Mississauga Hurontario-Main Line 10 LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

TOareaFan said:
An NDP minister representing Rosedale framed her question about the Hurontario LRT
Click to expand...
NDP Minister. Is this someone left over from Bob Rae's cabinet, or someone who was a minister from another province? The NDP aren't in government, so they don't have ministers, they have critics.

steveintoronto said:
I'm sorry?

The question was to the Premier. The *Premier* (who was there) dodged the freakin' question, and had another know-nothing proffer a dodge instead of the Premier doing the Dodge, even as a Ford.

Classic case of stick-shift. Offside.
Click to expand...
Answers are typically given by people roughly of parallel stature. If NDP member was a Transportation critic - then a Transportation Minister response is expected. If not there, a house leader or related minister may respond.
If the opposition leader asks a question, then the government leader (premier) answers.
 
BurlOak said:
NDP Minister. Is this someone left over from Bob Rae's cabinet, or someone who was a minister from another province? The NDP aren't in government, so they don't have ministers, they have critics.

Answers are typically given by people roughly of parallel stature. If NDP member was a Transportation critic - then a Transportation Minister response is expected. If not there, a house leader or related minister may respond.
If the opposition leader asks a question, then the government leader (premier) answers.
Click to expand...
I don't know where you get your ideas, but here's protocol and rules:
A shadow cabinet is a group of politicians who hold a political post with their party, but whose party is not in government (that is, an opposition party). A member of the shadow cabinet is a shadow minister. The leader of a shadow cabinet is called the Leader of the Opposition.
Shadow cabinet - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...
Shadow ministers are members of the opposition, chosen by the Leader of the Opposition. Shadow ministers have the important responsibility of scrutinising (closely examining) the work of the government and individual ministers.
Click to expand...
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_cabinet

Standing Orders
of the
Legislative Assembly
of Ontario
January 2009
[...]
Oral Questions
37. (a) The Oral Question Period shall be limited to 60 minutes, including supplementary questions and points of order.
Questions on matters of urgent public importance may be addressed to the ministers of the Crown but the Speaker shall
disallow any question which he or she does not consider urgent or of public importance. If in the opinion of the minister or the
Speaker the question requires a lengthy answer, either the minister or the Speaker may require it to be placed on the Orders
and Notices Paper as a written enquiry of the Ministry. The minister may take an oral question as notice to be answered orally
on a future Sessional day but where any reserved answer requires a lengthy statement, the statement shall be given under
"Statements by the Ministry and Responses".
May give notice
(b) A member who so wishes may give notice of an oral question directly to the minister concerned.
Supplementary questions
(c) In the discretion of the Speaker, a reasonable number of supplementary questions arising out of the minister's reply to an
oral question may be asked by any members.
No arguments or opinions
(d) In putting an oral question, no argument or opinion is to be offered nor any facts stated, except so far as may be necessary
to explain the same; and in answering any such question, the member is not to debate the matter to which it refers.
Minister may refer question to colleague
(e) A minister to whom an oral question is directed may refer the question to another minister who is responsible for the
subject-matter to which the question relates.
[...]
Click to expand...
http://www.ontla.on.ca/library/repository/ser/23378/200901jan.pdf

Lots of analysis here: e.g:
Lastly before results, it should also be noted that a large portion of the analysis refers
largely to Question Period in the Ontario legislature. The results of this study and the potential
solutions to a lack of decorum are meant to be applied equally across all matters of debate in the
legislative assembly, from Routine Proceedings to Opposition Days to Government Bills. Yet, in
both the personal interviews and the broader literature on this subject, there is an inevitable focus
upon Question Period as the primary source of incivility. All 17 respondents to the survey
distributed answered ‘Question Period’ when asked when heckling occurs most often, and one of
the more popular solutions to the problem of decorum revolved around the act of Question
Period as well. Additionally, there has recently been a sharp increase in discourse around
reforming Question Period itself, before other proceedings in the chamber, as numerous scholars
and MPs have written about their suggestions for reform (see for example Chong 2008; Chong et
al. 2010; Conley 2011; Hill 2010; Pearson 2010; Ryan 2009). This focus of past research and
interview participants upon Question Period means that this analysis necessarily maintains that
focus. This does not mean that the results and solutions suggested cannot be applied to other
proceedings of the Ontario legislature, only that the pre-eminence of Question Period in the
assembly tended to garner the most attention.
[...]
Click to expand...
https://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2013/Borden.pdf
 
Last edited:
BurlOak said:
Sorry, I didn't notice your initial use of the term "shadow" minister that you put in invisible ink.
Click to expand...
Well there, I hate to break this to you, but the NDP are the Official Opposition, and thus Bell is the Shadow Minister, as indeed she was appointed.

Here's what you wrote:
BurlOak said:
NDP Minister. Is this someone left over from Bob Rae's cabinet, or someone who was a minister from another province? The NDP aren't in government, so they don't have ministers, they have critics.
Click to expand...

But then, some like long form, e.g: "The Government for the People". You obviously have no problem with that...(albeit if the present polls are to be believed, the "People" do...)
https://www.ontario.ca/page/government-people
 
Last edited:
TOareaFan said:
An NDP minister representing Rosedale framed her question about the Hurontario LRT with

"people are fed up with being stuck in traffic for hours or crammed in like sardines in overcrowded buses or streetcars"

It is not clear she has ever been on Hurontario or understands the issues there or the environment there.
Click to expand...

