Provincial Politics – Page 114

A letter to Premier Dalton McGuinty.

February 13, 2012 by Peter Lowry

Dear Dalton: No doubt you have spoonfuls of sugar ready to go with the medicine you hope Ontario residents will swallow. The first dose comes with the Drummond Report and then the second with the provincial budget. Meanwhile, the media will continue to frighten citizens with speculation and rumours. What puzzles us though are why, in front of the news media, you said last week: “There are legitimate public expectations that we’ll do everything we can to eliminate the deficit as quickly as we can.”

You have got it wrong again Dalton. Take your time. Sure, former civil servant and bank economist Don Drummond might have some interesting ideas. They certainly should be considered. Our barber also has some interesting ideas. You should talk to him too.

Just who is telling you that you have a problem? Is it that young Mr. Hudak? We sometimes tend to forget that he took courses in economics. He is also a protégé of Mike Harris, one of the worst premiers in Ontario history. The two H’s, Harris and Hudak, are ideologues. That means that they put their theories ahead of people. It means they put business wants ahead of what people might want. Hell, they might even put their right-wing creed ahead of people’s lives. These are not nice people. Why should you worry about what they want?

It seems you told that audience in Ottawa the other day that you are going to cut the wages of civil servants in Ontario. That does not sound very smart. If you are paying them too much, who is at fault? What has changed? Has the cost of living in Ontario gone down and we failed to notice? Is it their fault that Ontario has a deficit?

You really need to rethink this Dalton. That is kind of Harris-Hudak thinking to blame the civil servants for something they did not do. Ask interim federal Liberal Leader Bob Rae what happened to him as Premier when he blamed the civil servants in the 1990s.

You should really think about what caused the recent economic problems for Ontario. Obviously there is not much you can do about the American banks who screwed up the mortgage business in the U.S. You have to deal with things you can correct.

For example, we have lost a lot of jobs in Ontario to low-wage areas in the United States. Have you thought of ways we could penalize those companies who send jobs out of the country? Should you ever buy anything from such companies? Sure, we have to respect trading agreements but American states seem to have no problem finding ways to protect their jobs. What are you, a boy scout?

Dalton, you really need to rethink your basic strategy. Liberals are supposed to respect the rights of the individual in our society. If we have hurt your feelings calling you and your caucus Whigs, we apologize. After all, Whigs are just Liberals who are two hundred years behind the times.

If you want to move into the 21^st Century, we will be happy to analyze this Drummond report for you and show you how a modern Liberal would make sure that the proposals helped the people of Ontario—not penalized them for your government’s mistakes. And we will only charge a fraction of Don’s bill. Your new pal, Peter.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Ontario’s ‘Tiny Tim’ will soldier on.

February 11, 2012 by Peter Lowry

Ontario’s Provincial Conservatives have a chance to dump their leader Tim Hudak at their meeting today in Niagara Falls. As there is no immediate replacement available, they probably will not bother. It would be a foolish move anyway. Despite his lack of political smarts that led to his loss to the McGuinty Whigs, there is a tradition among Tories that if you win some more seats you get a second chance to win it all.

Tiny Tim’s role model and mentor is former Premier Mike Harris. Unlike Hudak, Harris never tried to tell us he was smart. He posed as ‘The Tax Fighter’ in the 1990 provincial election and watched Bob Rae’s New Democrats win the election. Harris made a comeback with his ‘Common Sense Revolution’ after Rae had lost the bulk of his union support, five years later. Rae practically handed Ontario to Harris on a platter.

Despite all the gaffs Dalton McGuinty and his Liberals made in the 2011 provincial general election, Hudak could not capitalize on the lead he had in the polls. Voters started paying attention to him during the campaign and he came across to them as callow and stilted with his parroted right-wing pitch. If Andrea Horwath and her handlers had been able to better understand the dynamics of that election,Ontario would now have its second ever NDP government.

But for both Tiny Tim and Andrea, the next provincial election will be do or die. Their main problem is to not force the election too soon. All the political parties have to pay their election debts and build some reserves before anyone wants an election. Since neither of the opposition parties want to give the other too much leverage, the forcing of an election is an intricate dance. In 2015, the Liberals will be committed to an October election and their best bet will be to have a new leader in place well before then.

