News   Apr 23, 2024
 1K     3 
News   Apr 23, 2024
 443     0 
News   Apr 23, 2024
 1.1K     0 

Politics: Tim Hudak's Plan for Ontario if he becomes Premier

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think a lot of older Ontarians may be wishing for a Liberal minority, just long-lived enough for the PCs to trot Dim Tim out behind the barn and shoot him, so they can vote back in some unknown Davis reincarnation (not John Tory).
 
Surprising (as the Globe constantly complains about the awful transit in Toronto), but not surprising (as the Globe's endorsed Harper three times), but ultimately disappointing in its tepidness.

Globe editorial
The Globe's editorial board endorses Tim Hudak's Progressive Conservatives
Published Friday, Jun. 06 2014, 2:40 PM EDT

Over four days, The Globe editorial board looked at the options facing Ontarians. Today the board makes its endorsement.

On the first day of this series, we said that, in a perfect world, we’d be urging Ontarians to vote for the non-existent Liberal Progressive Conservative Party: a party that believes in fiscal responsibility as the foundation of government, but not its point; a party that understands the necessity of government to build a better society, but also government’s limitations; a party that puts the free market at the centre of its thinking, while acknowledging its imperfections; a party that chooses policies based on evidence, not dogma; a party powered by ideas, but still able to feel the pain of real people; a party that favours amelioration over revolution; a party that if entrusted with the stewardship of the once healthy but now mildly ill patient known as Ontario, could credibly promise to leave her in better shape.

There are three major parties in this contest, and none of them entirely fits the bill. We do not live in that perfect world. That is not a statement of despair or a call to apathy. Democracy has always been messy and imperfect. Elections are hardly ever about choosing between polar opposites, or self-evidently right and unmistakably wrong options, as far apart as noon and midnight. At election time, all choices are relative. At election time, all parties are graded on the curve.

Ontarians’ choices this time around are, as always, various shades of grey. All of the parties have blemishes, and each of the choices comes with its own uncertainties. Each of the parties falls short in different ways, but most importantly – because we are grading on that curve – each falls short to a different degree.

In a perfect world, we’d have no hesitation in calling for the Liberals to be tossed out. They’ve been in power for nearly 11 years. And over time, missteps and even misdeeds have compounded. eHealth. Ornge. A Green Energy Act that, years on, keeps driving up electricity prices, hurting consumers and businesses for the sake of a delusional industrial strategy. And then there are those two cancelled gas plants that have dogged Liberal Leader Kathleen Wynne throughout the campaign. The cancellations, made for electoral advantage in the 2011 election, could ultimately cost the province up to $1-billion. Allegations of cover-up surrounding documents related to the plants, and a police investigation, have added to the foul odour. This week it came out that Ms. Wynne’s predecessor, former premier Dalton McGuinty, was recently interviewed by the police in connection with the investigation. A police inquiry is not proof of wrongdoing. But “Premier Dad Questioned By Cops” is not an ideal story line for the Liberal brand.

Change at Queen’s Park would be a good thing. But to vote somebody out of office, you have to vote somebody else in. And the alternatives aren’t ideal. Their weakness is the main reason the Liberals won re-election in 2011.

The NDP has been the most disappointing of the three parties. It opened the campaign with long-time stalwarts penning an open letter, asking whether the party had abandoned its principles and sold its soul. And as the election moved into its final days, Leader Andrea Horwath was bizarrely attempting to mischaracterize Ms. Wynne’s proposal for a province-wide pension plan, an idea the NDP once supported and sort of still does, as being part of a right-wing, “Harper-style” agenda. The NDP’s moves have been strange and sad.

And then there are Tim Hudak’s Tories. Are they the ideal alternative? No, far from it. Are they a viable alternative? Yes, barely.

They deserve praise for taking a hard line with public servants, calling for an across-the-board wage freeze. Union attacks on Mr. Hudak, and support for Ms. Wynne, leave a reasonable apprehension that the Liberals won’t be firm in future contract talks. And absent a willingness to stand up to its own supporters, a Liberal government will miss its budget targets. Mr. Hudak also has the right idea on business subsidies: Get rid of them. His impulse runs counter to the Liberal tendency, which has been to move ever more deeply into the game of subsidizing businesses in an attempt to protect or create jobs. Several Liberal financial miscues, notably Green Energy, grew out of a mistaken belief that government has to get into industrial strategy. The game has long been powered by lobbying and fraught with muck, and the Tories are right to want to find a way out of it.

