Hi Everyone
This is just a post to let everyone know that I have relocated Milton Views to wordpress and will be updating there from now on. Come on over, and have a peek: www.miltonviews.wordpress.com. I haven't decided what to do with this blog yet- one idea I have is to make it more creative by using it to showcase short stories, or even a longer-form novel I've got in development, but I'm totally open to suggestions. Thanks for reading and commenting, and I hope you guys keep it up.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
"The only bad job, is not having a job-" Jim Flaherty
"The only bad job, is not having a job," Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, May, 2012.
He meant that job searchers, and the unemployed were being too picky in what they apply for. On one hand he has a point. There is a minority of us who want that perfect job and there's nothing wrong with that. But then there are those of us who at some point realize that search for the perfect job has to give way to the drive for cash, the feeling of self-confidence you get when you receive a well-earned pay cheque. Perhaps that's what the Finance Minister meant by that comment.
On the other hand, the Minister is a out of touch. What he has missed is that because of the higher unemployment rates, this is an employers market. I am willing to take a retail job and have been interviewed for retail jobs in the last few months but for whatever reason I haven't got them. My resume screams media- it's full of positions related to media and one customer service position. A perspective employer in a retail type of setting looks at it and wonders to themselves if I will stick around for a while, or immediately leave for the next big job. And while it is a reasonable question to ask, it's also one of the problems faced by job hunters.
Another issue is the lack of jobs. In Ontario things are bad and have a long way to go before recovery. Over the last while for example I'm finding fewer jobs to apply for within my field- two so far this week. Part of that is due to cutbacks at lot of media outlets; Rogers, CBC, and Post Media are in the process of cutting jobs. The market will soon be full of Journalists more qualified, and experienced than I. Another part of it is the fact it is a changing industry- I can't think of many others where technology has made such a big difference.
A third problem is the hike for Old Age Security (O.A.S.) by two years outlined in the budget . I appreciate it had to be done, but I wonder if the consequences of the action were fully thought out. Naturally older adults are going to be hanging onto those jobs two years longer than they would otherwise, and I can't really blame them. But it creates a problem on the other end of the job market with again fewer jobs for the younger job searchers. A more balanced approach would've been better; hike the O.A.S. by two years, and put something in play for those of us younger workers trying our best to get into the job market.
I am willing to relocate for the right offer. However, I wouldn't leave Ontario without a job to go to; my finances are such that if I were to make a physical move it would have to be employment first and then I move. And I think most people if pressed are the same way. If Flaherty expects us to relocate for employment, put the money where your mouth is; give us a grant or a tax cut that will make it easier for us to move around.
The world of job searching, and employment is completely different from when Jim Flaherty was first starting out. And he would do well to remember that the next time he opens his mouth.
He meant that job searchers, and the unemployed were being too picky in what they apply for. On one hand he has a point. There is a minority of us who want that perfect job and there's nothing wrong with that. But then there are those of us who at some point realize that search for the perfect job has to give way to the drive for cash, the feeling of self-confidence you get when you receive a well-earned pay cheque. Perhaps that's what the Finance Minister meant by that comment.
On the other hand, the Minister is a out of touch. What he has missed is that because of the higher unemployment rates, this is an employers market. I am willing to take a retail job and have been interviewed for retail jobs in the last few months but for whatever reason I haven't got them. My resume screams media- it's full of positions related to media and one customer service position. A perspective employer in a retail type of setting looks at it and wonders to themselves if I will stick around for a while, or immediately leave for the next big job. And while it is a reasonable question to ask, it's also one of the problems faced by job hunters.
Another issue is the lack of jobs. In Ontario things are bad and have a long way to go before recovery. Over the last while for example I'm finding fewer jobs to apply for within my field- two so far this week. Part of that is due to cutbacks at lot of media outlets; Rogers, CBC, and Post Media are in the process of cutting jobs. The market will soon be full of Journalists more qualified, and experienced than I. Another part of it is the fact it is a changing industry- I can't think of many others where technology has made such a big difference.
A third problem is the hike for Old Age Security (O.A.S.) by two years outlined in the budget . I appreciate it had to be done, but I wonder if the consequences of the action were fully thought out. Naturally older adults are going to be hanging onto those jobs two years longer than they would otherwise, and I can't really blame them. But it creates a problem on the other end of the job market with again fewer jobs for the younger job searchers. A more balanced approach would've been better; hike the O.A.S. by two years, and put something in play for those of us younger workers trying our best to get into the job market.
I am willing to relocate for the right offer. However, I wouldn't leave Ontario without a job to go to; my finances are such that if I were to make a physical move it would have to be employment first and then I move. And I think most people if pressed are the same way. If Flaherty expects us to relocate for employment, put the money where your mouth is; give us a grant or a tax cut that will make it easier for us to move around.
The world of job searching, and employment is completely different from when Jim Flaherty was first starting out. And he would do well to remember that the next time he opens his mouth.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Online Voting in Milton??
I'm against it. I don't think bringing in online voting will fix the voter apathy, and the extremely low voter turnout we've been experiencing lately. I realize that's a pretty backward reaction; it is the 21st century and technology was invented to make lives easier it's only natural that it should be extended to the democratic process.
The reason people aren't engaged has more to do with politicians themselves I think. Out of all elected representatives right now here in Milton at all levels of government I can think of maybe five possibly seven people who I consider to really be engaged with the voters... out at events clearly present and accounted for. These are people who will take time to listen, and take note of my concerns as a constituent.