A new Liberal leader is not the only change that voters need. Much depends on whether the party can come up with a jobs-oriented economic plan that makes sense to the voters. Ontario has lost too many of its manufacturing jobs for a full recovery and the federal Conservative’s emphasis on supporting our western resource base is not going to help.

If the Ontario Liberals were really smart—which might be wishful thinking—they would be doing the critical planning now. If the party had a new leader in place by the spring of 2014 and an action plan ready for the fall of that year, they would have an opportunity to win a snap election.

They would need a good rationale for the action but they could, in effect, run against Prime Minister Harper and his Conservatives. The best thing to do with Tiny Tim at this juncture would be to ignore him. And a strong job-creation action plan would look after Mrs. Horwath.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Reading the bones in la belle Province.

February 10, 2012 by Peter Lowry

Some thoughts while watching a few of the regular ‘talking heads’ being interviewed on recent events in Quebec: These so-called experts treat their voters as specimens—spread-eagled, pinned and dissected on a board. They ignore the impact of those allophones who steadfastly remain Quebeckers. And they think the rest of Canada ignores Quebec. What they need to overcome is their own biases that they bring to their analyses.

Politics is a fluid process and attitudes change.Quebec’s angst has its roots in history but real change for Quebec started in the 1960s and was called the quiet revolution. For lack of a turning point, we can use Expo ’67. It had challenge, umbrage, rebirth and confidence. It led to the excesses of the October Crisis. It made René Lévesque an unlikely revolutionary and by 1976, he was Premier of Quebec and vowing separation. He was a professional communicator and there was little to decipher in his threats to our country and his plans for Quebec.

But his referendum lost and he never recovered. His party lost its balance and appeal and never recovered. Separatism became a platform for demagogues who had lost touch with the people. Voting in Quebec became a tidal event. Each new wave is followed by dangerous undertows. You can only determineQuebec’s choices if you know how to throw and read the bones.

The reason is that Quebec voting has become increasingly volatile. A strange hybrid party has emerged that is the rump of the now defunct right-wing Action démocratique du Québec and deserters from the left-wing parti Québécois who formed the Coalition Avenir Québec. If you think that is a strange combination, consider this: Pollsters are telling us that if an election was held tomorrow and if this party had the candidates ready, it could win a provincial election.

And why was anyone surprised last year that the New Democrats won so many Quebec seats in the federal election? The voters no longer trusted Gilles Duceppes’ Bloc Québécois. That party had nothing to offer. Michael Ignatieff was old guard to them and they were not getting on the Liberal train. And they had an understandable fear of the right-wing agenda of Stephen Harper. Why not vote for that guy Jack’s New Democrats?

The NDP benefited from René Lévesque’s legacy of social democratic rule in the 1970’s and 80s.Quebec voters like those politics. It is too bad the Quebec federal Liberals had never thought to present a more social democratic program.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

“Then they came for the trade unionists.”

February 4, 2012 by Peter Lowry

And why should you worry about a bunch of union people? Is anyone looking after your interests? The German people did not seem to care before the Second World War but a pastor, Martin Niemöller, wrote, after the Allies released him from imprisonment in Dachau: “Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.”

And that is the most basic reason why Canadians have to speak out about incidents such as the Caterpillar scam in London, Ontario and the Rob Ford attack on city unions in Toronto. These should be a matter of deep concern to everybody.

The General Motors diesel engine works in London, Ontario were acquired by American venture capital firms in a fire sale when GM was on the ropes. The Canadian government gave the new company a $5 million incentive to keep Canadians working at the London works just five years ago. Today, owned by the giant Caterpillar Inc., with US$42 billion in annual sales, the plant is being moved to Indiana where the state government has passed ‘Right to Work’ laws and Caterpillar can pay a barely living wage.

The Rob Ford Versus the Unions scenario is a little different. The city of Toronto can hardly move city jobs to a less union-friendly environment. They have to create one. And they are hardly talking about a small adjustment to keep city taxes down. When was the last time you had someone say to you:”Just give up all your rights and we will look after you”?

If you think that is a good deal, you better settle in for a long strike and some very smelly garbage—in half the city—as the weather warms up. Just by prolonging the strike for two months with the savings in salaries, Ford will have reduced city expenses to his budget.

