Another letter to the newspapers

Warren McNary has sent this out to the papers:

Some people are still under the impression that the school review process and impending closures are a good thing. If in fact it is a good thing, others will adopt the model. Imagine then the following scenario.

Feb 21, 2012 Provincial Review Committee Presentation

The purpose of this meeting is to share the findings of our recent review, and announce our intentions with regard to the results.

As you are aware, due to rising costs and declining revenues, it became necessary to review the viability of all provinces. This was done by drawing up a classification plan and establishing benchmarks by which we can determine when a province is no longer viable to remain operating. As has been discussed, this has been an objective review, and the confidence in our data is very high.

We first want to thank you for your efforts in presenting to us your arguments and reasons why you feel that your province should remain operating, but unfortunately we could not use any of your recommendations. We are not able to let emotions stand in the way of sound fiscal management decisions. Each province must stand on it’s own merit.

Before we proceed we would also like to clarify that we understand that Saskatchewan has been able to maintain a balanced budget through provincial taxation, even without the equalization payments which you so often have asked for, but you must realize that we must look at the country as a whole, and the money must be shared with those areas which do not have the vast amount of natural resources and gullible taxpayers that you enjoy. We have large numbers of people living in urban sprawl where it is not possible to create enough revenue through natural resources or taxation to sustain themselves, and so through amalgamation we will be able to treat everyone fairly.

According to our classification plan, your province scored well in geography. However, it scored exceptionally low in areas of space utilization, facility maintenance, transportation, PTR ratio, and peer group size. We realize that these are essentially all as a result of low enrolment, but due to the steady drop in enrolment numbers we feel that we need to take decisive action before it gets any worse.

We will take a look at each of these criteria separately.

Geography: Saskatchewan has lots of this, but at present we need to focus our spending on areas of the country that have much more, such as Nunavit.

Space utilization: Large areas of the province are under utilized, especially since many people have left rural areas and small towns in the past five years. It appears impossible to either fill these areas under the present provincial policies, or to remove them.

Facility maintenance: There has been a general lack of facility maintenance in regards to highways, rail service, policing, hospitals, post offices, rural service centers, schools, and elevators at the local level for so long that they are nonexistent in most cases.

Transportation: Transportation through, around or over Saskatchewan has long been a problem for the rest of Canada. Costs to move people and goods between Alberta and Ontario would greatly be reduced if we could shorten the distance across Saskatchewan. Amalgamation will eliminate it completely.

PTR (Politician to Taxpayer Ratio): Saskatchewan has one of the highest PTRs in the country, far above the average. We realize that you favour this arrangement, but what would it cost to run the country if all of Canada insisted on the same PTR as you enjoy?

Peer Group Size: It is unfair to the residents of your province to think of them as perhaps the only one in their town, or the only one in a curling bonspeil. It must be hard for them to be both cast and audience in a community play. We feel that many of your young people suffer as a result of being on a local ball team of only one or two players. Rural residents live in areas where there is only one family with young children for miles, due to the school closure program of the Zero’s (07, 08, 09). We feel that putting these children into crowds of 3 to 7 to watch a hockey game is detrimental to their development. Amalgamation will move these residents to more populated areas where they can attend Flames or Oiler games with thousands. There they will attend larger schools where they can learn about gangs, stabbings, mugging, and the young offenders act.

Enrolment: We realize you have made extensive efforts to reverse the trend of dropping enrollment, but we all must admit that the idea of higher taxes and fewer services has only caused enrolment to decline further, except in the area of geriatrics, where large numbers of expatriate residents are returning for cheaper nursing home care.

Administration costs will be reduced through amalgamation. Your province, with a population that’s less than our identified enrollment viable cities, does not qualify to have it’s own administration. Your two largest centres do not qualify as geographically centered towns, nor towns of necessity, and we do not feel that your argument of the distance to the next enrolment viable or geographically centered cities is strong enough to have them reclassified. Therefore, we plan to proceed with closure of the province and amalgamation with the larger viable provinces.

We are sorry, but under the present legislation, there is no appeal

We understand that this will take some adjustment, but we know that you are more resilient than you believe, and will stick to your provincial motto, “It could have been worse!” And after all, as you’ve always said: “change is good.” Thank you.