Saskatchewan has been hurting financially. Since the November announcement of the province’s $1 billion deficit—a figure that is more than two times what was expected in June—the province has been looking at an assortment of strategies to mitigate that tremendous shortfall.
Since resource revenues like potash and oil still aren’t doing so hot, the Sask. Party has been considering bringing out the metaphorical axe, and looking for places to make some …modifications…to where, how and how much it spends.
This is probably the best approach. When you’re facing a ballooning deficit with no end close at hand to many of the economic factors that have brought about the situation in which we’ve found ourselves, you don’t have many options to work with.
Spending cuts, hiring cutbacks and raising taxes are all on the table. Two of those three are going to be really, really unpopular. So work with what you’ve got, I say.
The provincial government, in its effort to find financial wiggle room, has already ruffled some feathers, as unions balk at the prospect of potential wage and hiring freezes, spending cuts and possible layoffs. As we’ve seen, there are plenty of people who are uncomfortable with the idea of fewer, larger school boards and health regions.
However, let’s be completely fair here. There are plenty of very reasonable places where the metaphorical spending fat can be trimmed with minimal pain and minimal disruption to the lives and livelihoods of public sector employees, whose jobs are vital to the prosperity and healthy functioning of our province’s many services.
Or, as finance minister Kevin Doherty more succinctly put it, programs that are only “nice to have” need to be cut.
People tend to see a metaphorical storm on the horizon when the government starts talking about reopening collective bargain agreements. Unions like the Saskatchewan Union of Nurses and the Service Employees International Union West are already up in arms, ready to fight tooth and nail to defend the agreements that are already in place. Freezes are harmful, and rollbacks will be chaotic. No argument there.
But, before the government and unions even get to that acrimonious point where they cross horns and enter the zero-sum game of negotiating the losses that “transformational change” will entail, there’s a faint metaphorical light on that horizon too, if you will.
Returning to the subject of Doherty’s “nice programs to have”-line, there are plenty of matters outside of messy union deliberations over wage and hiring freezes, that the government can do to trim the fat. There are plenty of “nice things,” of which we can divest ourselves, cynical as that sounds.
For example, a series of recommendations have been released by the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation, suggesting that the provincial government has plenty of latitude to get rid of non-union related programs that chew through government money, like fitness programs that allow public service employees in managerial positions to make expense claims for absurdly non-essential items, like sports equipment, gym memberships and fitness DVDs.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m comfortable with managers in the public service and Crown corporations needing to pull their socks up, and buy their own sneakers and curling pants.
The rest of us are able to get by well enough, by budgeting those kinds of things to our own discretionary out-of-pocket spending. Treating people to those kinds of frivolous luxuries on the government’s tab is no longer something Saskatchewan can afford to do for anyone.
I have no illusions about fitness and maintaining an active lifestyle being a pretty integral part of a person’s healthy functioning as a human being—never more so than after a vacation that entailed three straight weeks of booze, holiday food and a steadfastly sedentary lifestyle. But asking the government to subsidize that to you is, let’s face it, a privilege.
Why am I picking on managers and their nifty little fitness program, you ask? Because the frickin’ thing runs the provincial government a sum of money that falls just short of $2 million a year.
With Saskatchewan’s provincial deficit the way it is, and public debt that looks like it will hit $15.2 billion, any little contribution to whittling it down, by cutting back government spending, counts.