Torontonians are in trouble. If they let Ford win against the city workers, they had better wonder who is next. We will believe that this fiasco is over when we see Rob Ford wearing a button saying: “Have you hugged a union member today?”

The London Caterpillar situation is far more serious. This is not just giving the finger to trade unionists but is also saying ‘screw you’ to the Canadian government. Maybe Prime Minister Stephen Harper could care less but Dalton McGuinty and that bunch of Whig wusses at Queen’s Park had bloody well better do something.

If nothing else, McGuinty could wear the crown a little easier if he sat down with Andrea Horwath, Leader of the Ontario New Democrats. Mrs. Horwath has a vested interest in aiding the unionists in London. Deb Matthews, one of Dalton’s key Cabinet colleagues, has a legislative seat at risk if there is no support for London area jobs.

Just think. Premier McGuinty could have a win-win situation, if he just got off his ass.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Ontario doctors discriminate Deb!

January 31, 2012 by Peter Lowry

Despite being a long-time fan of Deb Matthews, Ontario’s Minister of Health and Long Term Care, we have to admit that she has failed to solve the key problem in Ontario’s health care system. The problem is the doctors. They discriminate and there are people who cannot get a family doctor.

The people who cannot get a family doctor are elderly. They want too much of a doctor’s time. The poorest served of these elderly people are the chronically ill. The doctor cannot cure them. These people tend to have multiple problems that are difficult to treat. That can frustrate the doctor. And that is why doctors do not want these elderly patients in their practice. Doctors want young, healthy families as patients who can be treated quickly and easily.

Sure, the Ontario Medical Association tells doctors not to discriminate because of age or health of prospective patients. The Health Ministry tells the doctors not to discriminate. Despite this, Ontario Human Rights has let them discriminate. Hospitals still let them practice in their facilities, even though they know they discriminate.

That leaves the ball entirely in your court Deb. You are the one who pays these doctors. Your Ministry condones this discrimination. Take a look at the offer on your Ministry’s web site to find a family doctor for Ontario residents. Get your Ministry to issue you a health card with a false name and then fill in an honest application for yourself. You are a grandmother, see how many doctors want to have you as a patient?

When you spoke to the Toronto Board of Trade yesterday (Jan. 30) Deb, you said that the Local Health Integration Network would take more responsibility for local doctors. That was not necessarily good news. From where we sit, in a town that accounts for about a third of the full-time population of the North Simcoe Muskoka LHIN, it is ill-equipped to do anything about the discrimination problem.

While some people hate the LHIN concept in general, we felt that it might work if the centralized bureaucracy at Queen’s Park was proportionally decreased as the health care management was spread across the province. Okay, maybe that was wishful thinking.

But it is still the centralized staff at Queen’s Park that negotiates with the doctors. Do something about the discrimination. Please.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Who do you trust?

January 21, 2012 by Peter Lowry

There seems to be a universal inability to trust these days. We have come a long way from the politics of trust. We can forget the former grandfatherly images of the sage politicians who would look after our interest. Today we look at politicians as no-holds-barred fighters in a cage. Politics has become a survival of the fittest contest as the savaged and bleeding winner earns the title by being the last person standing.

As usual it is American politics that leads the way. Who is Mitt Romney and why is he ordained to lead anyone, anywhere? And why is President Obama so relaxed and laughing while it is the Republican’s turn in the cage? Is Newt Gingrich that funny? And did Rick Santorum (who?) really win in Idaho? And does it matter? Can the Tea Party recover in time to win South Carolina and save the nation from Romney?

Stay tuned folks.

The question is not who is going to win, but why. The United States of America is practicing the politics of hate and if you hate, you no longer trust. And that is the growing concern of political observers across North America.

In Canada we are already reaping the fruits of Conservative hatreds. The formerly docile pet poodles of Stephen Harper’s Conservative caucus are growing fangs and demanding the raw meat of vengeance on their left-wing opponents. Harper is still looking at the long-haul strategy and is trying to keep them penned.

But enough of their hatred for the liberal left spills through to keep the tensions high.

