Kevin, that is precisely the message that the citizens need to hear. It presents the reality, outside of the cold, hard numbers that the Finance Minister is instead attempting to pigeonhole as being the issue. Already, the politics are apparent. Yesterday, I reviewed an email from Mr. DeLorey. In it, he misrepresented that labour costs account for 52 cents on every public dollar spent in the Province.

Health care costs do account for a majority of all dollars spent, but not labour. As former Finance Minister Graham Steele noted, the current Government needs to make hard decisions on the items that truly enhance our public spending. Targeting teachers, cops, firefighters, etc., is simply resorting to attempting to achieve a political agenda, while abdicating responsibility for achieving true cost savings by taking on items such as prescription drug costs. In the U.S., I was always amazed by local and state governments targeting unions, rather than demonstrating the political courage to take on vested interests whose policies and influence truly affect effectively legislating for the public good.

So, what does it take? I know that there are some in the Liberal Caucus who are truly good people, attempting to do what is best for the overall good. So, how did a haphazard policy of blame the unions get adopted by the Leadership? My goodness, it feels so positively like I am back in the Southeastern U.S.!

John, no one is telling the Province to cede to all union demands. Rather, good-faith negotiations would likely result in advances for both sides. As I mentioned earlier in my interview on the Sheldon MacLeod Show, understanding the serious issues afflicting the Province does not mean pointing the finger at workers. Rather, as Graham Steele noted in his Thursday CBC column, it involves taking on the true issues elevating costs, especially of health care. Graham pointed to several examples.

Beyond this, the current Government which, to some degree, has done an admirable job of cutting some unnecessary fat (with some other examples to the contrary), has to face the fact that delivering a balanced budget during times of economic strife simply does not set the stage for long-term development, stability, prosperity. Call me a hopeless Keynesian, but these are the periods which actually required greater public spending to bolster private sector growth. No, this does not mean indefinitely financing a ferry which loses money; however, it does mean targeted investment on projects geared for long-term growth, including potential development of medical technology and green energy.

Labour unions, though, are not part of the problem; rather, they are part of the solution, helping to attract a work force to the Province — an educated and qualified one, with upper mobility, and the potential to drive the Province forward in the 21st Century. Throwing down the gauntlet at the unions does not accomplish this necessary and proper objective. Again, even though I have nearly always represented labour interests, I also understand that the collective bargaining process requires compromise. So, are the sides willing to come to the table without ulterior motive, and hash out the proverbial hard-fought bargain? Sadly, history does not seem to support this happening.