Politicians.. mostly at upper levels tend to go in for the easier soundbite. As a member of the press that's great- it gives us something to talk about; it feeds the 24 hour news cycle. And often we are the ones who see the context behind the quote; or the full story instead of just the spin. The problem is as a voter, personally I like to see it all; the whole package- the policy as well as the pretty face speaking about it. It all should matter.
Integrity ranks high on the list of qualities I look for in a politician. I haven't been seeing too much of it around these days. Politicians have gained a reputation for lying and scandal- Dalton McGuinty constantly promising no new taxes and yet he keeps introducing them. The various cabinet ministers in the Harper government who are either involved, or have been involved in scandals. Locally we have a well-documented, much commented upon case of Tony Lambert and the charges he has faced.
I grant some are expected- it is impossible for an opposition party to know exactly what they face if they're elected to govern. And in McGuinty's case it is in some measure at least his fault for making that particular promise several times and know that in likelihood he's going to end up doing it anyway. But still every once in a while it wouldn't hurt to keep at least one every so often just to surprise us. If people saw some integrity; a little bit more we're doing what we said we were going to, then maybe they'd sit up and pay attention for a while. Right now taking the McGuinty example again, it's too easy to look at him and say he breaks all the promises so why should I trust him?
Voting is part of the Canadian experience. I've worked as a Registration Officer at a federal election, and I remember it was late in the day when one couple comes up to register. Election officials aren't allowed to ask for proof of citizenship, which, was why I was surprised when in addition to the regular ID, one of them showed me their citizenship card. It's important to remember that feeling of pride; that to use the old and melodramatic argument that people fight for the right to vote, people die for it. I don't think it's too much to ask us to take 20 minutes out of our day once every 4 years to go down to our local school/community centre/church and vote.
Democracy is messy. Should we clean it up with technology? In spots there definitely are places it could be used to make it easier. But it shouldn't be the be all, and end all for the voting process. The lack of engagement is more due to politicians themselves I think than the people. If they kept their promises every so often, and told the truth then maybe we wouldn't be in such a tough spot in terms of turnout.
The reason people aren't engaged has more to do with politicians themselves I think. Out of all elected representatives right now here in Milton at all levels of government I can think of maybe five possibly seven people who I consider to really be engaged with the voters... out at events clearly present and accounted for. These are people who will take time to listen, and take note of my concerns as a constituent.
Politicians.. mostly at upper levels tend to go in for the easier soundbite. As a member of the press that's great- it gives us something to talk about; it feeds the 24 hour news cycle. And often we are the ones who see the context behind the quote; or the full story instead of just the spin. The problem is as a voter, personally I like to see it all; the whole package- the policy as well as the pretty face speaking about it. It all should matter.
Integrity ranks high on the list of qualities I look for in a politician. I haven't been seeing too much of it around these days. Politicians have gained a reputation for lying and scandal- Dalton McGuinty constantly promising no new taxes and yet he keeps introducing them. The various cabinet ministers in the Harper government who are either involved, or have been involved in scandals. Locally we have a well-documented, much commented upon case of Tony Lambert and the charges he has faced.
I grant some are expected- it is impossible for an opposition party to know exactly what they face if they're elected to govern. And in McGuinty's case it is in some measure at least his fault for making that particular promise several times and know that in likelihood he's going to end up doing it anyway. But still every once in a while it wouldn't hurt to keep at least one every so often just to surprise us. If people saw some integrity; a little bit more we're doing what we said we were going to, then maybe they'd sit up and pay attention for a while. Right now taking the McGuinty example again, it's too easy to look at him and say he breaks all the promises so why should I trust him?
Voting is part of the Canadian experience. I've worked as a Registration Officer at a federal election, and I remember it was late in the day when one couple comes up to register. Election officials aren't allowed to ask for proof of citizenship, which, was why I was surprised when in addition to the regular ID, one of them showed me their citizenship card. It's important to remember that feeling of pride; that to use the old and melodramatic argument that people fight for the right to vote, people die for it. I don't think it's too much to ask us to take 20 minutes out of our day once every 4 years to go down to our local school/community centre/church and vote.
Democracy is messy. Should we clean it up with technology? In spots there definitely are places it could be used to make it easier. But it shouldn't be the be all, and end all for the voting process. The lack of engagement is more due to politicians themselves I think than the people. If they kept their promises every so often, and told the truth then maybe we wouldn't be in such a tough spot in terms of turnout.
Monday, May 7, 2012
Stories to Watch: May 7-14
Some stories to watch this week.
1. Liberals cut OHIP Costs, freeze Doctors salaries: There are going to be changes to at least 37 OHIP fees before the end of this year. Services affected include: Cardiology, Cataract surgery The fee adjustment is expected to save the government millions. I consider this ongoing because the fight over wage freeze isn't over.
2. Come On Over, the Water's Fine: Rumours are going around that Dalton McGuinty, and his government would welcome any member of the opposition should they decide to cross the floor. Why not just call the by-election for Whitmer's seat and do it the legitimate way?
3. Latest Ornge Developments: Former CEO Dr. Chris Mazza has said through his lawyer that he is too ill to testify at the ongoing hearings into the matter. Reports this past weekend in the Star place Mazza in a rehab facility. They are looking at rescheduling his appearance for sometime in June.
4. Federal Liberal Leadership: It's not for at least another 9-11 months but names being bandied about include Martha Hall-Findlay, Bob Rae, and Justin Trudeau. How about someone fresh, and dynamic without any ties to any past Liberal leaders. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; get some good fundamental policies, and anybody can lead the party.
Local News:
1. Public Input Sessions are being held Tuesday May 8 to discuss what will happen to the Scott, and Wilmont area parks. Sessions begin at 6pm at the Milton Sports Centre located at the corner of Derry and Santa Maria Blvd.
