Premier Ujjal Dosanjh's recent announcement that the government will bring in balanced budget legislation (legislation, as opposed to actual balanced budgets) was greeted with justified eye-rolling, mockery, and hoots of derision by the official opposition and BC's media: Better late than never to acknowledge basic arithmetic.

Predictably, the Premier will not have to convince British Columbians or other Canadians about the virtues of balanced budget laws. (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick all have some variation of the concept in place.) He will instead have to convince some members of his own caucus, party, and allies, who are still groovin' to old 60s and 70s tax, tax, and spend mantras.

The usual arguments about the sky falling in if politicians are forced to live within taxpayers' means are employed by those opposed to any fiscal discipline. "Balance budgets and health care and education will suffer" goes the refrain.

Oh, please. One can disagree over how much should be spent on various programs or whether some ministries (like the Orwellian Ministry of Cooperation and Volunteers or whatever it is called) should even exist. But get beyond the debate over what is the "right" amount to spend, and you always fight over a smaller pie when a growing piece of the budget goes to debt interest. BC's last decade is a case in point.

It was not some right-wing government that doubled this province's debt over the past nine years (in good and bad economic times,) and thus channeled more taxpayer cash to debt interest instead of healthcare and education, or heaven forbid - tax cuts. Nor was it Mike Harris or Ralph Klein who sat on their hands around a cabinet table while the fast ferries, Forest Renewal British Columbia, and the new SkyTrain addition were all cooked up without anything so basic as a business plan. The end result of each of those fiscal incompetencies is costing taxpayers a small fortune.

Fact is, balanced budgets are not ideologically left or right. Conservatives in Saskatchewan, Alberta and Ottawa (and the NDP in Ontario and BC and the Liberals in Ottawa) ran up the various debts. The NDP in Saskatchewan, the Conservatives in Alberta, and the Liberals in Ottawa balanced the books and began paying it back. (Ontario Tories continued running deficits and are now paying down debt. At least taxpayers there received tax cuts while the deficit was prolonged. All BCers received was multiple boondoggles.)

Even those in favour of balanced budgets may argue that a law is superfluous: Either a government will balance the books or they won't. Well, that could be said for any law that binds governments. Truth in accounting legislation or even conflict of interest laws could both be deemed unnecessary. After all, if MLAs choose to voluntary practice disclosure and handle public money carefully and honestly - why have a law

Balanced budget laws force politicians to live within taxpayer's means and to make choices sooner rather than later. After all, if a government cannot balance a budget within at least a three-year cycle, it is a sign that the politicians in charge are putting off difficult choices in favour of higher debt and taxes for one's kids.

Given this government's record, the Premier deserved the skepticism over the yet-to-be-seen balanced budget legislation, but some of his party deserved it more for their reaction.