The part of the name of her riding isn't indicative of the transit ridership per capita of her riding, which is very high (take a look at the western and southwestern portion). Also, the way the legislature works the critics ask the government questions based on issues Ontario-wide or based in different regions. Southern Ontario NDP members were asking questions in the last parliament about Grassy Narrows.
 
Allandale25 said:
The part of the name of her riding isn't indicative of the transit ridership per capita of her riding, which is very high (take a look at the western and southwestern portion). Also, the way the legislature works the critics as the government questions based on issues Ontario-wide or based in different regions. Southern Ontario NDP members were asking questions in the last parliament about Grassy Narrows.
Click to expand...
I was not questioning her right to pose the question. I was referring to her posing a question very specific to the HLRT and it’s rumoured cancellation and referring to people being tired of being crammed into subways and streetcars which has no context/bearing on Hurontario....even her reference to people stuck in cars for hours is wrong in that context.....the hlrt may save some people time over driving but no one on that route is spending hours in their car (in rush hour I can drive from Bovaird to PC in 1 hour or less). She looked silly exaggerating the point with references irrelevant to the line she was questioning about.
 
^ Well, that's a lot clearer of a point to make for the view you have than the Rosedale reference, which is why I pointed what the critics traditionally do in the legislature.
 
Allandale25 said:
^ Well, that's a lot clearer of a point to make for the view you have than the Rosedale reference, which is why I pointed what the critics traditionally do in the legislature.
Click to expand...
The combination of the “Rosedale” in her riding name and the bizarre references in her question combine to create/ enforce the impression that she was asking a question about, and pretending to know something about, an area she has never been to and has no/little knowledge of (IMO)
 
I wonder if PCs will propose Hurontario be a subway. Now Doug's a moron, and the PC transit plan is still vague or nonexistent (other than they like rapid underground transit). But perhaps they could end up proposing something a bit more realistic than conventional subways but not LRT. Basically a 'lighter' subway - some above-grade, some below, some at-grade, shorter trains/stations. Which I'm sure Bill Davis in Brampton could be on board with since he proposed similar across the region +30yrs ago.

Was such a thing weighed prior to HuLRT, and it was eventually deemed that tram-style LRT was a better bet? I'm assuming yes but not certain. Anyway I think it's in the realm of possibility since it would achieve current prov goals of a) being a subway, and b) not competing with cars.
 
44 North said:
I wonder if PCs will propose Hurontario be a subway. Now Doug's a moron, and the PC transit plan is still vague or nonexistent (other than they like rapid underground transit). But perhaps they could end up proposing something a bit more realistic than conventional subways but not LRT. Basically a 'lighter' subway - some above-grade, some below, some at-grade, shorter trains/stations. Which I'm sure Bill Davis in Brampton could be on board with since he proposed similar across the region +30yrs ago.

Was such a thing weighed prior to HuLRT, and it was eventually deemed that tram-style LRT was a better bet? I'm assuming yes but not certain. Anyway I think it's in the realm of possibility since it would achieve current prov goals of a) being a subway, and b) not competing with cars.
Click to expand...

Lol with what money?

Who am I kidding. This isn't the party of fiscal responsibility

They'll be voted out next election so this proposal wouldn't happen anyways.
 
44 North said:
I wonder if PCs will propose Hurontario be a subway. Now Doug's a moron, and the PC transit plan is still vague or nonexistent (other than they like rapid underground transit). But perhaps they could end up proposing something a bit more realistic than conventional subways but not LRT. Basically a 'lighter' subway - some above-grade, some below, some at-grade, shorter trains/stations. Which I'm sure Bill Davis in Brampton could be on board with since he proposed similar across the region +30yrs ago.

Was such a thing weighed prior to HuLRT, and it was eventually deemed that tram-style LRT was a better bet? I'm assuming yes but not certain. Anyway I think it's in the realm of possibility since it would achieve current prov goals of a) being a subway, and b) not competing with cars.
Click to expand...
Then blowing money cancelling signed contracts, more studies, consultation, EA., etc., just to be cancelled by the next government?
 
44 North said:
I wonder if PCs will propose Hurontario be a subway. Now Doug's a moron, and the PC transit plan is still vague or nonexistent (other than they like rapid underground transit). But perhaps they could end up proposing something a bit more realistic than conventional subways but not LRT. Basically a 'lighter' subway - some above-grade, some below, some at-grade, shorter trains/stations. Which I'm sure Bill Davis in Brampton could be on board with since he proposed similar across the region +30yrs ago.

Was such a thing weighed prior to HuLRT, and it was eventually deemed that tram-style LRT was a better bet? I'm assuming yes but not certain. Anyway I think it's in the realm of possibility since it would achieve current prov goals of a) being a subway, and b) not competing with cars.
Click to expand...
It would be hilarious if the LRT that was planned even though it's own feasibility study clearly showed it's (some might say inflated) ridership projections could be handled comfortably with BRT became a subway....that would be a very funny thing for a bunch of "fiscal conservatives" to deliver.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top