1. Liberals cut OHIP Costs, freeze Doctors salaries: There are going to be changes to at least 37 OHIP fees before the end of this year. Services affected include: Cardiology, Cataract surgery The fee adjustment is expected to save the government millions. I consider this ongoing because the fight over wage freeze isn't over.
2. Come On Over, the Water's Fine: Rumours are going around that Dalton McGuinty, and his government would welcome any member of the opposition should they decide to cross the floor. Why not just call the by-election for Whitmer's seat and do it the legitimate way?
3. Latest Ornge Developments: Former CEO Dr. Chris Mazza has said through his lawyer that he is too ill to testify at the ongoing hearings into the matter. Reports this past weekend in the Star place Mazza in a rehab facility. They are looking at rescheduling his appearance for sometime in June.
4. Federal Liberal Leadership: It's not for at least another 9-11 months but names being bandied about include Martha Hall-Findlay, Bob Rae, and Justin Trudeau. How about someone fresh, and dynamic without any ties to any past Liberal leaders. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; get some good fundamental policies, and anybody can lead the party.
Local News:
1. Public Input Sessions are being held Tuesday May 8 to discuss what will happen to the Scott, and Wilmont area parks. Sessions begin at 6pm at the Milton Sports Centre located at the corner of Derry and Santa Maria Blvd.
Friday, May 4, 2012
Harper government: 1 year later...
The Harper Government celebrated its first anniversary on Wednesday May, 2. I would give them a C+ on the first year; there were successes, and plenty of scandal. There are definitely lots of ways to improve.
I am mostly satisfied with the job Stephen Harper is doing as Prime Minister. Harper is still the steady hand on the tiller. He is going for a balanced economic course; there are plenty of free-trade deals at various stages of negotiation. The way his government has handled the two major labour disputes (Canada Post, and Air Canada) was probably the highlight of the year. He fulfilled the promise to end Canadian combat operations in July of last year by bringing the troops home- another highlight, because a politician that keeps his promise is a rare thing indeed. The foreign policy of this government concerning Afghanistan, and Syria has continued creating what I would say is a uniquely Canadian identity on the world stage.
Where he could have raised his grade was the budget. He really should've take a look at the bigger picture before raising the age from 65-67 on Old Age Security (O.A.S.). The bigger picture is that there are many people my age, who are having trouble finding a job, and the move with O.A.S. only makes it that much tougher. There should've been some balance applied; raise the age on O.A.S., and find a way to help private industry create more jobs for younger people.
There are a couple of other places the Harper government falls down. We all remember Bill C-30 that gave birth to the twitter hash tag #TellVicEverything. There were clear flaws in that legislation; if people had read and studied that bill perhaps the whole controversy could have been avoided. Another is again the budget specifically the Environmental measures that would see the Assessment process shortened for resource projects. I would mention it in the budget, and then create a separate piece of legislation for it, and look at reforming the whole process instead of the relative piecemeal way it was done. Also there really should be more discussion on the consequences of these actions.
Then there are the scandals. Peter MacKay and his chopper rescue, Bev Oda and her 5 star London hotel at our expense; and that's just the higher profile ones I know I'm forgetting a few. The ministers in question haven't paid any consequences for their follies, and this is a second offense for Oda. We still haven't gotten to the bottom of both the F-35 debacle, and the Robo-Call scandals. I wonder if these scandals are the reason right now they trail the N.D.P. by 10 points.
Whether the Harper government learns from the mistakes of its first year remains to be seen. I hope they can, because the scandals and lack of focus on the larger picture make them seem like a tired government. One that in my books will stay at its C+ grade.
I am mostly satisfied with the job Stephen Harper is doing as Prime Minister. Harper is still the steady hand on the tiller. He is going for a balanced economic course; there are plenty of free-trade deals at various stages of negotiation. The way his government has handled the two major labour disputes (Canada Post, and Air Canada) was probably the highlight of the year. He fulfilled the promise to end Canadian combat operations in July of last year by bringing the troops home- another highlight, because a politician that keeps his promise is a rare thing indeed. The foreign policy of this government concerning Afghanistan, and Syria has continued creating what I would say is a uniquely Canadian identity on the world stage.
Where he could have raised his grade was the budget. He really should've take a look at the bigger picture before raising the age from 65-67 on Old Age Security (O.A.S.). The bigger picture is that there are many people my age, who are having trouble finding a job, and the move with O.A.S. only makes it that much tougher. There should've been some balance applied; raise the age on O.A.S., and find a way to help private industry create more jobs for younger people.
There are a couple of other places the Harper government falls down. We all remember Bill C-30 that gave birth to the twitter hash tag #TellVicEverything. There were clear flaws in that legislation; if people had read and studied that bill perhaps the whole controversy could have been avoided. Another is again the budget specifically the Environmental measures that would see the Assessment process shortened for resource projects. I would mention it in the budget, and then create a separate piece of legislation for it, and look at reforming the whole process instead of the relative piecemeal way it was done. Also there really should be more discussion on the consequences of these actions.
Then there are the scandals. Peter MacKay and his chopper rescue, Bev Oda and her 5 star London hotel at our expense; and that's just the higher profile ones I know I'm forgetting a few. The ministers in question haven't paid any consequences for their follies, and this is a second offense for Oda. We still haven't gotten to the bottom of both the F-35 debacle, and the Robo-Call scandals. I wonder if these scandals are the reason right now they trail the N.D.P. by 10 points.
