Money talks – and it's saying Liberals are the biggest loser

The Globe and Mail

2 July 2007

Page S1

In the heat of the controversy surrounding the pay and pension increases for B.C.'s MLAs, most of the discussion focused on which of the parties would be the bigger loser. Some said the Liberals would take the hit, since it was the Premier who initiated the controversy by setting up the panel that recommended the hefty increases. And it was Gordon Campbell – who stood to benefit the most – who in the end decided not to reduce the panel's outrageous recommendation, as a politician with his ear to the ground might have been expected to do.

Other people with whom I spoke suggested that Liberal supporters would be less offended by the increases since, being better-heeled, they were better positioned to compare their own pay stubs to what members of the legislature in Victoria were earning. For many NDP supporters, on the other hand, any increase on top of what MLAs were already pulling in looked generous in comparison to their standard of living. Nor would many New Democrats – and many other British Columbians, for that matter – have been impressed with NDP Leader Carole James's zigzagging on the issue.

Well, the verdict is now in, if public opinion polls are to be believed. And, according to the latest Ipsos-Reid survey, it's the Liberals who've taken it on the chin. Fully half of British Columbians have a worse impression of the Premier for porking out on pay and pensions. In comparison, only a quarter say their impression of Ms. James has worsened.

Aside from the verdict of public opinion, there's another reason Ms. James should be feeling somewhat bullish about the outcome – for the time being, at least. For, notwithstanding the criticism she took at the time over her performance, it's always been clear that there was a bit of method to her madness.

In my experience in government, there's nothing that elected representatives desire more – and nothing for which they more envy public servants – than to have funds available to do ‘good works' in their ridings. In Jean Chrétien's Ottawa, that's what the boondoggle at Human Resources Development Canada was all about. And when you scratch beneath the surface, the sponsorship scandal was essentially an attempt by the political apparatus to escape bureaucratic rules and dispense largesse directly to Quebec voters. For, though it's not well known to most Canadians, in Quebec – alone among the provinces – members of the National Assembly (as their legislature is known) are every year handed a personal kitty to use in their constituencies.

As president of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency under Mr. Chrétien, I once had a member of Parliament from New Brunswick tell me that she and her colleagues, and not bureaucrats, should be deciding which projects to fund in their ridings, since it was they who had to get re-elected. Perhaps she saw the writing on the wall: in the subsequent election, she went down to defeat. No need to shed a tear for her, though: she's now a Liberal senator – which is the way the system works in Ottawa.

Meanwhile, back in Victoria, we've already seen Ms. James and three members of the NDP caucus donate $10,500 from their pay increases to the Mary Manning Centre for sexually abused children, which was forced to lay off three part-time therapists after the Campbell government refused a request for additional funds.

We can expect further demonstrations of such largesse to favoured causes between now and the next election. And, watch for New Democratic candidates to put their Liberal opponents on the hot seat in the next campaign over what they've done with the pay increases they've taken.

Still, notwithstanding their leg up in public opinion, the NDP is not yet out of the woods. The terms and conditions of the job were known to their MLAs, too, before they ran for office, and no one forced any of them to leave their previous positions. Yet, they stand to benefit greatly from the new pension provisions – just like their Liberal counterparts. Watch for Green Party candidates to make that point in the next election. And watch for the Greens to feed off the public perception that the Liberals and the NDP are two peas in a pod – filled with folks who are concerned more about feathering their own nests than with serving the public interest.

nspector@globeandmail.com