It is municipal budget time again in Alberta, and all the rhetoric is beginning to unfold. Many municipal governments, whose trustees who are charged with looking out for our interests, are telling us what a great job they have done; they have managed to keep those budget increases down to a mere few percentile. They make it sound like they have done us a favour, but to most taxpayers, this just means being forced to pay more with little input into the process.
In fairness, the delivering of bad news and increased costs is a difficult task. The role of government, at any level, is to decide how to maintain our social structure while distributing what are limited, finite funds. For municipal governments this problem has become exacerbated as they have had to take on a plethora of programs, which were once provided by the federal and provincial governments. When we went through those measures of austerity 20 years ago, many of these services and programs were pushed down to municipal governments. They did not have to take on these responsibilities, but we as citizens have come to expect these services from our government. So what were they to do?
Recently, the Taxpayers’ Association has taken one view that wants to see a reduction of taxes, or at the very least, a limited increase in taxes. They have a valid point, as the rising costs of living here in St. Albert are hurting the most vulnerable. An average monthly increase in costs of approximately $25 does not seem like much, but to those on fixed incomes, it means having to make some serious personal economic decisions. One can easily understand why resentment occurs when many of the proposed projects in this budget do not meet their needs or improve their lives.
On the other side of the coin, there are those groups that are screaming for more funds to provide social needs within our society, though they may only address the needs of specific social groups. They look to government for these funds because this is how our society has evolved over the last 60 years. At one time, they were more proficient in providing for themselves and others, but not now. And they become part of those costs of a complex society, which we as taxpayers pay for.
The real increase in cost in a budget, however, comes from the administration – the bureaucracy of municipal government. There is a natural tendency for a bureaucracy to expand with the undertaking of a new project or program. There is probably no kind way to explain this other than it is a way senior bureaucrats measure their importance – it is through the size of their budgets and fiefs (departments). With that mindset governing bureaucratic politics, the only control to expansion comes from council. But this is a difficult task when that administration controls the information that council sees.
So, how does council maintain this balance? There is little it can do about inflation, though it must recognize that not everyone’s income keeps pace with these rising costs. This means that while the cost of living goes up, many people's quality of life is diminishing. So, council should ask itself: are these projects and increased spending an efficient use of taxpayers’ money? Will these proposed projects truly improve the quality of life for all citizens, and not just a privileged few? It sounds like rational and judicious advice, but it is easily overlooked when all those other interests are promising you great things if you only pay them a little more.
John Kennair is an international consultant and doctor of laws who lives in St. Albert.
