Dear Editor
Over the Christmas holidays, the Saskatchewan Party delivered a lump of coal in many Saskatchewan residents’ stockings. Thanks to Brad Wall and his party’s inability to budget its way out of a wet paper bag, provincial government employees may be asked to dig deep into their pocketbooks to make up for the projected billion dollar deficit in the form of wage rollbacks. Instead of reviewing the hundreds of millions of dollars in tax cuts that Brad Wall so proudly touted at election time, he is going to leave all options open, including rolling back the hard-earned wages of provincial government employees.
Now, I know that there are some out there who think government employees are already overpaid, and I’m not going to argue that point. The fact of the matter is that the very people who work hard every single day to deliver the promises the Saskatchewan Party dared to put on the table during the election are the last people he should be asking to absorb the brunt of the financial mess those very promises created. The very first place he should be looking at is in his own cabinet, with the addition of three extra MLAs, corporate tax breaks and shady land deals for party supporters, there are many millions of dollars that Brad Wall could find if he just bothered to try.
Add to that the minimal savings that may be realized by the various health and education cuts, social services cuts and programming cuts announced over the past year, and you can quickly see where this party’s priorities lie.
Saskatchewan residents deserve to expect a minimum level of health, education and social service programs available for our most vulnerable. With that said, taking even one dime from the people that deliver those programs should be considered a slap in the face to all Saskatchewan residents, because it will most likely result in a reduction of service level from those employees.
While I commend Brad Wall for wanting to make the hard decisions that may not be publicly appealing, he needs to consider the corporations and entities that can truly absorb an additional financial burden in a weak economy.
Individuals are the last place he should be looking to, unless he wants those same individuals to remember these poor choices come next election.
Donald Neuls
Coppersands
