It’s always interesting to watch people try and twist what we at the Canadian Taxpayers Federation do, in order to create some sort of boogeyman to attack.

The latest effort comes from a former Vancouver City Councillor, Gordon Price, who blogged a bizarre and inaccurate rant against me, the CTF, and anyone who dares to want to hold property tax increases to the rate of inflation (I guess that includes Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts, judging by her budget numbers).

It is full of inaccuracies and false assumptions about the CTF and my own views on property taxes. So let’s do a little Price rollback:

Price says: “As municipal budgetary deadlines approach, expect to hear a lot from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation – in particular, spokesperson Jordan Bateman, an ex-Langley Township councillor whose profession is now the de-legitimization of government through a relentless attack on taxes.”

The truth: I suspect I will be interviewed quite a bit about property tax increases, as it is an issue of great concern to many families and seniors across the Province. But neither the CTF nor myself look to “de-legitimize” government—we identify pockets of government waste at all levels, highlight alternative plans, do research and put issues on to taxpayers’ radar. Government is something a civilized society must have, but it works best when held accountable—not when given carte blanche to tax and spend as they see fit.

Price says: “The CTF position: municipal budgets should not go up beyond the rate of inflation.  Which means, essentially, no increase in the provision of ‘public goods’ – those services and structures which we fund collectively – and over time, a diminishment in the role and presence of government in our lives, accompanied by the assumption that the private sector can do it better.”

The truth: I have never said that it’s inflation or bust. But I do strongly believe that any increase or project that carries the tax burden above the rate of inflation should be subject to a public referendum or significant consultation process to ensure the taxpayers are on board. This comes partly from my own personal political experiences in Langley, where we made decisions on public safety that should have been vetted by the public through referendum, to ensure they were on board for the collective good we perceived the community needed. If these collective goods Price writes about are so wonderful, there should be no problem having them stand up to the scrutiny of democracy.

That said, the CTF (and I) believe that government should NOT have a central role in our lives. But that does not mean government should have NO role.

Price says: “Trout Lake followed Sunset, and Creekside, and Hillcrest, and Kensington – each a stunning addition, immediately embraced by the surrounding community – the people who pay for them.  Happily.  Because they got something so tangibly better for the additional dollars they were taxed.”

The truth: Then these series of buildings (if they truly are the cause of tax increases beyond inflation—and not raises for staffers) should have had no problem sailing through a referendum.

Price says: “What Jordan implies, of course, is that because they are collective goods, not provided by the private-sector, they are somehow illegitimate or excessive.  And he’s probably right: these community centres could have been done cheaper, or not at all.  After all, do we really need them?”

The truth: Find me somewhere I’ve ever said anything like that. I never have—and I’ve written literally millions of words on public affairs over the past 16 years. But to turn a blind eye to overregulation and waste within government is a terrible recipe for abuse of power. Thank goodness for the CTF, the press, whistleblowers, and for intelligent, honest citizens who keep an eye on politicians and government workers at all levels.

Price says: “What Jordan and the CTF don’t want to acknowledge is the collective benefits that result from the way Canadians are prepared to tax themselves – the benefits which often cannot be measured, at least in dollars.”

The truth: Great. Prove it by a referendum, not a lengthy blog post. Imagine a regular online or phone vote on priorities—it wouldn’t have to be costly, and it would better connect taxpayers to city hall, allowing all citizens to give their input.

Price says: “The U.S. has had 40 years of people like Jordan repeating the mantra of ’No More Taxes,’  of private-sector superiority, of de-regulation.  They have levered the inefficiences (sic) of government and resentment of its employees to support a generalized attack in order to constrain and de-fund government at every opportunity.  And the consequences are now evident: profound and rising inequality.  Not, I think, a coincidence.”

The truth: And Europe is chock full of countries that have gone the other way, expecting government to provide absolutely everything for them—and there are massive debts, riots, incredible distress and quite possible complete collapse. That’s why the CTF doesn’t propose tax freezes or cuts at the municipal level—just the rate of inflation, with public votes on going beyond that.

I believe in balancing priorities, in making the best possible use of every tax dollar, in helping stretched-thin taxpayers make ends meet, and in holding government to account for what they spend.

Price is generally a smart guy, and the poor research in this rant is beneath his usual standards. I’m perfectly fine having philosophical differences with him on issues—but he should at least present my opinions fairly.