Whenever a government reverses an unpopular or wrong-headed position, there is one immediate thing one should do: say thank you.
And a thank-you is exactly what the Saskatchewan Party government deserves for amending the cost-sharing formula for funding rural nursing homes and hospitals to an 80-20 split from the old 65-35 formula.
In a Feb. 22 news release, Health Minister Don McMorris surprised many with the announcement of $133.1 million in health infrastructure and access improvements. The announcement included:$49.3 million for design and construction costs 13 long-term care facility redevelopment projects:$18.7 million for new capital equipment and upgrades;$8 million for continued development of an electronic health record;$5 million for redevelopment planning of the Moose Jaw Union Hospital;$7.2 million to renovate and repair the Parkridge Centre long-term care in Saskatoon, and$ 500,000 for CT services in Melfort.
An additional $20.5 million was also made available for physician recruitment and retention. This should mean more doctors working in rural Saskatchewan.
But clearly the centrepiece was that $49.3 million for design costs and initial capital construction of nursing home or hospital communities in need of replacement in 13 communities. These facilities include projects already started in Watrous and Shellbrook and pending projects in Maple Creek, Biggar, Kerrobert, Rosetown, Meadow Lake, Prince Albert, Kelvington, Kipling, Radville and Redvers."Communities asked for a new funding formula and we are delivering," McMorris said in his news release. "An 80-20 split lowers financial barriers to the revitalization of health facilities in towns and cities across Saskatchewan."
It was news that came as a bit of a surprise.
Less than a month ago that McMorris was saying that any such change to the funding formula was a "long way" off and there was no timeline to change it. He even argued that "the community pride of paying off their share" and "sense of ownership" in the facilities they help pay for were sound reasons to keep the cost-sharing arrangements.
So all this begs the question: What changed?
To some extent, we can accept McMorris's argument for the value of local fund raising. After all, there is no way the government could afford to fund 100 per cent of the capital health funding requests of every community that would want a facility if the government paid 100 per cent of the costs. The local fund-raising component has been one good way to assess the seriousness of proposals.
However, having to raise 35 per cent was just too onerous and unfair.
In fact, since McMorris's statements just a few weeks ago, the relative unfairness had become a bit of a re-occuring issue in local editorials and on coffee row throughout rural Saskatchewan.
And while we should all be grateful for this policy change, what we should also make note that it likely wouldn't have happened without that pressure from rural Saskatchewan communities.
With the Sask. Party rock solid it rural Saskatchewan, it's still rather easy for the governing party to take for granted its rural support. It also would have been relatively easy for the government to say this was a policy it inherited from the previous NDP government that it couldn't yet afford to change.
Well, the government didn't take rural voters for granted, but that's largely because rural voters didn't allow themselves to be taken for granted on this policy. That's an important lesson to remember. Just prior to McMorris's announcement, Education Minister Donna Harpauer let it be known that her government intended to defer a new school board funding formula until after the election.
It might be possible that the health capital funding announcement is being made to placate criticism on the rural education file. If so, let this also be a reminder.
While it's important to be grateful, it's just as important to remain vigilant.
Murray Mandryk has been covering provincial politics for over 15 years.
