By now, we taxpayers have become used to government, at all levels, stealing from Peter to pay Paul.
We taxpayers go by many names, mostly intertwined with the word "sucker".
And forming arms-length committees made up of special appointees that control our lives, all under the guise of protecting us. Because, you know, we taxpayers need to be protected. Yeah right, but moreso is the hidden agenda to have us all
conform to their rules and machinations.
Springing to mind is the
Canadian Radio and Television Commission (CRTC) who guide application and content (but won't do anything to prevent
Telus' gouging of customers for everything from the highest cellphone costs in the world, to their landline monopoly, "because there
are competitors/options").
There's the
B.C. Utilities Commission, another arms-length appointed committee which "protects consumers" with its mandate to regulate the province's natural gas and electricity utilities, intra-provincial pipelines and universal compulsory automobile insurance (but who apparently have no appetite to stem Hydro's and
ICBC's gouging of customers).
Same thing locally too.
We have the
Okanagan Basin Water Board, yet another arms-length appointed committee whose mandate it is to "provide leadership on water issues". Yeah right. That leadership now encompasses their awarding of grants
from the provincial government
to local governments (
our tax money), all of which has led to requirements to conform while we lose the ability to make local decisions, by electing (or un-electing) them on water issues.
The Coldstream Acreage Owners' Association need only look back to last year's "rezoning attempt" by the District of Coldstream, under the guise of acting on recommendations from their Agriculture Committee to see the effect of unelected and appointed-by-government committees.
The common thread among all these committees--indeed even
who comprises the committees--is that these groups are out of reach of the everyday taxpayer's ability to control--by electing or not electing them--if we don't agree with their positions.
From the outside--the only vantage point a taxpayer has--these steering committees and organizations create another level of bureaucracy. And they're not magnanimous...they don't work for free, despite claims of being a not-for-profit "society".
Taxpayer dollars are needed for their offices, computers, staff, meeting expenses, etc.
And if not already, soon will be, via grants and other government-operating
disbursements.
So it comes as no surprise that the birth of yet another British Columbia bureaucracy was heralded without the normal screams of a newborn infant.
But a birth it was, proven by its accompanying paperwork.
Yup...paperwork announcing who/what must comply.
And who will pay.
At first glance, taxpayers might be tempted to say "and so it should be!"
But think again...we paid
before the new rules, and it's us who will continue to pay
after the new rules are implemented, so it's one more exercise in semantics.
From yet another appointed arms-length government bureaucracy.
Judge for yourself by the statement:
"British Columbia is transitioning responsibility for end-of-life
management of packaging and printed paper (PPP)
from governments and
their taxpayers
to industry and
their consumers."
"Their consumers".
Isn't that
us?
Yup.
Eyes glazed over yet?
Stay with me for the rest because, as it turns out, you and I are not paying
enough.
We taxpayers
already pay fees for recycling/deposit/environmental disposal costs when we purchase everything from paint, to tires, to liquor.
Now
retail stores, where you and I shop, must submit a stewardship plan on their recycling stream. And yup, any added costs to the retailer will have to be passed on to the consumer because (gasp!) retailers are for-profit entities.
But we're already paying for recycling and garbage dump costs.
So will we now have to pay an environmental waste deposit at the retailer for that newspaper and magazine we purchase?
For the over-packaging that makes a 10 centimeter battery sold in a 30 centimeter by 15 centimeter package, replete with bulging blister pack mysteriously conjoined with its cardboard hanging-enabler?
For the hefty cardboard boxes in which bananas are transported bruise-free from Chile?
Yup.
But we all (indirectly) already pay for those "overhead" retailer costs, you say.
Yes, but it's still not enough!
Think of the old PST system (to which B.C. is returning on April 1st, 2013), where every time, for example, that a used golf ball is sold, and then recovered from the pond and resold, it "attracted" provincial sales tax of 7 per cent. Let's say that used golf ball was sold for one dollar. Every time it was "recovered" and resold, the provincial government received seven cents. Imagine it being sold over and over again after over and over recovery and you'll see
cumulative fees.
One thing's for sure, by the end of that golf ball's working life, it has garnered government (and their appointed not-for-profit agencies and commissions)
more in taxes than the item was worth.
So, witness the birth of Multi Material B.C., whose
32 page plan explains the process.
They've already written letters to retailers on government letterhead, demanding compliance with B.C. government rules that all producers of PPP (packaging and printed paper) are required to submit a stewardship plan to
outline how retailers collect, recycle and recover PPPs.
Not just paper...
"Paper or plastic carry-out bags provided at checkout;
- Bags filled at the shelves with bulk goods, produce, baked goods, etc.;
- Disposable plates and cups;
- Take-out and home delivery food service packaging such as pizza boxes, cups, bags, folded cartons, wraps, trays etc.;
- Flower box/wrap;
- Food wraps provided by the grocer for meats, fish, cheese, etc.
- Prescription bottles filled and provided by pharmacists;
- Paper envelopes for developed photographs;
- Gift wrapping/tissue paper added by the retailer"...and the list goes on.
And, you guessed it.
Consumers will pay more, and government gets your money: "...
will offer a financial incentive to a local government or First Nation government..."
from page 10 of 32 here:
Interestingly, the MMBC website provides
a discussion blog with questions from interested parties here on the right side of the page.
"So far, nobody's asked if the government has gone into business with the Mafia," smiles Kia.
Oh yes, they have...at least
in a Toronto newspaper.
And
here.