In Ontario, Premier McGuinty is about to exact his revenge on the electorate for reducing his caucus to a minority government. When he plotted this, he must have thought he was going to lose. He hired a banker, Don Drummond, to plan his revenge. The not very secret Drummond report is soon to be released. The fact that McGuinty is still there to present it presents him with a conundrum. This is not chicken soup he is bringing to the electorate. It is a political expectorant. In bringing up the worst of the detritus of government, he is likely to have coughed himself right out of office.

Meanwhile, back in the United States of Hysteria, the Republicans continue to savage each other to prove who is the most pure, the most religious, the most hate filled—and who can defeat that abominable Obama. The election is in November.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Why surprise at Toronto casino?

January 17, 2012 by Peter Lowry

The ‘maybes’ as opposed to the former ‘no ways’ in regards to a Toronto casino should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed the hypocrisy of the Ontario government over the years. In an October 24 posting last year, this blog postulated that there really might be three casinos in the Toronto area. That could be pushing the envelope but the Toronto Star now reports that Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan says the province ‘may try its luck with a Toronto Casino.’

It had to happen. The province needs the money. The city needs the money. It is a match made in heaven.

The fiction over the years was that the government wanted to capture tourist dollars with its casinos. That was the supposed plan until easy access across the U.S. border became a thing of the past. A higher Canadian dollar made the casinos on the U.S. side of the border more attractive. And Ontario’s restrictive smoking and alcohol laws had already turned off many American gamblers. It makes it time to admit that the only market that can turn a substantial profit for the government is Toronto. All the government has to do is admit what we have always known: Toronto is the tourist destination preferred by most visitors to Ontario.

Mind you, Toronto Councillor Michael Thompson speaks for many Neanderthals when he says: “I wouldn’t want to hear about families losing their house or their life savings.” Obviously, Mr. Thompson and like-minded people out of Ontario’s puritan past should have stopped Niagara Falls, Rama, Windsor, Sault Ste. Marie, Skugog Island, Brantford, Gananoque and the National Capitol area’s Lac Leamy from taking the hapless gamblers’ money. That horse has been out of the barn far too long.

The only conflicted Member of the Legislature will be MPP “Tiny Tim” Hudak, Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition. He will not only be against anything the government is for, but just think of the number of people in his provincial riding who work at the Niagara Falls casinos.

The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation’s study on “land-based gaming”—whatever that means—will be coming out soon and it will say whatever the Ontario government wants it to say. The only thing that might be a surprise will be a move by Ontario into Internet gaming. The government needs the money.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Babel hears from the Ontario Legislature.

January 6, 2012 by Peter Lowry

Babel has heard from its man at Queen’s Park. The electoral district sent Mr. Jackson there in early October. We received mail from him this week and he also signed an article in the Examiner. There is little to say about the mailing piece; the recycle bin was already filled with copies from our neighbours, so we added ours. The Examiner article, we read.

The first thing that was obvious about the article was that our new Member of the Provincial Parliament has not spent his time taking a journalism course. This was written for him. It was very modest of him to only have his name at the beginning and end of the article. Usually something like this is written as a news release and the MPP’s name is worked into every second paragraph.

The story was based on Statistics Canada’s release of unemployment figures in October of last year. It also picked up on Conservative Leader Tim Hudak’s mid-December release that linked unemployment to the perceived weaknesses of Ontario’s apprenticeship programs. Whoever wrote the MPP’s article, failed to include the information on the subject from the mayor’s blog at Babel’s city hall Internet site.

The more timely response by Babel’s mayor to the unemployment figures last October pointed out the problem was that Statscan emphasized the donut hole instead of the donut. The mayor, justifiably, complained that Statscan made headlines of the unemployment and ignored the similarly high rate of employment. It is a factor of the average age of people in Babel. With its younger population, Babel is also near the top of the charts of the percentage of people employed.

Tiny Tim Hudak’s December release was just to blame Premier McGuinty for all of Ontario’s unemployment woes. This was hardly a surprise. What was confusing was that he explained that Ontario only allowed one new apprentice for every four journeyman trades persons in the province. While not a trained economist such as the Leader of the Opposition at Queen’s Park, we must admit that the ratio rule makes absolutely no sense. Surely there are various trades that need more apprentices and some that need fewer apprentices. Is nobody doing any forecasting in this?