Whether the Harper government learns from the mistakes of its first year remains to be seen. I hope they can, because the scandals and lack of focus on the larger picture make them seem like a tired government. One that in my books will stay at its C+ grade.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Ford vs. the Toronto Star: There's Enough Blame to go around
This could boil down to a classic case of he said, he said. Reporter Daniel Dale says he was taking photos for a story from public land, Rob Ford says otherwise. The story Dale was covering is completely legit- about why Ford would want to buy land near his house to build a security fence; Ford says it was to make more of a play area for his kids. This might even be a story I would have done but I wouldn't have done it like that.
Covering politics is about relationships. If you've got good relationships, then you can get the stories; get the quotes you need when you need them. I can think of stories I've been able to get because I've kept good relationships with the people I cover. If you have bad relationships your work will suffer.
The whole situation raises questions for me. What was a Reporter with a newspaper that has a known feud (for want of a better term) going on with the Mayor doing anywhere near his house? And taking photos of the area at 7:30 in the evening? At this time of year, that time is when the lighting can be difficult, and if you don't have the proper equipment to compensate for that, or the photo editing software and patience your shots more often than not are going to be bad.
Ford's conduct in hindsight was on the extreme side. What he probably should've done was to stay inside and call the police. I can't blame him entirely though; the reaction was natural when you consider he had young children at home, and a history of threats against him and his family.
His reaction now of banning that particular reporter from scrums is in one way reasonable, in another extreme. It's a reasonable instinct that when you or your family is threatened to want to protect them; it's reasonable to defend them at all costs. But the thing about reporters is that we have a weird sense of reverse psychology; tell us to go right, we'll turn left... tell us to zig, we'll zag. If we think you're keeping something from us, then we become like the proverbial dog with a bone; we won't stop until we find out what it is. Ford would do well to remember that before changing his media policy.
It's courtesy to tell people you may be taking their photo; especially when private interests are concerned. In this, Ford should be treated like anybody else, and a knock on the door wouldn't have gone amiss... it might have led to a better picture- a way of doing it without using his home. And perhaps a quote for his story.
The Star's motives are a bit suspect to the say the least. They have had a well-documented fight going on with Ford, and I don't think we should dismiss the possibility this may have coloured their actions here. Even when you take this into account there is enough blame to go around.
It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.
Covering politics is about relationships. If you've got good relationships, then you can get the stories; get the quotes you need when you need them. I can think of stories I've been able to get because I've kept good relationships with the people I cover. If you have bad relationships your work will suffer.
The whole situation raises questions for me. What was a Reporter with a newspaper that has a known feud (for want of a better term) going on with the Mayor doing anywhere near his house? And taking photos of the area at 7:30 in the evening? At this time of year, that time is when the lighting can be difficult, and if you don't have the proper equipment to compensate for that, or the photo editing software and patience your shots more often than not are going to be bad.
Ford's conduct in hindsight was on the extreme side. What he probably should've done was to stay inside and call the police. I can't blame him entirely though; the reaction was natural when you consider he had young children at home, and a history of threats against him and his family.
His reaction now of banning that particular reporter from scrums is in one way reasonable, in another extreme. It's a reasonable instinct that when you or your family is threatened to want to protect them; it's reasonable to defend them at all costs. But the thing about reporters is that we have a weird sense of reverse psychology; tell us to go right, we'll turn left... tell us to zig, we'll zag. If we think you're keeping something from us, then we become like the proverbial dog with a bone; we won't stop until we find out what it is. Ford would do well to remember that before changing his media policy.
It's courtesy to tell people you may be taking their photo; especially when private interests are concerned. In this, Ford should be treated like anybody else, and a knock on the door wouldn't have gone amiss... it might have led to a better picture- a way of doing it without using his home. And perhaps a quote for his story.
The Star's motives are a bit suspect to the say the least. They have had a well-documented fight going on with Ford, and I don't think we should dismiss the possibility this may have coloured their actions here. Even when you take this into account there is enough blame to go around.
It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Oh Ontario how you frustrate me
The title is born mostly of frustration. I've been on the job market since late November... and let's say I've had enough bites to know that it's more likely because of job market conditions than any lack of qualifications on my part. The fact is a lot of employers simply for whatever reason aren't hiring.
And I think it's about to get worse. On Wednesday the announcement came down that Standard& Poors was downgrading our economic outlook, and Thursday Moody's decided to downgrade Ontario's credit. It likely has something to do with the budget deal struck Monday, and then the budget voted on, Tuesday.
It probably is really no more than a verdict on the provincial budget. Specifically on the fact there is a new tax being applied when conventional wisdom shows us that business tax cuts are a better way to stimulate growth in private business. And who runs private business? Usually people making over $500 thousand... aka those being asked to fork it over by the N.D.P.
It's a wake-up call to Dalton McGuinty that he's got to stick to his guns on the Public Sector wage freeze, and the other cost-cutting measures contained within the budget. This may even shock him into re-thinking some of his response to the Drummond Report, and really going at it to cut spending. At least these are the things I keep trying to tell myself.
I look at these moves as a job hunter and wonder if I'm banging my head against a brick wall trying to find a job here. I wonder who will invest in a province that's got this enormous debt, and where the Premier is so beholden to his opposition he introduces a new tax just to keep power? Who will invest in a province where a government is constantly on the verge of collapse and the Premier let's face it, isn't exactly the most trustworthy as it comes to public money these days? Who will invest in a province where taxes are probably going to keep going up? Nobody, that's who. Not a single investor will, and I can't say that I blame them.
