Seniors taking another hit from UCP
By Letter to the Editor on April 1, 2021.
Editor; I feel it necessary to make it clear that I have no allegiance to any political party; however for the past 29 years I have lived in Alberta and am more than aware of government policies that often seem less than productive.
The current provincial government seems to target groups like doctors, nurses, teachers, unions and often institute policies that are detrimental to low and middle-income households in the most insidious and insensitive ways – and finally let’s not forget our seniors.
It’s the little add-ons, it’s the little incidental costs, it’s the little inconveniences that erode our social fabric.
Whereas a senior of 80 plus years needed to be examined by a physician to determine their capability to operate a motor vehicle, now this age has dropped to 75 years. And whereas until fairly recently, this was at no charge to the senior.
Now, however, each senior who needs to renew their driver’s license must pay a $100 fee.
It is important to know that this is not a doctor-imposed fee but rather a provincial government-imposed fee.
This imposed fee goes to the government, not the clinic.
In other words, every senior over 75 years of age must renew their license every two years at a cost of $100 for the doctor’s visit and $43 for a new license.
In my humble opinion this is nothing short of another tax grab by this UCP government.
This measure was implemented in a most underhanded way which seems typical of the way this government operates.
The government would rather spend millions/billions of tax payer dollars to wage war on Netflix and any faction that disagrees with their policies or to cover poor investment choices rather than support those grassroots aspects of our society.
And they obviously feel its OK to pay for these wars and poor investments through under the table tax grabs.
One hundred dollars every two years may not seem outlandish but as stated before, it is the little add-ons and the incidental costs can add up to a significant amount placed on a large segment of our society that relies on fixed-income.
Tom Walton
Lethbridge
-1
Oh Tom lighten-up! We all are going to suffer a bit. Just think we will have balanced budgets to brag about to our grandchildren in the future lol.
Seniors, especially those on fixed incomes, are also taking ongoing financial hits from the Liberal government, through foolishness such as the ever-increasing carbon tax that is added to our home heating bills every month. IIRC, the NDP has never opposed this tax, either.
Quite a big difference. The carbon tax treats everyone the same and you get a rebate depending on income where this targets a specific portion of our population. Charge everyone $143 every 2 years for a license and I am sure it would be front page news..
The driving test fee is justifiable. A carbon tax fee is not. Also, of course the driving test “targets a specific portion of the population”. Do you give old age driving tests to 20 year old people?
Furthermore, this rebate thing you speak of? It’s miniscule compared to the massive amount extra that we will have to pay for just about all goods and services. Do you really think the corporations are going to suck up the cost of the carbon tax lol? They’re going to pay it, then pass that cost on to us. So not only will we be paying for our “personal” carbon tax, we will be paying for the corporations and the elite’s carbon tax as well. Go team!
Again,
The Canadian Carbon taxes. Doing little to nothing to stop pollution, lines the pockets of the elites, and throws countless more of us peasant Canadians into poverty.
All of this merely equates to the elite getting richer, and all the rest of us becoming poorer. It’s the way it always has been and the way it will always be. Well, that is unless we demolish this archaic party system / vote buying system of governance.
You missed the point. It is not a drivers test, it was a medical report administered by a doctor which used to be free.
I didn’t miss the point, I just didn’t include one of the new fees that will be administered (not that it negates my points anyway). I clearly said that the the new fees were justifiable, so I addressed the point.
Driving is a privilege, not a right. As such, old people who are losing their sight, reflexes, stamina, etc, etc, SHOULD have to pay out of pocket for a driving medical examination.
so why don’t other licensed people not have to pay the same fee every 2 years. get your license at 16 and pay a renewal fee every 5 years. turn 75 renewal is every 2 years plus extra for medical. now lets have everyone renew every 2 years and have a medical. by watching most of the drivers in Lethbridge, administering drivers exams seem to be indicated for at least 70% of the drivers
kl$^Y
Once it has been determined that someone is able to operate a motor vehicle in a safe manner, then there is generally only 2 reasons to which they might begin to drive a vehicle unsafely:
1) Distracted driving (cell phone/texting/drug or alcohol addiction). These are things a person wouldn’t do during a driving test, so there’s no point in conducting another driving test or medical exam.
2) You start becoming physically challenged (old age). In this case of course, there is every reason to conduct medical exams and driving tests.
fair enough, but the issue remains: why gouge the senior? 75 is arbitrary – there is nothing i am aware that underscores 75 year olds are worse drivers than 16, or 20 year olds. perhaps when one is forced to go through the extra hoops and pay the extra fees the point made will resonate more?
$143 every 2 years to ensure that they are still capable of driving a vehicle without killing someone is “gouging”? Seriously?
A senior that can afford the high cost of a vehicle, vehicle insurance, fuel, and maintenance, can’t afford a measly $71 a year in the name of public safety? Wait, what?
Regarding your “75 is arbitrary” and comparing them to young drivers…see #1 in my previous post.
You and Phlushie bringing younger drivers, and how they drive, etc, into the argument is an irrelevant Red Herring. It’s a completely different topic.
…so the nickel and diming goes on while the Kenney UCP hands out cheap open-pit coal mining leases for pennies on the dollar, hands out $4.7 billion in corporate welfare, decreases corporate tax rates, spends ‘x’ $billions on iffy pipelines, continues with their ridiculous ‘war room’ to the tune of $millions/year, pays those closest to the Premier in the $190,000s to $200,000s/year, spends $1 million (?+) on taking the issue on carbon taxes to The Supreme Court of Canada knowing the Court would rule that it was constitutional….it beggars belief. Talk about a spending problem…..
the point is well made – those going on tangents do not undermine the fact that seniors are being singled out for very little reason. there are far more inept and dangerous people on the road than those 75+.
moreover, a tangent, yes, but it is worth weighing the focus being given to the 75+ against utter the lack of serious repercussions being given to those driving while suspended, without insurance, without a licence… which do nothing to dissuade them from driving. the thing is, they are dangerous, and, for those that think mostly in terms of money, should such a donk crash into you, you are left holding the bag.
Everything you said is not a tangent. Everything you said is an irrelevant Red Herring. See my replies to Phlushie, as along with addressing the Red Herring, they also address the non-sensical notion of seniors being “targeted” or “singled out”.