Provincial Politics – Page 77

On being nice to Premier Wynne.

July 12, 2017 by Peter Lowry

It could be hard to get used to doing this. The problem basically is that as a liberal all my life, it is very difficult to accept Kathleen Wynne as a liberal. She is not a liberal and I do not like the way she has been running Ontario.

But…(life is full of ‘Buts’ isn’t it?) what is the alternative? Our provincial New Democrats cannot find their way across Yonge Street. The NDP in this province has no future and appears to have no plans for one.

And the Ontario Conservatives are something mothers use to frighten disobedient children. The current leader of the Tories stole the leadership a couple years ago and since then has been searching for conservatives.

And Ontario’s Greens have never been in contention for anything.

Which brings us back to Granny Wynne. That woman has a death grip on the door to the Premier’s office. What she is really doing is threatening to take us back to the awful days of Mike Harris as Premier. Only this time, the choice is a political manipulator named Patrick Brown.

Kathleen Wynne tells everyone that she got into politics because of Mike Harris. The only reason she joined the Liberal Party was because Mike Harris was a Conservative. She thought the Liberals had a chance of unseating Harris.

But politically, Wynne is a reactionary. There is nothing progressive about her. She jumped into politics to fight against Harris’ move to amalgamate Metropolitan Toronto into a single city. It was probably the only progressive move he ever made. What Harris did not know to do was to give the politicians at Toronto City Hall the power to do their jobs. Anyone who thinks that city is well run needs to give their head a shake.

And how do you like the way Wynne sells off hydro distribution but leaves the liquor board wallowing in excess profits. If she had sold off the LCBO, the province could have made billions and still kept the revenue.

Not to mention the water torture she is putting us through in gradually introducing grocery store distribution of beer and wines. And have we seen any improvement in our Canada Pension Plan recently?

Yes, the bad news folks is that Granny Wynne might be your only choice in the election next year.

-30-

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

Alberta’s Right, Hard Right and Extreme Right.

July 11, 2017 by Peter Lowry

Former right-hand man for Stephen Harper, Jason Kenney has his “do or die” vote on July 22. It’s his chance to “unite the right” in Alberta. Conservative Party and Wildrose Party members will vote whether or not to come together as the United Conservative Party of Alberta. There are a few stumbling blocks along the way but the ultimate objective is for Kenney and friends to defeat the New Democrat government of Premier Rachel Notley.

Kenney’s first small problem is that while the Conservatives can decide to unite themselves by a 50 per cent plus one vote, not so for Wildrose. The Wildrose, who are the currently the opposition in the Alberta legislature, will only unite if their vote is 75 per cent or more. To help the Wildrose along, many of Mr. Kenney’s Conservative members are currently buying Wildrose memberships to help the Wildrose vote to see the light.

While we do not know enough Wildrose members to assess their feelings on this, we think some might consider this double vote as dirty pool. If you are concerned about this or other dirty tricks, Mr. Kenney knows lots of them. Just ask the women who wanted to run against him for the Conservative party leadership.

But even if the Conservatives and Wildrose unite, Kenney is going to face some much steeper competition. Brian Jean MLA, who has been captaining the Wildrose bunch for the past two years, has been doing a fine job and is willing to do a bit of arm-wrestling over the leadership of the United Conservative Party—should there be one.

It is also good to hear that there are a few others interested in the leadership possibilities of a new United Conservative Party. Frankly, this new party, if it happens, might be better off if it is not led by a mean-spirited social conservative such as Jason Kenney.

And there are some splinter parties ready to step into the breach in Alberta. The Alberta Party has the potential to take over the fiscal conservative voters who do not like the far-right social conservatism of Kenney. Mind you, there is already talk of a break-away Libertarian group who think Mr. Kenney is not far right enough to be the kind of leader they want.

Alberta has never had a lack of splinter groups to keep politics confusing.

-30-

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

Getting to know Patrick Brown.

July 5, 2017 by Peter Lowry

Thank goodness for Newton’s third law. It is the law of physics that says for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. It also seems to be a law of politics. It just works differently. It is like those commercials being given intense exposure on Ontario television recently to introduce provincial Conservative leader Patrick Brown.

The brain-trust behind Mr. Brown might be wondering why they have spent so much money. The expense has produced a win-one-lose-one effect. It seems for every two people they have introduced to Mr. Brown, one of the two dislikes what they see. What we are starting to hear in many parts of Ontario are negative reactions.

