A lot of that depends on how the Sask Party handles themselves during their term. Until this point, Brad Wall has spent his political career in opposition to the government and it is going to be interesting to see how he moves into a leadership role.

I don’t know if the people of Saskatchewan are looking for a new direction or if they just think it’s time to mix things up, but either way, they have decided to give the Sask Party a chance to prove themselves.

When it’s all said and done though, I think that the people of Saskatchewan have a lot to be optimistic about. The new government is going to be under close watch; there are high expectations, and there’s no doubt that they will be held accountable for the promises they made during their campaign. I’m not suggesting that there weren’t high expectations for the NDP while they were in power, but under the current circumstances, the Sask Party has much to prove, and that usually works out to being a good thing for the people.

Congrats to the new guys, nice to see Yogi finally on the govt. side. Congrats to some of my old friends from my ideological days now sitting in opposition (Harry Van Mulligan and Len Taylor), good to see them hang on to their seats.

Some of the NDPers didn't have the attitude that they deserved their positions by virtue of having the right party membership. Some of them did, and they mostly got turfed and rightly so. Don't worry, you die hard unionists, Judy got back in so your voice is still going to be heard, stridently, I am sure.

The final numbers - be they 37 or 38 seats - are just about right by my figuring. A sweep could have led to the type of political arrogance that Devine's cronies believed in, and that could very easily lead to the Sask Party's demolition in an election or two, and another 3 to 5 terms of left wing governments.

Less than 40 seats but still a comfortable majority means they have the mandate, but not so much that they can see themselves as bulletproof. This should mean that in 4 years they have to have a pretty good record to run on, not hoping to win again by gerrymandering as Devine did in '86.

Of course I am happy to see a party that seems to care about rural Saskatchewan in power, the NDP has completely turned their backs on us for the past two or more terms. Maybe now our highways, schools, and hospitals can be funded enough to serve us, instead of the more centralisation style of politics the left wing likes.

A final word to the fear mongers: Grant Devine is old history. Maybe now that whole issue can be put to bed. Calvert tried to tie Wall to the Devine scandal, but he was only involved in the Devine politics. What else could Wall do? If you were a right wing thinker in the early 80's in Saskatchewan, where else could you possibly be? Just because you weren't a card carrying member of Tommy's party doesn't necessarily mean you had your hand in the public purse like Bernston and company! Brad Wall was a conservative, and that meant he was involved in conservative politics, plain and simple. That doesn't mean he was a thief! The people who insist that everyone who is a right winger is a thief are the ones that propagate the stigma that all left wingers are pot smoking hippies.

We, as a political people in this province, need to put down all the rhetoric, and start examining what we can do together as a people and stop drawing horns on those who don't necessarily agree with us! Refer to my previous entry where I attempt to translate "conservative". We are not "ultra conservative" or "neo cons", we just believe that a person should be rewarded for his or her contribution to society rather than have the attitude that we are "entitled" to the benefits that are available. We have so much going for us here that we should be able to take care of those in need without hampering those of us who don't need.

Also, as one who was involved in several NDP campaigns, both provincial and federal, I have to say I am glad that Calvert lost because I believe he has lost sight of what a clean campaign means. For two elections now I have watched the NDP run attack ads, and base their whole campaign on fear of change, instead of looking forward to new ways of solving our problems. It came across as very negative, and gives me a bad feeling for the future of the left in this province. That team seemed this time especially to have the attitude that they must "win at all costs". At least they didn't circulate cartoons of Wall in a Nazi uniform, but I was expecting it at any time in the last month. They really took the low road, and that wasn't how we campaigned in the 80's when I was with them. As one caller to the talk show said, "We need to give the NDP a time out".

Okay, I admit it's a little scary to put your trust in someone new, but it was the time for it, past due actually. Now we need to hold our breath a bit, and hope this new guy doesn't turn out to be another disaster for the right wing. That's why I like the election results so much.

This is Paul Cerniuk, the Rosetown Man, CBC's token small town conservative, signing off.

I admit I want the government to change, but I don't want a blowout. I figure the province is better served by a cohesive, organised and stable right wing base and this usually doesn't happen within a term or two of a right wing party election sweep.

