Loss of STC harm­ful to many

Southwest Booster - - PINION -

Ed­i­tor:

Women in Saskatchewan will be ir­repara­bly harmed by the Wall gov­ern­ment’s de­ci­sion to get rid of STC.

Safe, af­ford­able pub­lic trans­porta­tion is nec­es­sary to en­sure the un­hin­dered and in­de­pen­dent move­ment of women in this prov­ince. When pur­su­ing ed­u­ca­tion, seek­ing em­ploy­ment, rais­ing chil­dren alone, pro­vid­ing care­giver ser­vices within their fam­i­lies or es­cap­ing abu­sive re­la­tion­ships, women are in grave dan­ger with­out it. This is es­pe­cially true for women liv­ing in ru­ral and re­mote parts of our prov­ince.

The “High­way of Tears” in Bri­tish Columbia has been linked to a lack of safe pub­lic trans­porta­tion. Women and girls re­sorted to hitch hik­ing and preda­tors moved in. Which high­way in Saskatchewan will be­come our “High­way of Tears” fol­low­ing the loss of STC? Or will it be all our high­ways?

El­derly women are placed in des­per­ate sit­u­a­tions with the loss if STC. Saskatchewan has a high pro­por­tion of se­niors liv­ing out­side of our cities. 35.6 per cent of peo­ple over 65 live in ru­ral Saskatchewan (the na­tional av­er­age is 16.8 per cent). Our ru­ral pop­u­la­tion is aging faster than our ur­ban pop­u­la­tion and women make up a larger pro­por­tion of se­niors liv­ing in ru­ral

STC is pro­vid­ing safe, af­ford­able trans­porta­tion across Saskatchewan. The safety of solid ve­hi­cles on win­ter roads. Well-main­tained, me­chan­i­cally sound ve­hi­cles. Pro­fes­sional driv­ers with proven safety records, First Aid train­ing and de-es­ca­la­tion train­ing to deal with con­fronta­tional sit­u­a­tions.

Ter­mi­nals with safety pa­trols, clean bath­rooms and food ser­vices where you can safely wait for trans­fers.

This is of ut­most im­por­tance to the in­de­pen­dence and free­dom of choice for all women in Saskatchewan, but es­pe­cially women liv­ing on low in­comes.

We des­per­ately need STC! Lorna Reimer - North Bat­tle­ford

CTF re­acts to fed­eral car­bon tax plan

Cana­dian Tax­pay­ers Fed­er­a­tion

Cana­dian Tax­pay­ers Fed­er­a­tion Fed­eral Di­rec­tor Aaron Wu­drick re­leased the fol­low­ing state­ment in re­sponse to last week’s an­nounce­ment by the fed­eral gov­ern­ment re­gard­ing car­bon taxes:

“By sig­nalling its in­ten­tion to im­pose the so-called Al­berta model of car­bon taxes on prov­inces which fail to im­pose their own car­bon tax, the Trudeau gov­ern­ment has aban­doned even the pre­tense of this tax be­ing ‘rev­enue neu­tral.’ It also con­tra­dicts se­nior Trudeau min­is­ter Ralph Goodale’s pre­vi­ous as­ser­tion that all rev­enue would stay in the hands of pro­vin­cial gov­ern­ments.

Car­bon taxes, whether ex­ist­ing or pro­posed, mean higher taxes for Cana­di­ans and their fam­i­lies, and harm to the Cana­dian econ­omy, es­pe­cially if ju­ris­dic­tions we com­pete with do not have a car­bon tax. Any re­duc­tion in emis­sions would be tiny on a global scale, and have zero im­pact on global cli­mate change.

The fact is, car­bon taxes in Canada will sim­ply not im­pact global cli­mate change. This is a les­son other coun­tries, such as Aus­tralia, have al­ready learned, which is why they have scrapped their own car­bon taxes.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.