Quote:
Originally Posted by killer_carlson
Slava, what I find difficult in your position, is that your premise is based upon the fact that savings will ONLY come if we do not build schools. That savings cannot be achieved in other ways.
I'd suggest there are other ways. I do point to some suggestions the WR made, along with other groups such as the taxpayers federation and even the media.
I'm not going to go line by line through the budget. At the same time, I see no value in debate if you're position is to equate less spending with cutting the priorities of the Albertans first (schools and hospitals), and ignore other inefficiencies.
|
No, I'm sure that there are inefficiencies and places to be cut. Its just that health and education are already enormous areas of spending and clearly in the case of schools more money has to be diverted here. Is it even possible to cut enough from inefficient spending to build the 50 new schools Redford wants or the 100 new schools the Wildrose says it would build?
I'm not saying that the cuts from inefficiency will automatically mean cuts to services, but at some point the onus is on the people saying it can be done to lay out some hard numbers that are plausible.