It was the Progressive Conservatives that won here in '82, and the next year the federal party of the same name that elected more members than any other before or since. Where are those parties today, outside of Rick Swenson's nightmares?

I believe blowouts cause chaos in the parties that win. This has led to successive left wing governments, by narrow majority or even minority, and the stagnant style that comes with that. I don't believe the voters and taxpayers of this province are best served by successive left wing governments and the empowered bureaucracies they bring with them. I also don't believe any government can effectively serve its stakeholders with huge majorities, except in Alberta, apparently.

I'm hoping the SaskParty gets about 35 seats, but they could get 40 or more. This might spell doom for the fledgling party, throw the right wing into disarray

See, NDP don’t hire Liberals, they just stole our ideas. It hurt even more so that after NDP leader Bob Rae lost his last election in Ontario, countless ex bureaucrats left Ontario and took up shop here in Saskatchewan. No local ownership, no local passion, no local ideas. To me, this is the legacy of the NDP. What a lot of people didn’t know is that Roy Romanow had a very tight relationship with Chretien and other Liberals here, but to keep the party brass at bay, he kept any intelligent, open minded thought out of the NDP ranks. Someone like me draws attention. Whether the Sask Party does this still has to be seen. However, with Wall moving closer to the middle over the years, at least he acknowledges the need to open thought in a province in the middle of the free market of North America. If there are still one or two too many right wing sexist, biased, racist, bigots in the Sask Party, they will be easy to spot.

So after 30 days of kids kicking down signs, strikes on campus, promises, threats, more threats and a terrible debate that should have never taken place, this campaign will go down as one of the most predictable but important elections in our history. Why do I say that? Because every election is important, every promise a politician makes is important, for us to remember and for us to hold them to account. I really don’t care who wins tonight, I just want change and I know outspoken, passionate, 40-something dames like me will keep whomever elected accountable. I just hope more do the same.

At least there is one political party in this province that gets real about our responsibility to Earth. A snowball probably has a better chance of surviving H, E, double hockey sticks than that party does of forming the next government.

Unfortunately, a corporatist-friendly government will govern after E-day. Corporatists will continue to rebrand our province, create castrophes real and imagined, make their demands, and accumulate more and more wealth. Saskatchewan's chunk of Earth and all living on it will continue to suffer the consequences. In the ideology of a corporatist there is no room for a wholistic world view. There is only the tired, old us 'n' them story that works to instill fear.

Fear keeps us apart. It makes us unable to force our government to ensure that the most vulnerable of our society -- the children -- do not go to bed hungry. In my lifetime, in a province of almost a million people, we should be able to feed all the children!

And, in case you haven't noticed, dear Reader, this Poet Mom takes that shit seriously.

The Earth Charter came about through a unique, decade-long process of consensus building – the largest global consultation process ever! As a result it is being widely endorsed by people and organizations throughout the world. At this critical time in our history, people seem to be looking for hope and are eager to respond to a call for global partnership.

Too bad our politicans care only for ballot boxes. What a different campaign this would have been had the leaders demonstrated real concern for humanity and all living creatures. What a leader Saskatchewan would be if we helped develop a sustainable global community founded on the Earth Charter principles of respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace.

Sigh. What chance, that?

In other words, that Christmas turkey you usually buy from the neighbour's cousin who lives on the farm might not be available for sale next year. That small producer might be regulated out of business. This is what is happening in B.C. Instead of adopting the more European and friendly approach to small farming, the right wing governments of Stephen Harper and Gordon Campbell decided that B.C. would legislate in favour of the big producers. That's left those who sell at the farmgate out in the cold. What happens next here in Saskatchewan is up to us to determine, right now. It's yet another talking point to raise with the candidates.

Having grown up in rural Sask, it shocks me how disconnected most urban dwellers are from their food sources. It's so taken for granted that food comes from the grocery store. It is rarely acknowledged that food is grown by someone in some place and shipped to the store. Few actually ask about what is in the food, how it has been grown, how far it's traveled to get here. This matters, especially at a time when our planet is so very vulnerable.

