. . and I'll wait until budget day before rendering a verdict, but to date things are not looking good for the current provincial government.
I think it is encumbent upon every government to look at all spending in all areas and to look for efficiencies. Some of the examination may be unpleasant and unpopular. After examination it may come to light that it is time to let some things go or to find a more cost effective method to offer the service.
Having said this, if the government decides cancel certain health or education services with a proven benefit to those utilizing them, while at the same time funding mega capital projects, I think they will find the public thinks its time to let them go.
I hope for both the public and Premier Wall's sake, that human services trump bricks and mortar. Otherwise Link will be getting outfitted for a premier's wardrobe.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Yup.. If you cut health and education and build a huge stadium while we're in a deficit, you are not a prudent steward of public money. Maybe back when we were swimming in money the stadium would have been a slam-dunk but right now with the cutbacks that are occurring, a good portion of the province will not be happy with the stadium getting funding.
ReplyDeleteThen again, this is a case where I think Wall is blinded. He's a huge Rider's fan and I'm guessing he'll bulldoze over all concerns to get his palace built. I guess we'll see.
It is hard to imagine any fiscal conservative supporting the Saskatchewan party after the second biggest deficit in the provinces history and nothing to show for it. Seems like Mandryk is correct in calling this government incompetent.
ReplyDeleteWell I agree with you on a practical level Mistress, I think your point highlights a huge flaw in the voting public. It is understandable that certain groups of people who see a service they use cut would be upset, it is preposterous that people allow single issues to dictate their votes. I know it happens, but honestly if bricks and mortar are the best option long term for the province should it not be considered?
ReplyDeleteJust a year ago we were a province on the rise, while the economy has temporarily set us back we are still in a prime position moving forward and our budget should reflect the long term benefit of the province rather than continually funding programs that have run their course simply to appease a select group of voters.
What bothers me regarding the discussions about a 0% budget increase it that people don't take into account the increased dollars this government put into all areas in the past year. Whether in infrastructure/health or education. And when will we stop equating one time capital cost with those of the on going operating budgets of labour/services. The sooner the public realizes this the better.
ReplyDeleteAs for reducing services I believe it was the NDP that removed any sense of an "equal for all" publicly funded health system when they raised my deductible on medication to numbers I could never reach unless I was dying. So if things such as Chiropractic services become a fee for service it won't be a pain in the neck for me. And if it makes my wallet a little lighter and thinner my back might even thank them.
You title this posting"The Jury is still out". Given the continued mismangment of this government the jury may well have already spoken. How stupid do you think we voters are? Its appalling to learn this Government is seriously considering some very high cost capital projects while at the same time cutting health and education budgets. And by the way, as a result of their mismanagement we may now owe the Potash companies money!! I am not a fan of Lingenfelter's but Ill welcome him in with open arms next elction..These guys have had a chance & they have blown it!!
ReplyDelete