Provincial Budget 2011 and spring NDP game plan

Today's Free Press story on the budget had three interesting bits. Two being related to revised budget estimates and the third being the date of the budget.  I've crunched a bit of numbers.

Budget 2010 predicted:
Total Revenue Estimate: 12,719,614,000Total Expenditure Estimates: 13,264,179
Resulting in a deficit of::  544,565,000

Rosann Wowchuk announced today that expenses were an extra $233,000,000 but revenues were also up $287,000,000.

So for 2010 actual that makes
Total Revenues 13,006,614,000
Total Expenses 13,497,179,000
The revised Budget deficit at: 490,565,000

This means that the operating deficit is being reduced to 54 million, or by 9%. Meaning estimates were 1.75% off on expenditures and 2.26% off on revenues. I don't know if this is within normal ranges but being off by 2% seems reasonable.

However, what is interesting for me is the explanations given for increases in expenditures. The first set of issues fingered as responsible for increase in costs the "2010 flood, forest fires and preparations for a potentially serious 2011 flood" seem to make sense. It's difficult to accurately predict exactly the severity of natural disasters.

 Where it gets more interesting its the second part: "Other increased costs came in health care, public safety and 'support for families'."  Makes this list interesting is the ambiguity of "support for families." Could this ambiguous "support for families" be tied to the education grants issue raised by Dan Lett in yesterday's Free Press. I guess we will know once the budget is tabled.

A second interesting bit on the revised estimate is the source of additional revenues. The government cites them as coming from "$160 million in personal income taxes and $70 million more in corporate income taxes." They don't mention if this is a result of a more vibrant economy or due to the success of their stimulus package from last year, they also don't mention or do the calculations for the reduced deficit. I find this odd, I would of thought given that the planned deficit was being reduced they would of spun it as their economic plan at work.

Also the date is curious, given that we're being told by the Premier, almost on a daily basis,  to expect and prepare for a big flood this spring. So you'd figure he'd be busy with the flood at that point, right? The date of the budget allows me to indulge in one of my favorite pastimes of political speculation.

Here is my outline of the NDP's spring game plan leading up to the fall election:

Step 1: Have Seligner at forefront of flood preparation and raise expectations for big flood. Selinger needs to be at forefront to try and raise personal numbers (a -4 rating and 28% undecided there is lots of potential to move).
Step 2: Announce a slightly reduced deficit today, but not really. Just say expenses went up but revenues went up by more. Make sure to create as little expectation as possible.
Step 3: Have flood come (a big one but not too big to overtake preparations but big enough to justify all measures taken). Make sure to market it as a success of all the preparations this spring and Selinger's and the NDP's leadership.
Step 4: Just as all the flood preparations are saving the province from a bad case of flooding, release a budget with an even smaller deficit. Trumpet expanded revenues as a result of last year's stimulus package working even better than anticipated.

Come out of April looking like the guy who's in charge and gets things done. Enter in the summer pre-writ period in solid shape.