major projects at a greater clip and creating private sector jobs that have a net zero impact on taxation.

While costed platforms may be some quirky media hook to a politician, I’m more interested in knowing what each leader will do to ensure our economy can grow in a sustainable and robust way.

Costs are rising and B.C. has fast become a province that creates amazing talent, then turns them over to other more affordable provinces that don’t exude the policy lurch we experience here.

The outcomes of this election are not yet known. But whatever decision the electorate makes on Oct. 19, there will be a cost.