The first mistake the Conservative hierarchy made was the commercial about his speech problems as a child. The close up of him speaking with his lips covering his teeth is designed to draw sympathy. His problem as a child was a stutter—which can be influenced by an overbearing parent or relative but can also be corrected with patience and confidence.

And then there is the ad that says if you are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual/transgender or queer (in case you might have been wondering what LGBTQ means) there is room for you in the Conservative Party. We doubt this commercial is having much impact on the target audience.

But the ad is certainly annoying a much larger group that could have been some of Mr. Brown’s base vote. It reminds the religious (social) conservatives of Patrick Brown giving them the back of his hand once he had their support in stealing the leadership of the Conservative Party. It reminds them that he is quite capable of being a two-faced son of a bitch.

For those of us who have watched Patrick Brown’s uninspiring career in politics over the years, we have little sympathy for him. He is a conniver and a user. His only real supporters in the Conservative Party are people who think they can use him to return Ontario to another Mike Harris type laissez-faire government.

If you had been wondering why the Ontario Liberals have not responded to the Conservative advertising? Why would they need to?

-30-

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

Are these the summer doldrums?

July 4, 2017 by Peter Lowry

Why do the talking heads of television shut down for the summer? While we know that it is just our hardcore readers who drop by during these months, we are not going to let them down. There is lots to discuss.

That takeover by Jason Kenney in Alberta has yet to be resolved. The attempt to join the Conservatives and Wildrose parties is causing new splinter groups to emerge. Maybe the idea of uniting the right needed some one other than Jason Kenney to lead it. Judging by his attacks on the Alberta Party, he seems to be more concerned about a united centre.

Frankly, we are intrigued with the on-going drama in British Columbia. It looks as though it is the left there that needs to unite to get the majority needed to keep Clark’s corrupt, right-wing Liberals where they belong. And with the battle over Kinder Morgan’s planned increase in pumping diluted bitumen over the Rockies—the issue will boomerang back to Ottawa.

And it should embarrass and splatter all over our hypocritical Prime Minister. Being the poster boy for the environment and approving pipelines for bitumen are not compatible positions. Bitumen from the oil sands pollutes in the extraction process, is a serious threat of environmental disaster when fed through pipelines, spews carbon into the environment being converted to synthetic oil, leaving tons of bitumen slag to further pollute and then is used in carbon producing internal combustion engines. Bitumen is no-win stuff.

But that cannot be the “Jonny one-note” excuse for Canada’s New Democratic Party. The lackadaisical contest to replace Thomas Mulcair as national leader does not speak well for the party, the contestants or our country.

We are about to go into negotiations to change the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and that is as vital to our economy as it is to the Americans and the Mexicans. There is no excuse for sleeping though any one of those sessions. We have to show up front that we are not going to be bullied. All three countries have to bargain in good faith.

And there is lots more to discuss. We will be coming back to the subjects mentioned and many others. We will wait for September to come up with a morning line for the NDP leadership contest.

For the rest of the summer, you can be assured that politics is never a boring subject.

-30-

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

Duking it out over hydrogen power.

June 29, 2017 by Peter Lowry

Smart politicians stay out of arguments over technology. This was the point we were trying to make in our June 20 comments on the multi-billion-dollar plan to electrify Ontario’s Toronto-area commuter train services. It was never our intent to put down the idea of hydrogen-powered trains.

It is very important to realize that the billions required to upgrade the trains has very little to do with how they are powered. Speedier, two-way service requires that all the commuter rail lines be twinned. We can no longer allow passenger trains to sit on sidings while other trains go by in the opposite direction.

And when you twin those lines, you have to rebuild overpasses and underpasses as required to allow for the two tracks instead of a single track. And making sure there are no level crossings also takes quite a few billions.

The next expense is upgrading stations to improve the service for the all-important passengers. And finally, you are going to change to electrical power to enable the trains to get up to speed faster and to brake quieter. It is this speed requirement that can allow for trains to run as frequently as every 15-minutes.

A small percentage of the billions involved will be needed to electrify the system. That requires overhead wires and connections to the grid. It will be a very efficient use of electrical power.

What is not efficient today would be the proposed use of hydrogen fuel cell power. Proponents of fuel cells always compare the use of hydrogen to that of diesel. Diesel is noisy, polluting, slow to come up to speed and takes a lot of space as part of a train. And that is why we need to have the electrical systems for the trains today.

