That’s because the Manitoba government, which announced its budget yesterday, is hiking cigarette taxes yet again, by a penny per stick, to make sure the province can stay in the black. OK, the cigarette tax isn’t the most significant part of the story — I just wanted my friends in my former hometown to chuckle when they read that lede — what is important though is that Gary Doer’s government is projecting a $48 million surplus in 2009-2010, due in part to that increase in cigarette prices. Not bad considering how many times we’ve heard the word “deficit” from other premiers and politicians over the last few months.

However, just because Manitoba is making money doesn’t meant it’s resting on its laurels. Doer announced that the government will reduce its debt payments to $20 million this year, as opposed to $110 million in 2008.

The NDPers  are also taking $110 million from the province’s rainy-day fund to make sure money for health care and education services stays topped up. (That’s in addition to the $98 million they’ve already taken from the $818 million fund.)

Like other provinces, Doer is increasing infrastructure spending to $1.6 billion — a $625 million increase over 2008 — to keep the economy moving and jobs flowing.

Overall, it’s a relatively safe budget, but one Manitoba should be proud of. It should be noted that while it’s important the province is drawing from its emergency fund and has upped capital investments, it really isn’t feeling the effects of the economic downturn. Unemployment in February was 4.8% (the national average is 7.7%), most houses are selling above asking price and retail sales only dropped a half a percent, compared to 5% across the country. A big reason for the province’s success is that they don’t have a stake in oil and gas or manufacturing industries like Alberta and Ontario, respectively.

Of course,  Manitoba doesn’t grow as quickly during boom times for that same reason (to put it in investing terms, think of the province as a balanced mutual fund, whereas Alberta would be an aggressive equity portfolio), but right now, when beleagured Ontario is about to release its fiscal plans for the years ahead, an even keel economic climate — and a safe budget — is exactly what Canadians in other jurisdicitons wish they could have too.

There’s Rob Carrick and Derek DeCloet at the front. Here’s Ellen Roseman walking down the hallway. It would be a great setting for noshing but I need to have my piece posted to the CBO website as soon as the lock-up ends.

The majorty of the journalists are in one big, cavernous room. It is quite grand. On either side stand four majestic Corinthian-like columns reaching up about 40 feet to a cathedral ceiling. Spoiling the effect slightly is the huge wrought-iron clock perched above the main entrance: its heavy hands remain motionless at 11:50 for the entire duration of the lock-up .

Also on the wall of the big, cavernous meeting room are several enclosed balconies where language translators sit whenever there is an international meeting in session. Today, the booths are occupied by security personnel, peering through binoculars at the sea of journalists below.

Yes, the 2009 budget was half leaked before the budget lock-up — yet security was as tight as ever. Dozens of uniformed security guards were stationed everywhere, in the halls and by the exit doors (when they say lock-up, they mean there is absolutely no chance of getting out this place until 4PM). I’m always reminded of National Post reporter Siri Agrell’s account of her attempt to escape early (reprinted below).

My first time to the budget lock-up, in 2007, I ended up sitting at tables and standing in line next to various ribald group of journalists. There was none of that this time. Maybe it was the less-spacious setting that required sitting and standing closer together, within earshot of too many people? (No, Alan, the journalists weren’t sweaty). Or was it those security guards peeking at us through the field glasses?

Siri Agrell’s escape attempt from the 2004 budget lock-up

2 p.m. Attempt to leave through the smokers’ patio, guarded by two female security guards. Reporter: “If I run, will you chase me?” Security guard #1: “Yup.” Reporter: “I have high heels on, so I guess you’d probably catch me, huh?” Security guard #2: “Maybe not, I have heels on, too.” 

2:15 p.m. Attempt to exit through rear loading door, guarded by two male security guards. Security guard #1: “Where are you going?” Reporter: “I’m trying to leave.” Guard #1: “You can’t leave.” Reporter: “What if I give you $20?” Guard #1: “Not going to do it.” Reporter: “$50?” Guard #1: “If I have to stay, you have to stay.” Reporter: “What if I make a break for it, do you think you could catch me?” Guard #2: “You have to get past me, too. Reporter: Would you arrest me if I try and escape?” Guard #2: “Worse, we’ll put you back in there.” 