And the worst part of is Dalton McGuinty is probably the best of the bunch. In her deal with the Liberals N.D.P. leader Andrea Horwath showed a penchant for taxing, and spending usually associated with the party. In doing some reading on their website the P.C.'s have some ideas, but they're vague at best;the minute they become policy ideas is the minute they become a serious threat to McGuinty.
So when did that happen? When did a leader who has regularly broken promises, whose government has been in recent years plagued by scandals involving out tax dollars become the best we can do? Probably after the last provincial election when even after nearly a year of campaigning voters still didn't know Tim Hudak that well or trust him.
Dalton McGuinty made the mess. Now's the time to clean it up... if he doesn't then voters should do it for him by electing someone else next time out. At least I hope that's what will happen. If it doesn't I'll move to Saskatchewan.
And I think it's about to get worse. On Wednesday the announcement came down that Standard& Poors was downgrading our economic outlook, and Thursday Moody's decided to downgrade Ontario's credit. It likely has something to do with the budget deal struck Monday, and then the budget voted on, Tuesday.
It probably is really no more than a verdict on the provincial budget. Specifically on the fact there is a new tax being applied when conventional wisdom shows us that business tax cuts are a better way to stimulate growth in private business. And who runs private business? Usually people making over $500 thousand... aka those being asked to fork it over by the N.D.P.
It's a wake-up call to Dalton McGuinty that he's got to stick to his guns on the Public Sector wage freeze, and the other cost-cutting measures contained within the budget. This may even shock him into re-thinking some of his response to the Drummond Report, and really going at it to cut spending. At least these are the things I keep trying to tell myself.
I look at these moves as a job hunter and wonder if I'm banging my head against a brick wall trying to find a job here. I wonder who will invest in a province that's got this enormous debt, and where the Premier is so beholden to his opposition he introduces a new tax just to keep power? Who will invest in a province where a government is constantly on the verge of collapse and the Premier let's face it, isn't exactly the most trustworthy as it comes to public money these days? Who will invest in a province where taxes are probably going to keep going up? Nobody, that's who. Not a single investor will, and I can't say that I blame them.
And the worst part of is Dalton McGuinty is probably the best of the bunch. In her deal with the Liberals N.D.P. leader Andrea Horwath showed a penchant for taxing, and spending usually associated with the party. In doing some reading on their website the P.C.'s have some ideas, but they're vague at best;the minute they become policy ideas is the minute they become a serious threat to McGuinty.
So when did that happen? When did a leader who has regularly broken promises, whose government has been in recent years plagued by scandals involving out tax dollars become the best we can do? Probably after the last provincial election when even after nearly a year of campaigning voters still didn't know Tim Hudak that well or trust him.
Dalton McGuinty made the mess. Now's the time to clean it up... if he doesn't then voters should do it for him by electing someone else next time out. At least I hope that's what will happen. If it doesn't I'll move to Saskatchewan.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
The Deal, and the Politics
The deal reached Monday that averted an election doesn't bother me. It forced the people making over $500 thousand to pay an extra 2% on their taxes. It seems a pittance to me to avoid a provincial election worth over $100 million that probably wouldn't have accomplished much anyway. McGuinty is saying right now the tax will only stay until the deficit is paid off. I've heard it said it is nearly impossible to repeal a tax measure once implemented.
What's more interesting here is the politics. Dalton McGuinty made a catchphrase out of "I will not raise taxes a penny more," and now here he is having to break a promise... again. The polls show it's a move the rest of us fully support; but it is still is a broken promise. And it's one that has to anger his party's supporters on Bay Street who will be effected by this, and that will end up costing him votes. When you put it together with the rest of the budget- the semi-voluntary public sector wage freeze, and asking seniors to pay more for their drugs based on the income; this could be end up being a politically expensive budget for him.
The N.D.P. and Andrea Horwath come off as a political winner here. She got what she wanted; the tax hike, and more money for social programs and health care. She comes off as a strong leader in the eyes of her supporters, and maybe wins a few more a votes given that she saved the government from defeat. But it's a pretty hollow victory. It's a dangerous game she plays; agreeing to a deal one day, and abstaining from a vote on the budget the next. It begs the question why make the deal if you don't plan to vote for it? It's almost as if the N.D.P. wants to have its cake and eat it too- it wants to push through its priorities but it's almost like it's reserving the right to vote against it at a later date. It raises some integrity questions about the N.D.P.
Tim Hudak comes off as being the big loser in all of this. I give him points for consistency- he said his party would vote against it, and so they did. He's also isolated himself now, sitting firmly on the outside looking in, as Andrea Horwath takes the lead in a role that should really be his as leader of the opposition. I find lately Hudak's been going for the easy line too much, instead of the good policy idea; it makes it seem as if he hasn't found the balance between providing a government-in-waiting, and a voice for the opposition.
The deal has been struck ensuring the McGuinty government's survival. However the games have just begun.
What's more interesting here is the politics. Dalton McGuinty made a catchphrase out of "I will not raise taxes a penny more," and now here he is having to break a promise... again. The polls show it's a move the rest of us fully support; but it is still is a broken promise. And it's one that has to anger his party's supporters on Bay Street who will be effected by this, and that will end up costing him votes. When you put it together with the rest of the budget- the semi-voluntary public sector wage freeze, and asking seniors to pay more for their drugs based on the income; this could be end up being a politically expensive budget for him.
