Custom Search
Top Stories
Go to Site Index See "Top Stories" main page
NEWS RELEASE · 6th September 2011
BC Liberal Caucus
Adrian Dix spent the Labour Day weekend sidestepping reporters’ questions about his stance on the BC Teacher’s Federation job action.

“British Columbians deserve answers from the Leader of the Opposition,” says Education Minister George Abbott. “It’s no secret that big labour – including the BCTF – are major partners of the NDP, but to flat-out refuse to answer basic questions about what the NDP would do with the BCTF negotiations is disrespectful to parents, students and teachers.”

There are four simple questions for Adrian Dix to answer:

1. Does he believe that the BCTF should be given a substantial raise during this time of economic uncertainty?

2. Would Adrian Dix cut existing programs or raise taxes to pay the estimated $2 billion cost of the BCTF demands?

3. With nearly all other public sector unions having signed net-zero contracts, would Adrian Dix renegotiate those contracts as well to offer the same raises and benefits demanded by the BCTF?

4. Does Adrian Dix agree with his Kamloops-North Thompson BC NDP candidate who is calling for substantial increases to the BCTF contract?

“Adrian Dix is the leader of the opposition,” says Abbott. “He needs to be up-front about what his union-friendly policies will mean to ordinary British Columbians. Will it be reduced services, or higher taxes?”
Comment by les watmough on 12th September 2011
I have met Dix and to sygest he is afraid of anything is absured. Abbot ,first off, dosent not give a tinkers what Dix thinks or what Dix MIGHT do-- That question is irrelevant. Where did the pay raise nunberas come from? the Fraser institue? Negotiations are takeing place THERE ARE NO NUMBERS Abbott shoud give them(the teachers)the 30 percent that they gave their deputy ministers HA
les watmouugh
Mr. Dix has answered these questions
Comment by LW on 8th September 2011
It should be noted that Mr. Dix did answer these questions when he accepted the invitation to speak to teachers at a summer conference last month. Interestingly though, no Liberals chose to accept the BCTF's invitation to attend...
Maybe this has something to do with it.
Comment by Pevans on 6th September 2011
I've never been a member of a union (but I did try to start one once), so I'm not big on the more rabid versions. I do find I have a kind of resonance with this article though:
No money but let's negotiate?
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 6th September 2011
The whole negotiation is a sham because the government holds all the cards. They decide how much money, if any, is on the table and then negotiations are to take place? It is therefore necessary for them to deflect attention away from how they stacked the deck and how they determined and precipitated the BCTF reaction. It is a pretty lame maneuver and George knows better. Alas he is caught between the truth and political spin.
A few questions for Abbott and the BC Liberals
Comment by Karen on 6th September 2011
It is no secret that big business are major partners and beneficiaries of the BC Liberals and it appears to be standard policy for the party to offer unsubstantiated excuses and platitudes for the favoritism given to corporate entities. I would like the BC Liberals to answer four simple questions:

1) Did the BC Liberals feel it was necessary to give lower and lower corporate tax rates to big business when there was no indication that the cuts made any difference in investment to the province or jobs? Especially when they continued to kowtow to business interests during times of economic uncertainty?

2) How many cuts to were made to social services, including essential services, to pay for the approximately $300 million (plus) in lost revenue realized by the corporate tax cuts?

3) Considering the public has had to cover lost revenue, for those corporate tax breaks and hundreds of millions more dollars in industry subsidies, with escalating user costs, additional taxes and slashed social services, is the BC Liberal party willing to go after their friends to recoup some of that lost revenue?

4) Does George Abbott still agree with his party that Corporate taxes should be reduced to 'zero' despite reports from respected think-tanks and universities that reducing corporate taxes does little to improve the economic position of a state?

George Abbott has used the socialist card as a derogatory term against Dix but here he is trying to gain favour with the public using the same arguement. What a hypocrite! What will it be George, more corporate favoritism or a government social system that isn't an embarrasement on the national stage?