Cutbacks will increase poverty

Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

I warned people that the Dunderdale government would finance the multibillion-dollar Muskrat Falls project (with its expected cost overruns) on the backs of people with disabilities, hospital patients, the working poor, students, low and fixed income seniors, public sector workers and others. Today, the provincial Coalition of Persons with Disabilities (COD NL) is experiencing provincial funding cuts, so we must ask, who’s next?

We live in a have province with lots of have-not people. How can the Dunderdale government have a poverty reduction strategy when provincial public sector cutbacks will mean more poverty? How is the Dunderdale government going to attract immigrants and prevent people from leaving the province when cuts in education, health and social programs are planned? Whatever happened to the new Corner Brook hospital and a new Waterford Hospital? Whatever happened to more affordable, accessible housing? What’s the point of having a provincial Disability Policy Office when you cut funding to an organization like COD NL? Premier Kathy Dunderdale and her P.C. colleagues have to ask themselves where their sense of social justice and equality is.

Edward Sawdon

St. John’s

Organizations: Coalition of Persons, Corner Brook hospital, Waterford Hospital Disability Policy Office

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Mr.R
    February 19, 2013 - 15:49

    Cathy don't listen to the haters..& most of them who conplain live gereration after generation on the welfare system.

  • david
    February 19, 2013 - 15:22

    Cutbacks will not increase will just stop reducing poverty. But reducing poverty thrpough unsustainable public expenditure is temporary, ineffective, and results in more unintended consequaences than solutions anyway. Even a windfall like the gobs upon gobs of offshore oil dollars couldn't do that proof enough for you?!? The only way to reduce poverty is through provate sector job creation, not arbitrary, inefficient re-distribution of other people's money. That's what governemnt's will never admit, and never will accept, because there's simply no votes in that truth. It's all about public service folks...

    • Edward Sawdon
      February 19, 2013 - 19:10

      David it seems as if you oppose government involvement in dealing with our serious social and health care issues. Are you opposed to the Dunderdale Government's support of the multibillion dollar Muscrat Falls dam. If you support her government then why don't you and your corporate colleagues look after the Muskrat Falls Project and let Government help Persons with Disabilties. and the Working poor, amongst others. You talk about "inefficient re-distribution of other people's money. Well should "other people's money" be spent on Dunderdale's Muscrat Falls? Do you support "Corporate Welfare"? Or should OUR Tax dollars, not "others or yours but OUR Tax Dollars go into mush needed Affordable accessible Housing Persons with Disabilities and new Hospitals for the Havenot people in this Have province? Speaking about Taxes don't the Poor and the Fixed Income people pay Taxes too? If you support Public Sector Cutbacks and Job Layoffs then I hope you support a FREEZE in the Dunderdale's 6 figure salaried Patronage Appointments and the Premier's Pensions and Benefits. etcetra. Mr. David I have a social conscience, I advocate for social justice and equality, but I think you are more concerned about your own self-vested interests than the "least of these" in our society.

    • david
      February 20, 2013 - 08:46

      Edward: Your first sentence is compleltely wrong, An incorrect premise never supports a worthwhile debate, so I didn't bother to read the rest. But I will say this: one of government's most basic, legiitimate repsonsibilities is to provide health care. Yet they refuse to take that role seriously enough to provide a viable, sustainable, efficient system, instead simply overseeing its eventual inevitable demise and using that issue as rhetoric elections.

  • Corporate Psycho
    February 19, 2013 - 15:05

    Dunderdale refuses to help the COD but has handed out more money in patronage appointments in the last two weeks than the COD needs. Kind of puts it in perspective doesn't it?