The N.D.P. and Andrea Horwath come off as a political winner here. She got what she wanted; the tax hike, and more money for social programs and health care. She comes off as a strong leader in the eyes of her supporters, and maybe wins a few more a votes given that she saved the government from defeat. But it's a pretty hollow victory. It's a dangerous game she plays; agreeing to a deal one day, and abstaining from a vote on the budget the next. It begs the question why make the deal if you don't plan to vote for it? It's almost as if the N.D.P. wants to have its cake and eat it too- it wants to push through its priorities but it's almost like it's reserving the right to vote against it at a later date. It raises some integrity questions about the N.D.P.
Tim Hudak comes off as being the big loser in all of this. I give him points for consistency- he said his party would vote against it, and so they did. He's also isolated himself now, sitting firmly on the outside looking in, as Andrea Horwath takes the lead in a role that should really be his as leader of the opposition. I find lately Hudak's been going for the easy line too much, instead of the good policy idea; it makes it seem as if he hasn't found the balance between providing a government-in-waiting, and a voice for the opposition.
The deal has been struck ensuring the McGuinty government's survival. However the games have just begun.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Stories to Watch: April 23- 30
What stories am I watching this week? Here's the answer:
1. The Budget Dance: Will Andrea Horwath support Dalton McGuinty's budget? Will there be a bargain struck today that will ensure the government survives to fight another few months? Or will we be heading to the polls? So many questions, so few answers. We find out the final answer tomorrow. An interesting side-note to this story NewsTalk1010 is running a poll on their website asking listeners if they want the two of them to reach an agreement, or have an election. The results are surprising, at last check: 73.1% of people who answered the question want an election.
2. Ornge Inquiry: The all-parties public accounts committee at Queen's Park is conducting an inquiry into the misspending at the Ornge Air Ambulance Service. Last week we learned that one of McGuinty's political advisers knew what was going on, but did nothing. The committee also revealed plans to ask for a rarely used Speaker's warrant to be issued for former Ornge CEO Chris Mazza to appear in early May. The only problem: Nobody knows where Mazza is.
3. Alberta Election: Albertans could make history today by changing the Progressive Conservatives and Alison Redford for Danielle Smith and the Wild Rose Alliance. The P.C.'s have reigned supreme for the last 41 years, and some opinion polls indicate if they were to win, it would be a minority. If the Wild Rose Alliance wins it could set up an interesting dynamic within Canada, as the party takes a fairly confrontational attitude towards the province of Quebec.
4. Quebec Student Protests: Speaking of Quebec, the province's students continue their fight against possible tuition hikes. On Friday groups of protesters attacked the Montreal Convention Centre as Premier Jean Charest addressed the city's business community. There is a slight possibility Charest could call a provincial election.
5. Local Politics: Milton Town Council meets tonight (April 23, 2012). Some items on the agenda include; the Velodrome, a proposal to expand the Gymnastics facility at the Milton Sports Centre, and a notice of motion regarding the continued development of the Horse Industry from Ward 3 Councilor Cindy Lunau. For a full agenda click here. The link will take to the PDF format- you need an Adobe reader to view the agenda.
1. The Budget Dance: Will Andrea Horwath support Dalton McGuinty's budget? Will there be a bargain struck today that will ensure the government survives to fight another few months? Or will we be heading to the polls? So many questions, so few answers. We find out the final answer tomorrow. An interesting side-note to this story NewsTalk1010 is running a poll on their website asking listeners if they want the two of them to reach an agreement, or have an election. The results are surprising, at last check: 73.1% of people who answered the question want an election.
2. Ornge Inquiry: The all-parties public accounts committee at Queen's Park is conducting an inquiry into the misspending at the Ornge Air Ambulance Service. Last week we learned that one of McGuinty's political advisers knew what was going on, but did nothing. The committee also revealed plans to ask for a rarely used Speaker's warrant to be issued for former Ornge CEO Chris Mazza to appear in early May. The only problem: Nobody knows where Mazza is.
3. Alberta Election: Albertans could make history today by changing the Progressive Conservatives and Alison Redford for Danielle Smith and the Wild Rose Alliance. The P.C.'s have reigned supreme for the last 41 years, and some opinion polls indicate if they were to win, it would be a minority. If the Wild Rose Alliance wins it could set up an interesting dynamic within Canada, as the party takes a fairly confrontational attitude towards the province of Quebec.
4. Quebec Student Protests: Speaking of Quebec, the province's students continue their fight against possible tuition hikes. On Friday groups of protesters attacked the Montreal Convention Centre as Premier Jean Charest addressed the city's business community. There is a slight possibility Charest could call a provincial election.
5. Local Politics: Milton Town Council meets tonight (April 23, 2012). Some items on the agenda include; the Velodrome, a proposal to expand the Gymnastics facility at the Milton Sports Centre, and a notice of motion regarding the continued development of the Horse Industry from Ward 3 Councilor Cindy Lunau. For a full agenda click here. The link will take to the PDF format- you need an Adobe reader to view the agenda.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Milestones Matter
Tuesday April 17, was Charter Day. It marked thirty years since Pierre Elliott Trudeau signed on behalf of Canada a document that enshrined our rights in law. I started a thread over on the Hawthorne Villager about it, and it quickly disintegrated into Trudeau bashing.
It got me thinking about the Canadian Identity, and how milestones matter. In the last two weeks two important anniversaries were marked. The first was the 95th anniversary of Vimy Ridge. Canada was barely 50 years old. At the outset of World War I Canadian soldiers were scattered among British regiments fighting under British commanders. At Vimy Ridge they were gathered together forming four divisions under a Canadian commander and asked to fight. In the war's context it wasn't a very significant battle, but after it was done Canada had an army. And that made it very significant for Canadian history.
