One supposes it’s better than the 1980s when Saskatchewan politicians tried to buy us with our own tax dollars.
But there wasn’t much in either the Saskatchewan Party or NDP platforms for rural voters … or any voters, for that matter.
Both major parties released their platforms at the end of the campaign’s second week. And to suggest both were light in content would be an understatement.
The best news for rural voters is the Sask. Party commitment to an extra $70 million for highways spending.
The problem is that it might not be as good as it appears.
As a portion of $842-million total capital, and maintenance/repair highway spending introduced in last year’s 2015-16 budget, this is a mere eight-per-cent increase.
Maybe that’s nothing to sneeze at in today’s world of austerity — in fact, some might see as pretty substantial bone the Sask. Party is throwing to its rural base.
But another big problem for rural voters right now is so much of the Premier Brad Wall’s highways spending is being eaten up by things like $1.9 billion Regina by-pass that mostly benefit urban traffic.
As for the roads many rural travel, it remains to be seen how much will be done for them.
Sadly, “it remains to be seen” seems a big theme of this campaign.
In the case of NDP leader Cam Broten, “it remains to be seen” whether he will seen in rural Saskatchewan.
In fairness to the NDP leader, many things his party is proposing in its platform — certainly, the more extensive platform — might benefit both rural and urban people.
Promising the lowest-in-Canada utilities bundle — the old promise under Lorne Calvert’s NDP government — is clearly something beneficial to all Saskatchewan voters.
And Wall’s contention that this will cost $595 million seems questionable, given that’s about the annual profits made by all the Crown corporations put together.
Similarly, who can argue that hiring more nurses, teachers or even social workers is a bad thing?
And, certainly, most everyone would agree that it was bad to be wasting money on the government’s Japanese lean health care saving model, the Global Transportation Hub land purchases or Regina by-pass.
That said, the NDP notion that they are going to pay for things like their utility rate subsidies by cutting Crown corporation management and waste, the number of consultants and the bad investment decisions is pretty suspect.
You can’t base your spending decisions by pretending you are saving money by no longer spending on things that aren’t in the budget anymore.
And in the case of lean or past questionable spending decisions of the Sask. Party government, this spending is over and done with.
Moreover, the NDP’s emphasis on massive savings by ending waste and mismanagement implies that an NDP government would never make bad spending choices.
This would be great, but Saskatchewan taxpayers’ experiences with past NDP governments on messes like Spudco and lost money in U.S. investments certainly suggest otherwise.
That said, the NDP platform at least touches on a broader selection of issues than Wall and Sask. Party.
Credit Wall for challenging the status quo with things like private liquor stores and CT/MRI scans.
But breaks on education property taxes for seniors or offering graduates help in buying their first home after you have already offered incentives for them to stay with tax breaks on their education doesn’t really help build Saskatchewan’s economy.
What seems even more puzzling, however, is the admission in the Sask. Party platform that it can’t even consider a nest egg us until oil again tops $75 a barrel.
This doesn’t offer a whole of lot of hope for voters.
There again, neither major party platform is especially inspiring.
Murray Mandryk has been covering provincial politics for over 22 years.
