Tuition, Prescriptions, and the Powers of Prediction.
October 15, 2007 | 05:22 PM
With this, the third day of the election, I like the focus on issues that have substance to them. Let’s face it - the only time politicians ever talk about substance is during elections. After that, any semblance of substance is quickly replaced with the need to maintain power or oppose it. I hope, as the campaign moves on, the problems which confront Saskatchewan in the areas of justice, education and inclusion become front and centre as well. If not, they will hinder our growth and the opportunities that present us all.
I admit, in all political campaigning there must be a “sexy” factor and these three platforms do present some allure to the status quo. But as I tell my kids daily not to wonder outside their geographical comfort zone, either alone or with friends, I wonder at what stage will this campaign earnestly tackle the reality in our two major cities, up north and in rural communities: crime, youth crime, petty crime, random crime and crime that exists because we (and I point the finger at our government bureaucracy) have turned our backs on our aboriginal citizens.
Tuition is a great catch, if parties believe those attending our post secondary schools will rush to the polls if thinking a check is in the mail. If there was a 2-4 at the polling station, maybe. Prescription drug policy will definitely attract the attention of those over the age of 50 and sagging at the heels (don’t worry, my turn is near) but I ask aloud, “what isn’t covered by the Family Benefit Drug Plan offered right now?” Lastly, the fact that we have to make accountability an election platform says enough about the accountability we have at present. I would like to ask David Karwacki why he wasn’t too concerned about accountability when federal Liberals were handing over thousands of taxpayer dollars across petit tables in Quebec City or why power wielding Saskatchewan Liberals thought it was okay to knife Linda Haverstock in the back. Sorry, as a former active Liberal, I don’t trust the party because it is still run by many who created all the problems years ago and since. David’s a nice guy, but the party has not changed.
So I guess I will have a “wait and see attitude” about a turning point needed in this election to wake us all up and start talking about reality apart from the view held by our campaigning folk who left the gate with those big wacky faux sunglasses on that have slighted their vision, on this, the third day of the campaign that really hasn’t taken off yet. Only time, and truth, will tell.
Comments: (1)
While I do agree that the parties involved in this election should be sticking to campaigning on their platforms, and not by slinging proverbial mud at others, you do bring up an interesting point whether you intended to or not. How do we get these groups to address the issues that they don't feel are important? We all have issues that are important to us, and as part of the constituency that you have mentioned a few times, it's important that we identify what our issues are, and ask questions about where the parties stand. It is important to research which party platform is the closest to what we value as important items. This decision should be completely separate from any preconceived notions of party allegiance. If there are no parties that are addressing your important points, bring them to the candidates. You are especially lucky having a public forum to express your ideas, and get them in the spotlight.
I am one of those individuals who you decided would be best attracted to the polls by the promise of copious amounts of alcohol at the polling stations. As a young voter, I have done my homework, and from that I have made my decision. Young voters are important, and should be encouraged to make educated decisions, and hold those who are elected accountable for the promises that they were elected upon. Trying to discount promises that attempt to line up with what young people want in this election simply because they target young people not only insults the intelligence of those individuals, but is pretty damaging to the credibility of anything you say after that.
You are right about accountability of a government. All governments should be accountable to those that put them in office; the voters. Anyone can talk to their MLA (or MP for that matter) and find out why that thing they promised during the election hasn't happened yet. After all we do pay for their wages and benefits, even if some of us are "uninterested alcoholic youths".
Posted October 17, 2007 12:01 AM