On April 17, 1982 the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was officially signed into law. Before then Canada enjoyed a kind of half-nation status; some decisions could be appealed to the British Privy Council as late as the 1970's. Until the Constitution and Charter's passage Canada was ruled by the British North America Act- something that originally created the country. There were no firm rights for First Nations, and the Provinces had little idea on their responsibilities; ie: what they had to provide for the citizens.
Thanks to the Charter, as of 1982 Canadians had their rights enshrined- as close to set in stone as you could get. It made it illegal for someone to be discriminated against based on their colour, sexual orientation, or religion. It guaranteed people the right to vote in an election, and the right to stand themselves for election. It cemented people's freedoms of mobility- to leave the country/ province. It guaranteed that citizens were treated fairly under, and before the law (people were given a free trial). In short, and in hindsight it was a remarkable achievement. Making it even better, did you know the Charter of Rights served as inspiration for something similar in South Africa?
And that's why I'm disappointed in the Harper government for marking it with merely a press release; a statement. I get that it's a hyper partisan atmosphere in Ottawa these days; and Pierre Trudeau was after all a Liberal. But he did get the leaders of 10 different provinces and territories to agree on something- and that's an achievement few Prime Ministers have been able to duplicate since. And arguably the charter and its stated freedom of expression is the reason why politicians can call each other names. Shouldn't such an achievement have greater recognition?
Canada is so eager for newcomers to appreciate our culture, and history. It's time we started making milestones matter despite the politics behind them. You never know, that could be the start of a different identity apart from being "not American."
It got me thinking about the Canadian Identity, and how milestones matter. In the last two weeks two important anniversaries were marked. The first was the 95th anniversary of Vimy Ridge. Canada was barely 50 years old. At the outset of World War I Canadian soldiers were scattered among British regiments fighting under British commanders. At Vimy Ridge they were gathered together forming four divisions under a Canadian commander and asked to fight. In the war's context it wasn't a very significant battle, but after it was done Canada had an army. And that made it very significant for Canadian history.
On April 17, 1982 the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was officially signed into law. Before then Canada enjoyed a kind of half-nation status; some decisions could be appealed to the British Privy Council as late as the 1970's. Until the Constitution and Charter's passage Canada was ruled by the British North America Act- something that originally created the country. There were no firm rights for First Nations, and the Provinces had little idea on their responsibilities; ie: what they had to provide for the citizens.
Thanks to the Charter, as of 1982 Canadians had their rights enshrined- as close to set in stone as you could get. It made it illegal for someone to be discriminated against based on their colour, sexual orientation, or religion. It guaranteed people the right to vote in an election, and the right to stand themselves for election. It cemented people's freedoms of mobility- to leave the country/ province. It guaranteed that citizens were treated fairly under, and before the law (people were given a free trial). In short, and in hindsight it was a remarkable achievement. Making it even better, did you know the Charter of Rights served as inspiration for something similar in South Africa?
And that's why I'm disappointed in the Harper government for marking it with merely a press release; a statement. I get that it's a hyper partisan atmosphere in Ottawa these days; and Pierre Trudeau was after all a Liberal. But he did get the leaders of 10 different provinces and territories to agree on something- and that's an achievement few Prime Ministers have been able to duplicate since. And arguably the charter and its stated freedom of expression is the reason why politicians can call each other names. Shouldn't such an achievement have greater recognition?
Canada is so eager for newcomers to appreciate our culture, and history. It's time we started making milestones matter despite the politics behind them. You never know, that could be the start of a different identity apart from being "not American."
Monday, April 16, 2012
Ontario Budget Vote Day: April 24, 2012
The Ontario Liberals announced this morning they will bring their 2012 provincial budget to a vote April 24, 2012- one week from tomorrow. They also stated they've been unable so far to come to a deal with Andrea Horwath and the N.D.P, something vital for avoiding the second provincial election in a year.
I don't think this budget is worth going to an election over. The major weakness from where I sit is the lack of a job creation strategy. There is no reason the N.D.P's idea of a tax credit for companies creating new jobs can't be tweaked to suit the Liberals budget.
The problem with that is the Liberals have asked the N.D.P. to cost out their demands. This one carries a $250 million price tag. Where will the N.D.P. get the money? The answer lies likely in demand #1: a tax increase for those making over $500 thousand/ year. Essentially this could put the Premier known for repeating he will not raise taxes a penny more, in a position of having to raise taxes in order keep his government afloat. Something that amounts to political suicide for McGuinty, and something none of us wants.
An election right now won't benefit anyone. The low turnout last time will be surpassed by a turnout this time; people will vote with their feet and stay away. They'll say a pox upon all of your houses, and the results may even be messier than they are right now. Besides that, can a province that's billions in debt afford to throw out another $100 million?
The only thing it might do is force the Liberals to clean house at Health after the scandal at Ornge. Tempting as that is, I don't really think that's worth an election; the same can be done much cheaper with a simple resignation. The budget will be more like background noise for another campaign; it will be the fight being waged by the public sector unions against a pay freeze. It may even be framed as a discussion over the future of organized labour.
Will we have another election? My gut says no... that budget isn't worth going to a campaign over. But perhaps the ongoing fight against the attempted pay freeze may send us there; organized labour is a pretty powerful force in Ontario. Whatever happens the ball is clearly in Andrea Horwath's we'll know for sure April 24, 2012.
I don't think this budget is worth going to an election over. The major weakness from where I sit is the lack of a job creation strategy. There is no reason the N.D.P's idea of a tax credit for companies creating new jobs can't be tweaked to suit the Liberals budget.