When the day comes that it is inexpensive, non-polluting and energy-efficient to obtain hydrogen from methane, or by electrolysis from water, and it is inexpensive to store and transport, we will join the chorus of people wanting to switch to hydrogen power. There are just some serious problems with hydrogen that need to be solved first. And those are problems for scientists, not for politicians.

-30-

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

Inviting President Trump.

June 28, 2017 by Peter Lowry

In politics, you are not always able to dine with people you like. All to often you have to deal with the position rather than the person. And in the case of someone such as the President of the United States of America, the position outranks the person. And what would you ever expect to gain from insulting the position?

The truth is that there is nothing to be gained from insult. And it silly to insult Donald Trump. You can make note of your more scathing thoughts about the man and you can save them for your memoires. Nobody gives a darn in memoires and if it makes you feel better, why not.

And if you really want President Trump to honour commitments his country made in regards to the Paris environmental conference, you are not going to make any progress slagging the guy. And it is obvious that he ignores all indications of global warming. Maybe the man has yet to have some learning opportunities and might still see the light.

But you can feel sorry for the Brits. They have already invited President Trump to London where he will be drawn through the streets in a golden carriage and afforded a state dinner with the Queen. Prime Minister May is still paying the price for that foolish invitation. More than 2 million Brits have already signed a petition demanding that this Trump triumph be withdrawn. It is important to note though that while the state dinner and regal trappings were asked to be revoked, there is no objection to Trump coming to the U.K. as a tourist.

I still remember the time Bob Nixon MPP sent me an invitation to a luncheon for then Quebec Premier René Lévesque that was being hosted in Toronto. Bob knew how much I despised what Lévesque stood for. While there was no way the guy could convince me of anything, I had to admit, when listening to him, that he was serious and seeking answers.

But in the case of Donald Trump, it is hard to believe that he believes in anything other than himself. His misogynistic and narcissistic characteristics make him a lampoon of himself.

-30-

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

Spring clean out for Ontario booze.

June 26, 2017 by Peter Lowry

Have you got it figured out yet? Every few years, the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) thinks it will be a good time to clean its warehouses. To facilitate this house cleaning, it tries to clear all its warehouse shelves. It makes it easier to dust them.

But you never see the LCBO doing any deep discounting. It could never maintain its close to 35 per cent net profit margin if it started offering better prices. It is for this reason that the LCBO periodically gets into an argument with its unionized employees. Management push the union’s buttons threatening their hours and by being hard-nosed over slight increases in pay. In response, the union threatens to strike.

Part of the deal with the union is that it has to give the LCBO lots of warning. When the union issues its warning of a strike, the information is then breathlessly shared with the Ontario public. The concern is that 40 per cent of Canada’s citizens in Ontario are going to be cut off their tot of rum. They had better stock up.

What could be better for overall sales than the warehouse stock being stored in the customers’ pantries instead of the warehouse. Excess profits are safely protected. A small increase to the approximately 15 per cent of unionized full-time staff will hardly dent the board’s earnings. It can be made up by cutting hours for the part-time retail staff who do the bulk of the work for the government-owned booze monopoly. After all, sales will slump for a while because of all those customers who have stocked up.

The real danger to the LCBO will be the changes coming in Ontario employment and labour laws. The equal pay for equal work provisions could put an end to the fiction that the LCBO can have such a high percentage of part-time employees. And having those part-timers eligible to join the union could present serious challenges to a politically appointed board. Ontario tipplers already pay too much for their tipples and they will be paying to try to maintain the outrageous profits the Ontario government extracts from its citizens for their booze.

Okay Ontario, the union and the LCBO settled their differences last night shortly past the strike deadline. How does it feel to be had again?

-30-

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

Granny Wynne knows best.

June 25, 2017 by Peter Lowry

The current argument between Ontario’s New Democrats and the Ontario Liberals is like a school yard spat over who did what. It is not only childish but it makes both sides of the argument look foolish. They are arguing over who thought of having a mediocre pharmacare plan first. Neither side has much of which to be very proud.

The point is that not having a universal pharmacare program works at cross purposes to the intent of Canada’s Medicare program. It means that those of us who take our meds are paying more for them and those who cannot afford them, fail to take them and drive up the cost of Medicare.

