The Liberals are good at complaining.
They complained about the deficit for years, but never said they would balance the budget, or how. They have called for, and will continue to call for (once the Estimates process is underway this week), increased funding in pretty much every government department. But they won’t say where the money would come from to pay for those promises.
McNeil likes to complain about user fees, but he won’t commit to freezing them, or say where the revenue will come from to make up the difference and balance.
He has complained about “taxes”, but has no actual plan to reduce them, or which ones.
Worse than his non-answers on important economic questions is his voting record. Stephen McNeil complained about the HST increase, but voted against the NDP’s legislation to reduce it next year.
Blogger Parker Donham, wonders if there is anything more hypocritical than the analysis of provincial budgets:
The finger-waggers never acknowledge the tradeoffs required for a government of the day to indulge their pet priorities. They never say, “Cut them, so you can fatten me,” and, “My cause is more deserving than their cause, because…”
Budgets are about choices. “We’re going to do this. We’re not going to do that. Here’s how much it will cost.” You can agree with the choices or disagree with them, but it’s silly to pretend that funding one thing doesn’t mean unfunding another, or that programs can balloon while taxes plummet.
The problem for McNeil is that, while easy, this approach means his Liberals cannot help but contradict themselves. And they do: day after day, week after week, on issue after issue.
It is time for journalists to force Stephen McNeil to answer some questions about the choices he would make.