Letters, Oct. 26

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 26/10/2023 (1053 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Reassessing numbers

Re: Reconsidering cuts to gas tax (Think Tank, Oct. 17)

My op-ed piece on Oct. 17 had sound political and policy analysis, making the point that the $330 million cost to government annually in lost revenue for the gas tax cut, is far greater than the “making life affordable benefit” to Manitoba drivers.

However, the actual calculation of the amount of that gas tax cut was overestimated. The total amount of taxes on gasoline in Manitoba is approximately 26.8 cents per liter. The NDP proposed gas tax cut is only on the $.14 per liter gas tax, not on other sales taxes. For the average driver travelling 15,000 km per year the gas tax cut amounts to only about $210 annually or about $4 saving each week.

The gas tax cut is not in keeping with values and policy to redistribute wealth, create more social equity, while addressing climate change. It amounts to buying votes with tax cuts, a fiscally conservative approach to politics and public policy. As it redistributes wealth in the wrong direction, while subsidizing gas vehicle reliance, rather than climate-friendly just transition to public transit, active transportation and ride sharing.

By recommitting the gas tax cut right after the election, the new premier is sending mixed messages about his intention to govern for everyone or for those privileged to own a vehicle or drive. Cutting the gas tax was re-announced at the same time as another commitment by our new premier, to search the landfill. This raises how the cost of the gas tax cut for six months, will almost cover the estimated cost to search the landfill for the remains of missing and murdered Indigenous women.

This would be a better use of those funds than subsidizing gasoline consumption, as it is a good step towards truth and reconciliation, justice, and our shared humanity. There are many other uses of the $330-million annual cost of the gas tax cut that would better support Indigenous women and girls at risk, who will receive no benefit from cutting the gas tax.

Marianne Cerilli

Winnipeg

No time to pout

Re: Honeymoon over for miffed MLA Wasyliw, who gives premier cold shoulder after being left out of cabinet (Oct. 25)

I am disappointed in Mark Wasyliw’s adolescent sulking over not receiving a provincial cabinet post. I would be very worried if I were one of his constituents, because apparently I will not have a full time and dedicated MLA prepared to support his constituents.

We have all had the experience of not winning a promotion to which we feel entitled. Generally speaking, the best idea is not to sulk publicly and try to attack our boss.

As a result of his behaviour, Wasyliw’s term as MLA is off on the wrong foot, with the premier, his fellow MLAs, his constituents and the community.

Hopefully MLA Wasyliw will reconsider his attitude.

Lynn Silver

Winnipeg

How on Earth can Mark Wasyliw continue as the representative for the constituents of Fort Garry?

By his own words “Given that I am not in cabinet, I’m going to have a lot of time on my hands and I am going to be taking more cases and working as a defence lawyer.”

Boo hoo, boo hoo, get over it Mr. Wasyliw, you were passed over for a cabinet post for reasons the premier feels were warranted. You were elected by the constituents of Fort Garry to represent them, do the job you were elected to do and represent them.

Saying “to hell with them, I can do more work for myself” doesn’t cut it, shame on you, get over it and do your job. Now the premier will be shown as the bad guy when he needs to have Mr. Wasyliw taken to the principal’s office to be told what his job as the representative of Fort Garry is. And if Mr. Wasyliw doesn’t like what the premier says, then Mr. Wasyliw should do the honourable thing and resign and let the constituents of Fort Garry have the representation that they deserve.

Ken Butchart

Winnipeg

Time to step aside

Re: Seniors deserve better (Letters, Oct. 25)

Scott Johnston, former minister of seniors and long term care, should be embarrassed to be writing a letter to the editor so soon after being unceremoniously rejected by the voters of his constituency.

The seniors, and other constituents, of his area, obviously felt that the NDP and Wab Kinew were a better choice for them than allowing him and his PC party colleagues to continue to run the economy, health care, education and other important priorities into the ground.

He should have spent as much time worrying about seniors’ care as the responsible minister as he did writing his milksop-type complaint about the lack of a seniors’ portfolio in the new government. He should have been more effective and maybe he would still be a sitting MLA. Give the new government a chance to show what they can do.

Sorry, Scott, you and your colleagues proved ineffective and now have four years to watch from the sidelines.

Laurie Etkin

Winnipeg

Former minister Johnston indicates the new NDP government does not support seniors. Considering the new minister of health, seniors and long term care was only appointed last week, it could be an opportunity to pump the brakes and give them time to do their job.

While I do not possess a crystal ball predicting current government failures like Johnston does, I can use search engines. Please refer to June 2014 when government released the provincial strategy, “Advancing Continuing Care — A Blueprint to Support System Change.”

This document shares plans to age in place at home, increased community supports, staffing and long term care among other things.

As far as I can see, the 2014 strategy was not acted upon by incoming government and includes many items found in the 2023 strategy released 6.5 months prior to the election. How is this any different than how Wab Kinew “slapped seniors of Manitoba in the face?”

Jeff Roos

Winnipeg

Less politics, more real help

The new Manitoba government has made several positive healthcare commitments — centring patients and families, increasing team-based care, and healing and nurturing the health workforce.

It will review the governance of the system, eliminate waste from administrative processes, and, given its talk about the health-care system of the future, hopefully embrace The Learning Health System concept, which applies the business philosophy of continuous improvement to clinical medical decision-making.

However, as health care in Manitoba is a complex system, a standard chain of command will only go so far. Even though the health-care system subsumes many different organizations, solving its most intractable problems will require distributed leadership that connects the silos, distributed decision-making that has a bias to action ahead of over-planning, and the freedom to deploy multiple simultaneous approaches to the critical problems, learning what emerges from the successes and failures.

There’s the rub. How can any government institute the health-care leadership framework required to make progress on intractable problems, if the framework requires failures that could politically contribute to defeating the government?

My suggested solution is mutual political disarmament. In the best interest of a thriving Manitoba healthcare system, the premier and the two opposition party leaders should negotiate ground rules as to what political criticisms are fair and what failures are to be considered non-political.

While this system is obviously beneficial to the new government, the citizens of Manitoba should also reward the opposition parties for their cooperation by insisting on the same ground rules whenever the governing party changes.

Shayne P. Taback, MD

Winnipeg