Tax grab
To the Editor:
On Sept. 1, a tax was put on the retail and wholesale sale of oil. Some retail outlets have a sign posted by the shelves where oil and filters are displayed. Other outlets do not, so you do not find out about this tax until you check out your purchases.
One outlet has a pamphlet entitled “Take used oil, filters and containers off your hands,” which was put together by the Saskatchewan Association for Resource Recovery Corporation.
According to this pamphlet, plans are to establish 31 used oil, filter and container collection depots and eight other collection options in 39 zones – this by the year 2000.
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
SARRC estimates that 53 million litres of oil, two million oil filters and seven million oil containers are used in Saskatchewan annually. Therefore, environmental tax would be: 53 million litres of oil @ 10 cents (five cents for oil, five cents for container) = $5.3 million. Two million oil filters @ 50 cents = $1 million.
Seven million oil containers @ 50 cents (average) = $3.5 million.
Total tax collected per year will be $9.8 million.
My first concern is that $9.8 million is a lot of money for a project that will not be in place until the year 2000. My second concern is that if this project gets off the ground, what incentive does a person have to bring oil, filters or containers to these depots? If there are no rebates, there will be no returns.
– Eric S. Olesen,
Swift Current, Sask.
Peace crops
To the Editor:
Once again farmers in the Peace River country are playing the waiting game, waiting for warm winds to dry unharvested grain, while interest charges mount in the bank.
The cost of farming has increased almost beyond comprehension. All is not as commendable as farm sales’ advertising would have a novice reader believe. Farmers grow grey before their time battling countless uncertainties.
Costs have mounted until farming has become only for those with an inclination to follow their persuasion in spite of the countless obstacles.
However, each day this late in the fall convinces many that the anxiety of crop loss does not induce continuation.
– H. W. Jackson,
Falher, Alta.
Rural reality
To the Editor:
I saw the premier on television at a fancy businesspeople’s supper in Regina. The premier made a comment that business and employment have risen sharply in the last year or so.
It’s funny how some people have an uncanny ability to camouflage reality. What the good premier should have said is, in spite of deteriorating highways, small towns disappearing, people leaving in droves, the highest taxes in Canada, major cities in Saskatchewan have enjoyed a relatively good year.
I hardly call a province where towns of 15,000 population have half their buildings on main street boarded up “a booming economy.”
I also find it hard to believe that a provincial government which has all but written off its rural population, and has not initiated one single program to keep young people in rural Saskatchewan, would call itself “fiscally responsible.” At least not in a province where 80 percent of the economy revolves around agriculture.
– John J. Hamon,
Gravelbourg, Sask.
World peace
To the Editor:
I live in Colonsay, Saskatchewan, Canada, which is the best town in the best province, in the best country in the World. I also live on planet Earth, the best planet in the Universe.
On Oct. 19, I heard on the CBC TV news that the Pentagon is planning to renew its efforts to develop laser weapons, which is a renewal of the Star Wars program proposed by Ronald Reagan.
The best planet in the universe is being threatened with nuclear destruction.
We should replace the UN with a World Federation. Membership would include only nations which retain no nuclear weapons, land mines or laser weapons, and have cancelled the debts owed to them by developing countries which currently have 60 million people dying from malnutrition every year.
– Ralph D. Wright,
Colonsay, Sask.
Foreign prices
To the Editor:
Having returned from Europe, I was horrified at what stores are selling Laird lentils for – 2.19 marks for one pound. This is $1.825 after converting money to Canadian. Are you mad yet? Well, canaryseed is $2 a pound our money in Belgium.
Farmers, we need 20 cents a pound for these products. If you don’t sell for less, you will get 20 cents a pound to make a little.
Someone is ripping us off.
– Robert G. Brick,
Regina, Sask.
CWB veto
To the Editor:
The recent announcement and various press releases issued from Mr. Goodale’s office addressing the proposed amendments to the CWB structure left the impression the much-needed accountability and farmer control would finally come to pass with Bill C-4. Press releases from the Minister’s office regarding the bill are misleading, leaving us the illusion of accountability and farmer control instead of real accountability and farmer control.
For example: Buried deep within the framework of Bill C-4 lies a clause granting the Minister of Agriculture or the Minister of Finance veto power over any decision reached by the board regardless of the fact their decision was arrived at by a majority vote. This amounts to the real power still resting in the hands of federal politicians, not the farmers.
The rules governing the Canadian Wheat Board and the Ontario Wheat Board differ.
The Ontario Wheat Board, which also receives federal treasury guarantees, does not have a single government-appointed board member, nor are they required to seek permission from the federal Agriculture Minister or the Government of Canada when structural changes are required. Why do the rules change for Western Canadian grain producers?
The CWB insists on conducting their business affairs with cloak-and-dagger secrecy.
What is the reason behind this clandestine “keep the books closed” policy? What is it Mr. Goodale doesn’t want the average Canadian to know? More importantly, what is it he doesn’t want Western Canadian grain farmers to know?
– Darla Frank,
Mossbank, Sask.
Alberta unity
To the Editor:
Re: Alberta’s Growth Summit
This is something I have asked our governments to do for some years now. How can we promote Canadian unity when there is no unity within Alberta?
Ask any labor leader or city MLA as to what is going on in rural Alberta. They do not know, and in most cases, could care less. How many of us rural people know what is going on in urban Alberta?
Is this a way to run a province or country, working in the dark? Unity should start at home, then be extended elsewhere. …
Right now, young men in rural Alberta are denied access to jobs because of discriminatory auto insurance rates. Unlike their urban counterparts, who can use public, subsidized transportation in the city, which all Albertans pay for in added costs to goods and services.
There is no saving to anyone keeping young men away from jobs and then on welfare, as then again all of Alberta has to pay.
Has anyone in government asked any taxpayers if this is the way we want it ? No, and the shameful truth is, they have had 25 years to do it.
– John Pokorney,
Tilley, Alta.