It is good to see that the NDP are thinking about real needs. Just why they would suggest that only the 125 most commonly prescribed drugs be free to the public is something that only they can explain. It is like saying ‘Tough beans’ to those with an uncommon problem. Since the Liberals are offering to fund the full 4000 or so listed drugs up until age 25, that must be saying ‘Tough beans’ to those between 25 and 65—which does not make really good sense either.

But you have to give this round to Granny Wynne and her Liberals. A small step in the right direction is better than no progress at all. Even the Ontario health minister, Eric Hoskins, has been pitching pharmacare to anyone who would listen for years.

Mind you we started calling the Ontario premier Granny because anything she was going to do took a long time to happen. It is similar to when she finally admitted that the Ontario minimum wage should be $15 per hour. Did she launch it in reasonable time? No. She is taking two years and staging the increase over that time.

The one strong benefit of this pharmacare plan is that of the intense pressure on a Liberal or New Democrat government (should one or the other get elected next year) will be to complete the universality of the plan. The likelihood of any Conservative government doing anything other than finding ways of cutting back the plan would be extremely unlikely.

-30-

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

The political position in public protests.

June 24, 2017 by Peter Lowry

One of the most important classes you attend in the reality school of politics is that of the public protest. You have to learn your lessons fast. You learn how people can organize and lead and maximize the media value. You also learn to find the other guy’s organizer and how to neutralize the person or persons. These are lessons of the streets and the solutions are often harsh.

These concerns are in response to a recent column by Toronto Star columnist Martin Regg Cohn. He was writing about the School Resource Officer (SRO) programs run by the Toronto school boards and the objections voiced by the Black Lives Matter (BLM) group in Toronto.

BLM is a group of trouble makers who seem to represent nobody but themselves. They are a growing embarrassment to the Toronto black community. They have used the name of a group that came about in the U.S. because of the ongoing tragedy of American police shooting black citizens.

It would be foolish to suggest Canadian police are perfect but there are different circumstances in this country. Our police might suffer from some bad training and inept management but they are hardly the out-of-control cowboys such as you can find in some U.S. communities.

Nor is Canada militarizing the police such as has been happening over the past decade in the U.S. Supplying the police with battle-field type weapons and armoured carriers is a formula for finding the bad guys to be arming themselves accordingly. It just spreads conflicts and adds collateral damage.

The reverse of this course is what we are doing in the Toronto area in providing a police presence in schools under the SRO program. This is proving beneficial in humanizing contact with police for students and changing attitudes.

But ignorant, self important groups such as Black Lives Matter are resisting this in schools. BLM has already soured the relationship between the Gay Pride Parade organizers and the police and they now want to destroy a good program for our children. We should go to the trouble of finding out what these fools really want. They are not helping anyone with the direction they are headed now.

-30-

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

Gambling with losers.

June 21, 2017 by Peter Lowry

You find by being observant that the people in a hurry to get to the cashier at a casino are usually the ones wanting to get more money to gamble. Why a casino would extend credit to people is a question that is hard to answer.

The question was partly answered recently when it was noted in a newspaper article that Ontario casinos had recently written off $10 million in bad debts. That is a very small percentage of their more than a billion in revenues each year but a surprisingly high percentage of the money advanced to gamblers. If you were in a large cash business such as a casino, you would question hard the wisdom of advancing money to people who would default on that much money.

The rationale we are offered is that the casino does not want their whales to be bringing suitcases full of money to the casino. They do not want to encourage criminals to try to harpoon their high-rollers before the casino gets a chance at the money.

The argument seems to be a bit silly when you consider that people who can support a habit such as high-stakes gambling can also draw money directly from automated teller machines on the floor of the casino. Yes, the fees are high on those machines but it will cost the casinos less than writing off millions.

Our experience in casinos over the years is that there is very little difference between gambling at low or high stakes tables, penny slots or $100 slots. There seems to be no change in the law of averages. And nobody ever wins because they need to win.

You should look on gambling as fun. You are in for a lot of pain if you gamble with more than you can afford to lose. Always look around that casino and understand that it is the gamblers who pay to keep the lights on, pay the salaries and keep the facilities looking attractive.

The smart gambler: knows the odds and knows when to quit, increases their bet when winning and keeps to a minimum when losing and never tries to guess the number on the next roll of the dice.

-30-

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