But our earnest MPP gives a plug to Georgian College for its efforts with apprenticeship programs. We expect we can all agree with that as we face a new year in Babel with renewed determination.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Should we kill all the lawyers?

December 28, 2011 by Peter Lowry

Having been active in business, charities and politics, one gets to know many lawyers. Some of them are quite civilized and likable people. Despite this, there is a strong tendency to agree with William Shakespeare’s character in Henry VI, Part 2 who suggested that (to have an effective revolution) first we have to kill all the lawyers. In Shakespeare’s time, the line probably had even the lawyers in the audience laughing.

At a neighbourhood get-together the other evening, a lawyer made the mistake of claiming that lawyers are put on earth to assure us less fortunate people of access to the law. The reaction to his claim was spontaneous and bordered on the rude. Of course, in his field of law, he has every right to feel proud of what he is able to do for people. It is just that lawyers themselves are often guilty of promoting bad jokes about lawyers.

To many of us, the lawyer is seen as someone with their hand out, waiting for the rest of us to pay our tithes for access to the law. Without legal training, your way is barred. Even in small claims court in Ontario where having legal counsel is not always necessary, we have noted that court-ordered settlements tend to be more generous when lawyers are involved—probably to pay their fees.

But lawyers have been with us since before the days of Cicero in ancient Rome. In Robert Harris’ wonderful novel Imperium, he showed how inseparable lawyers were from politics as far back as Cicero’s time. Mind you, assassination was one of the alternatives to having more votes back then, so you would have expected politicians to be a bit more cautious in making enemies.

Politicians in our day need not be quite as concerned. If they are also lawyers, they can look after themselves quite nicely, thanks to the voters.

If, for example, you have ever struggled with condominium law in Ontario, you can quickly learn what an ass, the law can be. Condominium law, in this province, is probably the best example of lawyers looking after lawyers you will ever see. The elected board of directors of a condo community is treated in the act as though they are incompetents—and can be.

Of all failures of Ontario lawyer-politicians, the most offensive was the response to Toronto Police Chief William Blair when he asked about laws supporting his expanded police force for the G20 in Toronto. He was given the wrong and outdated act under which he was to operate that even he knew had to be wrong. Nobody stepped up to take the blame. Premier Dalton McGuinty (a lawyer) and his pack of lawyers at Queen’s Park disgraced our province!

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

They want who to keynote?

December 24, 2011 by Peter Lowry

That is it! We are not going. So what? There is no way that we can agree to Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty giving the keynote address to the federal Liberal biennual conference in mid January. You need to be some sort of a real liberal to set the right tone for the conference. Dalton McGuinty is not liberal.

Dalton McGuinty is a whig. A whig is a liberal twice removed and 200 years behind the times. If Tiny Tim Hudak had a brain or Andrea Horwath a plan that could work, there is no way Dalton would still be Premier of Ontario.

The purpose of the Liberal Party of Canada gathering in January is to go forward, not backward. This is a meeting where we must deal with the needs of Canadians in the 21^st Century. Dalton cannot get out of the 19^th Century. He knows nothing about the 21^st Century. He thinks electricity is something that comes from windmills and sunlight. He thinks gas fired generating stations can be loaded on a hay wagon and moved somewhere else. He thinks you can solve the province’s medical problems by giving the health portfolio to someone with an I.Q. of more than 80.

Canada needs to know that it is going somewhere besides all-day kindergarten. It believes in our right to a family doctor—of our choice! It wants medicare to mean something besides more user fees. Canadians think adding HST to other gas taxes is pushing a bit too far.

Why were we under the impression that the keynote address at the convention was to be a scholarly discussion by Adjunct Professor Don Tapscott from the University of Toronto? Anyone who could encourage the delegates to think ahead, think broader and advance the party’s position in the political spectrum is most welcome. Not having heard a lecture by Professor Tapscott, we are open to finding out what he has to say.

What Dalton McGuinty has to say is another matter. The other day we heard some talking heads on a news program speculating that the real opposition to the Harper Tories in Ottawa would have to come from the provinces. That is a lot of pressure to put on Jean Charest and three new Premiers. Dalton has his hands full in Queen’s Park.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]