2:45 p.m. Attempt to exit through side door, near food service, posted with three security guards. Reporter: “I’m trying to escape, are you going to stop me?” Guard #1: “I think the three of us could probably stop you.” Reporter (as food cart is wheeled past): “What if I hid under one of those carts?” Guard #3: “Then you’d be trapped in the kitchen.” Reporter: “That might be better.” 

3 p.m. Attempt to negotiate with the head of security. Reporter: “I’m trying to escape, think it’s going to happen?” Head of security: “Probably not.” Reporter: “How many guards you got around here?” Head of security: “35-ish.” Reporter: “Has anybody tried to escape before?” Head of security: “No.” Reporter: “Really?” Head of security: “Why would they? The reading material is riveting, the company’s excellent and the food is great.” Reporter: “Are you being sarcastic?” Head of security: No reply. Reporter: “Seriously, would you chase me?” Head of security: “No, but the snipers would probably getcha.”

The Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation is to be strengthened (increased borrowing capacity plus a bridge-financing facility) to enable it to respond more effectively in the event a member institution becomes insolvent. The government also “proposes to designate tax free saving accounts (TFSAs) as a separate category of deposits insurable by the CDIC.” I thought they already were, but this sentence in the budget document suggests they weren’t.

The federal government intends to push forward with a national securities regulator. One step is to fund an office to assist with the transition. Another is to table securities legislation based on the recommendations of the Hockin panel, for willing provinces.

There are some new measures to help consumers of financial products. Specifically, the government plans to strengthen disclosure requirements for credit-card issuers. Grace periods to pay off credit-card balances are to be subjected to a minimum requirement. Mortgage insurance provided by banks is to be made more transparent and affordable.

A task force on financial literacy is to be struck, to make recommendations to the Minister of Finance on a cohesive national strategy for financial literacy. To launch in the spring, representatives will be selected from the business, educational, volunteer, and academic communities. Maybe they’ll pick one or two of Canada’s financial bloggers. They’re doing a fine job already contributing to financial literacy. Thousands of Canadians turn every day for illumination and guidance to bloggers like Canadian Capitalist, Michael James on Money, Canadian Personal Finance, Where does all my money go, and Canadian Financial DIY.

Sometimes there is nothing to be done but other times a bit of knowledge can lessen the blow. Traffic tickets are one such case. I know because I just got back from traffic court after representing someone who had two traffic violations.

You learn a lot going through the system. For example, about a quarter of the people in the court room had their charges dismissed because the police officer did not show up.

Also, before going to traffic court, one might get the charges reduced through a plea bargain. In Ontario, you can call the traffic court and request a “first attendance meeting” with the prosecutor. After hearing your story, they may then reduce the fine — or if you had two or more violations, they may withdraw one if you plead guilty to another.

Plea bargaining occurs on the day of the trial as well. It occurs during the recess called after attendance is taken and the cases represented by agents (none went to trial as they had either reached a plea bargain or were dismissed due to the officer’s failure to show). During the recess the prosecutor and their assistant meet with defendants and often agree to plea bargains.

Prior to trial, one is entitled to request disclosure of the evidence the prosecution intends to present, including the officer’s notes. That’s because you or your agent are allowed to cross-examine the officer at the trial and can use that disclosure to prepare your questions. It’s good to do this in case you don’t get a plea bargain during the recess and have to carry through to trial (or if you want to fight it all the way).

In Ontario, they actually have a form available from the court to request disclosure. If the prosecutor fails to provide disclosure on time (e.g. officer does not forward notes), it may be grounds for dismal, postponement, or a good plea bargain.

One can hire those services that fight tickets, like Pointts or XCopper, but they charge $250 to $500 in Ontario. It seems to me the most they do is just what is outlined above. They know how the system works. Very few of the cases actually go to trial as far as I could see from my visit. Most are settled out of court or the officer does not show up and it’s dismissed. If you have been issued a ticket or two, and know your options, you probably don’t need them.