Some friends have taken on the 100 Mile Diet which promotes eating only foods grown within a 100 mile radius of your home. Quite a challenge! But it has really made me take time to think about the food my family eats. And thinking, as opposed to being spoonfed a diet of toxins and trash, is important. Especially when the politicians hold the spoon!

I listened to the opening remarks of each Leader and the first two questions they debated. And then I could take no more. I turned off my radio in personal protest.

Each of those three men should issue statements of apology to Holly Preston, the debate's moderator. They displayed nothing but disrespect for her person and her profession and utter contempt for the process to which they had all agreed, during their free-for-all! What does this say of our society? To our children?

Many students were assigned homework that required them to watch/listen to that broadcast last night. What did they see? Full-grown upper- and upper-middle-class white men being disrespectful to a woman and behaving in just the ways children are taught to never behave!

My word, you foolish men, do you ever think of the children?

I'll admit that in the short time I listened a few key words did catch my attention.

Wall's opening statement included not one but two mentions of the phrase, “common sense.” For those who have forgotten and those too young too remember, please know that the Grant Devine's Conservative coup was based on a “coalition of common sense” and that, as we know, resulted in convictions and jail time for several high profile Conservatives, so many so that the common sense coalition was forced to disband and reconstitute itself as the Saskatchewan Party.

Both Karwacki and Calvert commented on Wall's, Enterprise Saskatchewan, a faceless thing that will dictate the future of the Saskatchewan economy should Wall and his band of capitalists gain power. Neither of the questioners managed to ask the Sask Party Leader the question I want answered: Is Enterprise Saskatchewan the means by which a Wall government could allow the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA) to dominate our economy?

If so, we should be very worried as this agreement would do irreparable harm to our provincial economy, our culture, and our environment. It promotes a slash and burn agenda. Rural municipalities would be particularly impacted because TILMA can interfere with “how municipalities operate, particularly in the areas of procurement and legislation,” according to the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties.

For some strange reason ;-) local democracy gets in the way of the capitalist greed agenda which TILMA calls for:

• No obstacles: Governmental measures (legislation, policy or other procedure) will not restrict or impair trade, investment or labour mobility between the two provinces; and

• Non-discrimination: There will be no preferential treatment of a province’s people, investments and goods, except for justified actual cost-of-service differences.

Rereading this, I'm wondering if that doesn't that sound a little racist as well as greedy and power hungry...

More on TILMA:

The TYEE

SUMA (PDF)

Here are two responses...

Dear Kelly,

I have a few issues that I include below which I would appreciate if you would include in your blog:

1. Access to information
2. Rehabilitation services.

As a person who is partially sighted, one of the greatest barriers I face in everyday living is gaining access to information. As a person who cannot read regular print living in a sighted world, gaining access to information is a huge barrier. As you are aware, newspapers, books, flyers etc. are all distributed in print which a person who is blind, deaf blind or partially sighted has no access to.

Also to broaden the access to information issue, traffic lights that are visual only prevent persons who are blind from gaining needed information to safely cross streets and therefore remain independent. In downtown Saskatoon, there are two audible pedestrian signals that voice when the walk light is on as well as voicing the street name. As a person who cannot see traffic signals or read street names, it is important for all citizens to have this information.

I realize that access to information is a huge issue and cannot be addressed totally by a provincial government but there are some improvements that can be provided to help disabled persons remain independent and contributing members of society.

To assist a person with vision impairment to gain access to information, computers with adaptive software are very useful. A sighted person who purchases a computer just takes it home connects it and proceeds to use it. A person who is blind, deaf blind or partially sighted must spend thousands of extra dollars to purchase adaptive equipment such as a screen reader or a braille display to give them access to the computer.

In Saskatchewan the SAIL program does provide some adaptive equipment to certain disabled groups but very little of consequence for the blind.

If persons who are blind, deaf blind or partially sighted could access government assistance to purchase adaptive screen reading programs for computers as well as braille displays, it would assist in providing access to information and therefore prevent isolation which is very common among disabled individuals.

