Given that Ujjal Dosanjh has conceded the election, it's time to look ahead and ponder the proposed tax cuts by the Liberals. The election rhetoric from the "tax cuts = the apocalypse" crowd needs a rebuke. It would be appropriate to start with the outgoing government's record on the issue.

After boosting taxes in the early and mid-1990s, the late 1990s saw New Democrats cut small business taxes, raise the threshold for the corporate capital tax, and up film tax credits and oil and gas exploration tax credits - all positive moves. And the justification for such tax relief was that it would spur investment in British Columbia.

On personal income tax, between 1998 and 2001, the NDP cut taxes by 12.3 percent for a $80,000 single income earner - a $1,053 tax cut. Taxes were cut by 12.4 percent for a single income of $25,000 - a $169 tax cut. A two-income family of four at $90,000 saw a 10.9 percent reduction in their provincial income tax, or $734 more in their pockets, while a senior couple at $30,000 saw a 39.2 percent reduction - or $262.

Is it odd that NDP tax cuts, in real dollars, benefited high-income earners more than low-income British Columbians Not really. High-income earners pay a greater share of taxes to begin with. It stands to reason that when governments cut taxes (oh Lord that it were more often), the dollar amounts of tax cuts are greater for those who earn more.

Given that record, it is disingenuous of New Democrats to argue that tax cuts were spawned in hell whereas more government spending - their position during the election - is heavenly. And it also makes no budgetary sense. Last year, the government forecast expenditures at $22.3 billion (and overshot that) and plans to spend $24.3 billion this year - a $2 billion increase in one year in planned spending. Given the relative inefficiency of government spending vis-à-vis private sector expenditures, it is the extra $2 billion in spending that is "reckless," not tax cuts which were completely absent from the last provincial budget.

Can the Liberals be criticized for their tax cut plan Yes, but not for the reason the outgoing Premier asserts. The Liberals' instinct on tax cuts - we need them soon and in large doses - is correct, but too narrow in scope.

By 2004, British Columbia business taxes will be almost double those of Alberta on most scales (small and general rates) and seriously out of whack with Ontario. In addition, businesses in BC are subject to a corporate capital tax that taxes assets, not profits. On the personal side, BC's marginal tax rate is nine points above Alberta and over two points above Ontario. The Liberals need to expand their tax cut plan and do so without apology.

UBC professor Maurice Levi argues that tax cuts will help British Columbia quicker than might otherwise be the case, given our position, sandwiched between low-tax Alberta and Washington state. Our ability to retain and then attract entrepreneurial talent is contingent in part on competitive tax rates. The U.S. federal reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, speaking about U.S. surpluses, recently argued that at this point in the economic cycle, tax cuts were preferable to new and higher spending.

With the exception of two years, the outgoing government tried to spend B.C. into prosperity. That has now put us into an almost have-not state, with a smaller economy than Alberta's (odd as that is given our advantage in terms of many more resources), and declining real income.

More government spending for its own sake did not boost BC's economy over the past decade, and those who argue otherwise seemed inclined to ignore real economic data. Their ideological rhetoric should be placed on the ash heap along with the outgoing government.