Where is the evidence that this has been an issue in Saskatchewan schools or that schools don’t already have policies to protect kids?
The tail is successfully wagging the dog: There is really isn’t much difference between Saskatchewan United Party (SUP) policy and Saskatchewan Party policies.
This is necessary to keep children safe, Moe said.
The first priority. To keep children safe.
Wouldn’t these safety concerns for children merit “first priority” status for whomever forms government after Oct. 28? Aren’t there a hundred or more other issues that someone serious about being premier of Saskatchewan might consider as a bigger “first priority?”
The rare circumstance of any child already experiencing the difficult and intimidating process of transitioning while attending elementary or high school is an issue that requires the utmost sensitivity.
That’s why schools already are highly aware of the struggles any such student and would certainly have already explored arrangements to accommodate both the affected student and all other students. It’s what teachers do.
Protecting kids? Protecting which kids from whom? Where is the evidence that this has been an issue in Saskatchewan schools or that schools don’t already have policies to protect kids?
Nevertheless, out comes a decree from a governing political party — one coming five days after the Sask. Party put out its entire campaign platform with absolutely no mention of this issue. It’s unnecessary.
Nor does there appear to be any practical way for a provincial government to determine who is or isn’t biologically male. So why are Moe and the Sask. Party doing this now?
Well, it likely has everything to do with the political capital that Moe and the Sask. Party think can be derived from all this — gain that sadly may very well come at the costs of a few children and their families who may now be more easily outed in their schools and communities.
Essentially, it comes from the same place where the Sask. Party developed Bill 137 — the pronoun bill it framed as legislation protecting “parents’ rights” that were never threatened in the first place.
In the byelection aftermath, Moe declared he heard from the voters (although, not necessarily the voters in Regina Coronation Park and Regina Walsh Acres where Sask. Party candidates didn’t win by more than 50 per cent of the popular vote).
But if the Sask. Party mimics SUP policies well enough, it might prevent SUP from bleeding away votes in ridings where the Sask. Party is in close fights with the NDP.
Out comes the change room policy with the added political benefit of creating a wedge issue between the Sask. Party and NDP. It also draws the attention away from health care and education.
Of course, this all comes at the expense of vulnerable children who might now be more easily outed.
But neither SUP nor the Sask. Party seem to be taking that into consideration. That’s another thing the dog and the tail share.
Mandryk is the political columnist for the Regina Leader-Post and the Saskatoon StarPhoenix.
Our websites are your destination for up-to-the-minute Saskatchewan news, so make sure to bookmark thestarphoenix.com and leaderpost.com. For Regina Leader-Post newsletters click here; for Saskatoon StarPhoenix newsletters click here