On my second point of rehabilitation, if I had a heart attack, a stroke or an accident, broke my back or neck, my rehabilitation is covered under the health care system. But if I lose my eyesight due to illness or accident, I am referred to a charity for my rehabilitation services.

In this day and age it is no longer acceptable that persons who become disabled by sight loss should be sent to a charity for their rehabilitation services and have to rely on that charity's ability to raise charity dollars before services are provided.

Something I would like to ask the politicians in this election is: would they expand the SAIL program to include adaptive equipment for the blind, deaf blind and partially sighted.

Will they investigate changing the delivery model for rehabilitation services for the blind from a charitable model to a community based model?

Thanks,

Judy Prociuk

First and foremost...

The right to vote in secret and independently. Currently we have a template that will have braille beside each hole. However, there is no accompanying braille documentation. I must rely on a sighted buddy or an election officer to assist. I refuse as my vote should be cast as every one else casts their vote.

Example: imagine going to the poll and all you are given is a blank piece of paper with ten circles going down the right side of the page. Each circle is numbered. The first is 1, the second is 2, etc. Now you are told by the returning officer the list of persons you can vote for. Try to remember and do not change your mind as you may have to ask three or four times. Ohhh, and you mark the ballot in invisible ink so there is no way you can verify that you marked the number 2, or the number 7. But fold it up and consider that your vote has been cast.

The blind and partially sighted are asking for electronic voting with paper backup. This is the best option. The second best is using a template with holes in it and they are numbered in large print and in braille. The ballot goes inside the template and we can vote. However, we are asking for accompanying documentation in large print and in braille so we can review the candidates in secret and independently. The reason this is the second best option is that we can not verify what we marked. It is like using invisible ink.

This is my only issue. If I cannot vote how can I affect change on any of my other accessible issues?

Robin East

When will the dope question ever go away? Or will we use this as a safe diversion: a) from hard drugs such as crystal meth, cocaine and others that are increasingly being used in this province by younger people and by those who couldn't otherwise afford it b) the ease of these drugs brought it into our city streets via the Hells Angles and the Indian Possee, or c) more people are sick, kill others when they get behind the wheel, or during a violent argument, and lose everything due to their alcohol drinking problems compared to any effect associated with marijuana smoking? Why do we keep making Mary Jane a big deal?

I think it's because those who smoke marijuana, and there are many, exhibit a free thinking, outspoken, independent, almost rebellious character, personality or lifestyle. The others sit around looking like idiots all stoned and everything. For some of us, it's a fun and harmless escape that accentuates the thought process and briefly makes living in Saskatchewan interesting! Get over it people and put your judgment away.

The stupid thing is that no one in Saskatchewan has risen to the occasion at all to even mention the proven medical benefits of marijuana.

So we waste twenty minutes of this campaign to act silly and ask silly questions like immature pranksters because smoking dope is still taboo here, even though many many many people do it. Maybe it was a good way to not talk about the focus brought by the Saskatchewan Party to the many children in this province that are being abused. It's odd that the timing factor played huge in this wherein getting high, the "gotcha" factor that never took hold after Wall admitted to smoking dope, and the silly banter with a bunch of boring, middle aged white men in the middle of a boring, middle aged white man election campaign, overlooked the need to focus on those kids that are being abused...............

I thought that by this time, I would be partial towards one party, but I have to say that the Sask Party and the NDP seem to be pretty even as far as this race goes. I look at the headlines and I see “Calvert promises 2,000 new daycare spaces”, or “Wall promises cheaper insurance for green cars” and both of these are nice ideas, but they definitely aren’t enough to put one party ahead of the other in my mind.

I don’t know if it’s going to take an outrageous announcement to catch my attention, but at this time it seems that my vote is going to be based mostly on the stereotypes that are out there, that is: “The tired old NDP”, or “The reliable old NDP” depending on who you talk to, and basically the opposite concerning the Sask Party.

We could look at certain issues and deduce a party’s philosophy from them, but to do that at this point would be a stretch; there just isn’t enough there to go by. I think that the leaders are going to have to do more to create a distinction between their parties and their platforms so that the voters can clearly see that one party is more deserving of their vote than the other.