Vol.

i

52 No. 1 PUBLISHED IN VANCOUVER, B.C. SINCE 1931

B.C.’s BUDGET —
NO JOBS, FEW TREES

B.C.’s budget, though calling for an increase in budgeted expenditures of 8%,
provides precious little comfort for the Province’s army of unemployed, for those past
victims of Government policy now on welfare, or for the forests.

Underneath the din of public relations trumpeting, the Government admits its
failure in small print: it forecasts 14% unemployment throughout 1985, and — despite
a lot of bally hoo about Expo and highway construction, — a 13.3% rate in 1986.

As in the past, the least fortunate in the society, those least capable of defending
themselves, will bear the brunt of cuts:

Ministry of Human Resources reductions total $12,962,867. They are concentrated
in these areas:

— Direct community services $622,606
— Services for families and children $1,978,098
— Special programs for the retarded $6,270,639
— Health care and dental services for GAIN recipients $1,691,524
— Seniors’ supplement $1,000,000
— S.A.F.E.R. $1,400,000

The big winners? Highways allocation increases by $478 million, an 84% jump.
Industry and small business development, up 6.3 million, or 23%.

Interest on public debt (when the Socreds took office in 1975, the combined
Provincial Government and Crown Corporations’ debt was $4.4 million. Today, it
exceeds $17 billion) has ballooned, up $146 million, or 62%.

Forestry? (see page 4 for details of Fed-Provincial agreement).

Beneath all the expensive smoke and mirrors about unsigned agreements, the
allocation for operating costs of the silviculture program has decreased by over $8
million — discounting for inflation, a 26% slash.

What about the $558 million “Economic Renewal Program’’?
As noted, there is an increase of $478 million in highways, $65 million allocated for

» the Federal-Provincial agreement that has not been signed, $6.1 million more for -

“industry and small business,” and $4 million more for “international trade”.

Subtract that total from the overall expenditure estimate, and the remainder of
$8.503 billion is a reduction in real expenditure from last year.

So the beneficiaries are people building the Coquihalla Pass and the Annacis
Crossing, and the people selling ice cream to Expo visitors.

For the rest of the half million or so unemployed, half-employed and poor, this
budget is yet another in a long series of kicks in the stomach.

Last word goes to the National Council of Welfare, an agency established in 1969 by
the Federal Government to advise on social policy:

Their latest report says that the rise in B.C.’s low income families is “alarming”’,
that the number of such families has “ballooned” from 65,000 to 157,000 in three
years.

Small wonder. |

RETURN REQUESTED

THE LUMBER WORKER

CONSPIRACIES

“People of the same trade seldom meet
together, even for merriment and diversion,
but the conversation ends in a conspiracy
against the public, or some contrivance to
raise prices.”

—From “Wealth of Nations”
by Adam Smith

Permit No. 5035
Vancouver, B.C.

HOUSING POLICIES.
FAVOUR THE RICH

In housing, as in other policy areas, the
Mulroney government is continuing the
Liberal tradition of shifting resources and
wealth from the poor to the rich.

A study, recently completed by University
of British Columbia economist David Hul-
chanski, revealed the effects of those poli-
cies. In 1967, 62 per cent of the lowest fifth of
Canadian wage earners owned their homes.
In 1981, this dropped to 48 per cent.

In the same period, for the richest 20 per
cent of Canadians, home ownership rose
from 78 to 83 per cent.

The reason is that housing policies were
increasingly oriented to benefit the rich.
Direct rental and housing subsidies are
administered by the Canada Mortgage and
Housing Corporation. These subsidies are
the primary program for low and moderate
income housing assistance.

Finance Minister Michael Wilson an-
nounced last November that the CHMC
budget would be cut by $48.5 million.

At the same time, the Tories have indi-
cated that there are no plans to alter the
indirect subsidies delivered through the tax
system. These primarily benefit high
income Canadians.

THE HIDDEN TAX SUBSIDIES COST
TAXPAYERS $1.6-BILLION IN 1979, THE
LAST YEAR THE GOVERNMENT RE-
PORTED SUCH DATA. HULCHANSKI
CALCULATED THAT CANADIANS
WITH INCOMES OF $10,000-$15,000
RECEIVED AN AVERAGE TAX SUB-
SIDY OF $314 WHILE WEALTHY CANA-
DIANS WITH INCOMES OVER $100,000
RECEIVED AN AVERAGE TAX SUB-
SIDY OF $6,753.

An example of how tax subsidies work is
Former Prime Minister John Turner who
made a capital gain of $635,000 on the sale
of his Toronto mansion last fall. Since it was
his principal residence, he had to pay no tax
on that gain. Were he taxed at his full 50 per
cent rate on this sale, he would have owed
over $300,000.

This should be contrasted with the aver-
age recipient of subsidies through non-profit
housing projects who would have to spend
118 years in a housing project to receive
such a benefit such as this.

Government policies must be reversed.

There should be stepped-up direct support
for low-to-moderate income housing and a
major cut in the indirect tax subsidies.
—from UE “Facts and Comments” March

March 1985

Mulroney as follows:

size of the rumored one.
the urgent thing is to get a start.

are nego

Sth Floor, 1285 West Pender Street,
Vancouver, B.C. V6E4B2

‘matter is very important for all Canadians and for Bi
Columbians. But for IWA members, it is absolutely ur; 2

SOCREDS DELAY FOREST AGREEMENT

On October 18, 1984, Regional President Jack Munro wired Prime Minister

“I understand that a tentative Canada-B.C. agreement, calling for joint
- expenditures of three hundred million dollars over a five-year period, has been

reached, and is now awaiting approval of your government.

The amount is of course woefully inadequate. The policy statements presented at

Cornerbrook just two years ago, for example, suggest a program about double the —

your campaign in B.C., you demonstrated an understanding of the
need for a greatly expanded forestry program. The success of your Pa’
candidates in this province is to a considerable extent a mandate for that progr

u your Government approve this program immediately so that work ¢

April, 1985