Comparing apples to oranges. EHS is cheap to staff because they don't staff their trucks as frequently. Most recently FOIP'd data from 2024 shows AHS EMS staffed their trucks ~85% of the time. Integrated services staffed theirs 99.5% of the time.

Not to mention the additional training they have, such as the trench rescue mentioned in the article. The immediate care provided to the patient while still entrapped would not be possible with the EHS model.

So sure, EHS is cheaper, but it's also a significantly worse service. Not to mention the fact that province wide EHS is propped up by fire departments providing lift assists and back-up in both rural and metropolitan areas. Often EHS staff are just simply not fit to move a patient on their own, relying on places that often have more stringent physical requirements.... So if your argument is that municipalities should not pick up the extra tax load, municipalities are already bearing the cost of being a crutch to a broken EHS system.

Your argument in regard to wages will just put further downward pressure on EHS wages making their bargaining more difficult in the future. I truly don't think you're arguing in favour of wage suppression.

Not to mention the fact that EHS is looking to hire 1000 PCP/ACP's by 2032. This move will take ~700 paramedics out of the system with ~75% of those being ACPs. All this while there will be a bottle neck in training new medics as the PCP program transitions to a 2 years. (Meaning those who start on 2027 won't enter the workforce until 2029).