steveintoronto
Superstar
If the Cons have any intention of moving ahead on this, they have a golden opportunity to state so today. I'm not optimistic that it'll be anything but more weasel words.
raptor
Senior Member
so the logical conclusion is that the liberals had no more intentions of expanding transit than the PCs. talk is cheap
steveintoronto
Superstar
The Libs certainly had their faults, don't get me started on Il Duce...but what exactly is "logical" about the deduction you make from the premise presented?
I think it shows that Martians have landed. And they don't even talk like we do, let alone it be cheap.
If your deduction is logical, then you've just debased the Con's claim that their governance is better because they're not going to build what the Libs claimed to be building.
Again, I'm not defending the Libs on this, just astounded at the desperate lengths some resort to to defend the Cons' inept bumbling and destruction.
raptor
Senior Member
I'm in no way defending the Cons, they're despicable. But the Libs are not far off. They've promised so much, and delivered so little (transit expansion-wise).
rbt
Senior Member
I think the Liberal rule is best described as 2 separate phases.
McGuinty spent a lot of time talking with very little action; mostly dealing with low budget items although purchasing GO corridor was a substantial advancement in it's own right.
Wynne seemed to give it an actual try during her brief time as premier; but she didn't have much to work with. Nearly every project which was ready received full funding under her watch, and she did take steps to setup a stream of funding for many other promises too.
AFP, while locking in the project after hitting financial close, kinda works against a single-term premier because it's damned hard to get every detail to paper in a 4 year period; you shouldn't need to decide the placement of a lightswitch in order to dig a 60 foot deep hole in the ground.
We'll find out over the winter whether Ford is actually serious about building subways or not. A TBM tender opened in January will be delivered in 2021 which is plenty of time to get a tunneling contract in place. If we do the entire thing as an AFP, it'll be a minimum of 4 years before either SCC or Relief line starts construction.
asher__jo
Active Member
I think memory is short. The liberals devised Transit city, conservatives in city hall shot the majority down. They revised their plans and actually committed to a few remaining projects, even if they did drag their heels. So comparing the PC's lack of a record to the Liberals inadequate one isn't even close.
Allandale25
Senior Member
^ I think David Miller and folks at the TTC would take issue with your view that the "liberals devised Transit city [sic]".
raptor
Senior Member
If anything, the liberals killed a huge chunk off transit city (Sheppard East, Malvern, Eglinton West, Waterfront West)
TOareaFan
Superstar
would he? Maybe the Liberals did not but I don't think David Miller would object to the notion that he and other liberals did
asher__jo
Active Member
I'll concede I got who devised the idea wrong. This is just all the more true that Metrolinx needs to be planning transit and released from the tendrils of DOT.
asher__jo
Active Member
Of course the majority of deferring or cancelling was because of the political posturing in city hall. ie, sheppard east as LRT not good enough, and Eglinton West because of Tory's Smarttrack.
Allandale25
Senior Member
would he? Maybe the Liberals did not but I don't think David Miller would object to the notion that he and other liberals did
I think he would because he was pretty upset in 2009 (Edit: it was actually 2010 per @robmausser's post below) when the McGuinty Government reduced the budget of the Transit City lines.
Last edited:
robmausser
Senior Member
This deferment was done in 2010, far before Ford was in office wanting the Sheppard subway or Tory was in office
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2010/03/26/miller_outraged_as_budget_sideswipes_gta_transit.html
TOareaFan
Superstar
I am pointing out that there is a very clear distinction between a Liberal and a liberal......Miller may not have been the former, but he very much is the latter (and proudly so).
asher__jo
Active Member
Valid point, and can be debated to death if that was the right decision. I'm more articulating that the Liberals weren't exactly great at taking initiative, but it was conservatives at city hall the really derailed previous plans Liberals and 'liberals' had created. A lot of the environmental studies and planning have been done for these projects, so it's really saddening when another government throws away that progress. If the PC's want to say they're not the same party that filled in the Eglinton subway, they aren't very convincing.
Kyle Campbell
Active Member
I don't think there is any doubt that the $15B is inflated.......it includes the cost of things the Liberals promised (but never actually spent) but not the revenue that the PCs have already cut (ie cap and trade).....you and I may not agree with the concept but the next logical thing in their exercise is to then cancel the things that the cap and trade was going to pay for ....thus slaying a big part of the $15B deficit they are saying is there.....and then they just have to deal with the regular old deficit that we all knew we had (assuming they are using the auditor general's accounting methodology rather than Charles Sousa's
I believe accounting method depends on if you are in or out of power. Creative accounting is a cottage industry for all political parties. I think the inflated deficit is also part of the plan. The easiest way to show big deficit reduction is to count the Liberal election promises then count the money not spent on them as "savings". It totally goes with Ford's mantra of finding magic and painless "efficiencies".