But Mr. Hudak is also running on a platform of simplistic slogans. The Million Jobs Plan has been rightly mocked for failures of basic arithmetic. The promise to cut 100,000 government workers contains some reasonable ideas borrowed from Don Drummond’s Liberal-commissioned report on right-sizing government, but the rest is just about offering a nice round number for campaign purposes. The pledge to cut red tape by one-third is similarly just a slogan, not a plan to govern. The Tory platform is about signalling to the electorate that they are erasing the “progressive” from Progressive Conservative. To govern that way would be misguided, because governing best is not merely about figuring out how to govern less. There is much immaturity in the Conservative plan.

In a perfect world, Ontario voters would have (at least) two excellent alternatives to choose from. They instead have two imperfect choices: a tired Liberal Party that has yet to learn enough from its mistakes, and an untested Progressive Conservative Party that needs to moderate and mature. The only way it will do so is if it is given the chance to govern. As for the Liberals, spending some time in the wilderness will allow them to rethink and recover themselves. On balance, in our imperfect world, we choose the Progressive Conservative Party – but kept on the short leash of a minority government. In two years’ time, if all goes well for the maturing of the Tories and the rebuilding of the Liberals, Ontarians could find themselves returning to the polls, facing what the province desperately needs: two much stronger choices.

Follow us on Twitter: @GlobeDebate

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...-for-a-conservative-minority/article19047636/

Of course, the Harper government has moderated and matured so much during their time as a minority government that they proved capable of making non-partisan choices that benefited all Canadians. Maybe we'll see this with the Hudak government?
 
I think a lot of older Ontarians may be wishing for a Liberal minority, just long-lived enough for the PCs to trot Dim Tim out behind the barn and shoot him, so they can vote back in some unknown Davis reincarnation (not John Tory).

Actually, the older Ontarians are wishing Bill Davis would return as PC leader (and Premier of Ontario).

davis3nov11.jpg.size.xxlarge.promo.jpg
 
Michael Chong for PC leader. I could support a guy like him.
Michael Chong publicly opposed same-sex marriage in 2005; and while he's made it clear he has no interest in re-opening the debate, I'm not aware that he has actually recanted his bigoted views.
 
To be fair most Canadians have changed their views since 2005. Back then not even a majority of Canadians supported same sex marriage, today it's at 80% approval.
 
I had no idea Bill Davis was still alive, but I just looked it up and he's 84 years old. Good luck of getting him to be politically active.
 
Surprising (as the Globe constantly complains about the awful transit in Toronto), but not surprising (as the Globe's endorsed Harper three times), but ultimately disappointing in its tepidness.



Of course, the Harper government has moderated and matured so much during their time as a minority government that they proved capable of making non-partisan choices that benefited all Canadians. Maybe we'll see this with the Hudak government?

I'm saddened but not entirely surprised at this, because the Globe can get thick in the head with their editorials sometimes. I pronounce it firmly "lol-worthy".
 
Michael Chong publicly opposed same-sex marriage in 2005; and while he's made it clear he has no interest in re-opening the debate, I'm not aware that he has actually recanted his bigoted views.

Is there any evidence that he is bigoted, or was he simply opposed to same-sex marriage. The two are unrelated.
 
He's active, fighting LRT in Downtown Brampton.

Seems appropriate, since it was Bill Davis (as Premier of Ontario) who forced the change in Scarborough from light rail to Intermediate Capacity Transit System (ICTS), for what is now the Sheppard RT (which opened in 1985). Maybe he wants Intermediate Capacity Transit System (ICTS) for Brampton?
 
Last edited:
To be fair most Canadians have changed their views since 2005. Back then not even a majority of Canadians supported same sex marriage, today it's at 80% approval.
Fair enough. And though I have seen information that some prominent politicians have publicly stated they've changed their rules, I haven't seen anything about Chong. Not that I've spent a lot of time researching it. It' certainly an issue he'd need if he'd want to widen the Tory support much beyond the base, and make serious inroads in 416/905.

Is there any evidence that he is bigoted, or was he simply opposed to same-sex marriage. The two are unrelated.
Perhaps in 2005 they were unrelated, as I suppose it could simply have been ignorance (though even that's hard to believe, but let's give the benefit of the doubt). But that's certainly not true today. There's no excuse these days for publicly opposing same-sex marriage - and anyone who is so utterly evil and bigoted should not be representing us in society.
 
Last edited:
Although Hudak is certainly not nearly as socially Conservative as Harper and the boys, I don't relish any one winning an election on cheap slogans and one-liners. They may make for great signage and easy to remember political advertisement, they are not policy plans and simplistic views can be very divisive pitting one group against another as opposed to trying to find common ground.

I want Wynne to win but I can see why people just couldn't vote Liberal again. The stench of corruption and incompetence is still in the air at Queen's Park and she maybe the recipient of the masses anger against McGuinty. Unfair perhaps but politics is anything but fair.

Thankfully, the NDP are not even close to being in the race and their support is falling as it should. Hudak is a lot of things but incompetent isn't one of them and Howarth is certainly that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top