The B.C. Liberals downgraded the forest ministry this week, cutting its funding by $200 million over three years and dropping the once proud ministry from the list of those that are expected to help the province meet "tomorrow's needs."
The chop was justified in the name of efficiency, or "refocusing financial resources," as the budget documents put it.
But there was no mistaking that it reflected government disenchantment with the troubled forest sector as a source of provincial revenues.
Indeed, when Liberals were challenged on the cut, they pointed to the balance sheet.
Forest revenues are expected to bottom out at about $350 million in the financial year ending March 31, about a third of what the sector was providing as recently as three years ago.
Meanwhile, the forests ministry is still spending more than $600 million a year on operations, not including the cost of fighting forest fires. No longer could that level of expenditure be justified by the revenue returns, argued the Liberals.
"As the province enters a new decade it must ensure its financial resources are focused on those areas that reflect tomorrows needs," the budget documents declared.
Government was therefore "rationalizing" ministry budgets by $320 million over three years and directing the savings to other "priorities," including programs for families, youth, environment and the arts.
The target ministries included agriculture, energy, community development and transportation. But forestry took by far the biggest hit, accounting for about 60 per cent of the total.
"As the forest sector continues to dramatically transform itself to target new areas of economic viability, the province too must look to manage land and natural resources in a more efficient and effective manner," the budget continued, with appropriate nods to "administrative savings," "better coordination of front line services" and the like.
When reporters asked for details, they were directed to the relevant passage in the budget documents, which said ministry staffers "are currently working on plans for achieving these savings."
Presumably forests will sustain its share of layoffs under the Liberal plan to reduce overall government staffing by about 10 per cent or 3,500 positions over three years. But the Liberals have halted the long-standing practice of reporting staffing levels (and reductions) on a ministry by ministry basis.
Still, the ministry's own service plan, tabled along with the budget, gave some indication of where the axe (sorry) is intended to fall.
Forest management will get whacked the hardest, losing about a fifth of its budget or $60 million over three years. Compliance and enforcement loses a third or $8 million. Executive and support services are taking a $7-million hit and the Liberals eliminated $9 million from land management bureau.
The plan provided additional clues about the possible impact on ministry programs. For in line with the funding cuts, the Liberals have quietly changed most of the performance measures in forests.
Up to now, the ministry has reported annually on such things as its success in containing wildfires; whether it is doing enough to reforest the lands denuded by harvesting, fires and disease; and whether forest companies are maintaining a high level of compliance (95 per cent or thereabouts) with the forest practices code.
In the most recent year for which the ministry reported results (2008-09), it failed to achieve most of the targets. Most notably, it had to admit that it was reforesting only about three hectares of timberlands for every four that were lost.
The Liberals have eliminated the possibility of any further embarrassment over that record of underachievement by abandoning most of the performance measures.
The ministry will continue to report its success in meeting revenue targets. It could hardly do less, since those are scrutinized by the independent auditor-general.
But no longer will it measure its success in containing wildfires.
Instead of reporting the percentage of timberland that has been restocked on an annual basis, it will forecast the degree to which this year's reforestation activity is expected to boost timber supplies 65 years down the road. (Presuming any of us would be around to know whether such a forecast is borne out.)
Instead of reporting industry compliance with the code, the ministry will try to make sure that at least 70 per cent of the timber harvest meets international standards for sustainable forestry.
The government added a requirement for the ministry to report annually on the number of communities and first nations that have signed timber-sharing agreements.
And in keeping with Liberal concerns about the revenue stream, the ministry has also been directed to survey forest companies and other stakeholders on whether the government is "supporting a competitive operating environment."
Less precision, less rigour, less attention to the details of stewardship on a public resource. No wonder the Liberals figure the ministry can make do with fewer public servants, particularly in any watchdog capacity.
----------
Digital Edition Tip-of-the-week: The Digital Edition offers a service called "My Monitors". It is a way for us to notify you when a topic you are interested in has appeared in the Newspaper. Visit our Digital Edition for more information.