The problem with that is the Liberals have asked the N.D.P. to cost out their demands. This one carries a $250 million price tag. Where will the N.D.P. get the money? The answer lies likely in demand #1: a tax increase for those making over $500 thousand/ year. Essentially this could put the Premier known for repeating he will not raise taxes a penny more, in a position of having to raise taxes in order keep his government afloat. Something that amounts to political suicide for McGuinty, and something none of us wants.
An election right now won't benefit anyone. The low turnout last time will be surpassed by a turnout this time; people will vote with their feet and stay away. They'll say a pox upon all of your houses, and the results may even be messier than they are right now. Besides that, can a province that's billions in debt afford to throw out another $100 million?
The only thing it might do is force the Liberals to clean house at Health after the scandal at Ornge. Tempting as that is, I don't really think that's worth an election; the same can be done much cheaper with a simple resignation. The budget will be more like background noise for another campaign; it will be the fight being waged by the public sector unions against a pay freeze. It may even be framed as a discussion over the future of organized labour.
Will we have another election? My gut says no... that budget isn't worth going to a campaign over. But perhaps the ongoing fight against the attempted pay freeze may send us there; organized labour is a pretty powerful force in Ontario. Whatever happens the ball is clearly in Andrea Horwath's we'll know for sure April 24, 2012.
Monday, April 2, 2012
My Stories To Watch: April 2-9 2012
Stories to watch this week....
1. Ontario Budget Drama: What price will the N.D.P. demand of Dalton McGuinty to keep him in power? Andrea Horwath is set to give her demands, or let us know if she intends to follow fellow Opposition Leader Tim Hudak and vote it down. In an interview with Moore in the Morning today, Horwath refused to say if she even been talking to the Liberals over the weekend.
2. The Three Amigos meet: Prime Minister Stephen Harper is meeting in Washington with President Barack Obama, with Mexican President Calderon. Items on the agenda include greater trade ties, and how to tackle the Mexican drug cartels.
3. The Rafferty Trial: Chapter #4 of the Crown's case against Michael Rafferty continues this week. Today the jury takes a tour of the field where Tory Stafford's body was found.
4. Air Canada: The union representing airline's machinists are taking the federal government to court. They're arguing the federal government's anti-strike legislation is unconstitutional because it violates the freedom of association. The pilot's union has started a similar challenge.
In Local Politics...
Note: Tonight's Community Services Standing Committee meeting has been cancelled.
1. Ontario Budget Drama: What price will the N.D.P. demand of Dalton McGuinty to keep him in power? Andrea Horwath is set to give her demands, or let us know if she intends to follow fellow Opposition Leader Tim Hudak and vote it down. In an interview with Moore in the Morning today, Horwath refused to say if she even been talking to the Liberals over the weekend.
2. The Three Amigos meet: Prime Minister Stephen Harper is meeting in Washington with President Barack Obama, with Mexican President Calderon. Items on the agenda include greater trade ties, and how to tackle the Mexican drug cartels.
3. The Rafferty Trial: Chapter #4 of the Crown's case against Michael Rafferty continues this week. Today the jury takes a tour of the field where Tory Stafford's body was found.
4. Air Canada: The union representing airline's machinists are taking the federal government to court. They're arguing the federal government's anti-strike legislation is unconstitutional because it violates the freedom of association. The pilot's union has started a similar challenge.
In Local Politics...
Note: Tonight's Community Services Standing Committee meeting has been cancelled.
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Federal Budget Verdict: 2012
It was a two-budget week for Ontario. Tuesday Dwight Duncan presented the provincial budget, while Thursday it was Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's turn. Flaherty brought down a budget I'd call surprising given this is his government's first with no Opposition breathing down their necks.
It wasn't bad, I just have doubts as to whether it went far enough. It went big on saving money, small on spending. They cut Civil Service by 19 thousand, and are going to stop making the penny this fall. They raised retirement age by two years, and changed the environmental reviews process for resource projects.
The approval process for a resource project- the Northern Gateway pipeline for example can take up to 6 years to complete. The measure spoken of in the budget will shorten that to 24 months in what Flaherty calls an "accelerated regulatory process". Hand-in-Hand with this is are measures to grant Revenue Canada greater auditing powers to make sure that "Green" charities are in fact sticking to a limit of 10% of their overall budget when they lobby politicians. At the core of this is a realization that a lot of Canada's jobs are going to come from t he resource sector. This could be bad for the environment, but I think we should wait to see how this plays out before we offer a final verdict on this one.
The budget also raised the amount Canadians can bring back into the country from the United States from $50 over a 24 hour period to $200 starting in June, 2012. On the one hand this helps people who spend a lot of time down south, on the other it could backfire as people begin doing more of their shopping in the United States. What happened to the noises Flaherty was making late last year when he talked about asking Canadian retailers to lower their prices to the same levels as their American counterparts? I'd find a way to include a statement to that effect in the budget. Perhaps some tax cuts for those that do??
Part of the Conservatives' job creation plan appears directed towards innovation. The Conservatives propose reforming the current system of indirect tax credits to one based around innovation, and productivity. The grand scheme is to dedicate $1.1 billion over the next five years to support research and development; $500 will go to fund innovative companies already in existence. Additionally, the government is working on free-trade agreements that will increase the marketplace for Canadian goods, services, and labour.
Here's where it didn't quite go far enough. The ideas on free-trade and innovation are great ideas which, are going to end up helping the Canadian economy. But in my limited exposure to the business community, I've come to the conclusion that Canadian towns, and cities are fueled by their small businesses. The free-trade agreements, and the tax system reform will help them at some point, as will the $1000 hiring credit for new employees. But a lot of these smaller businesses- I speak of the mom& pop shops, need more direct help now more than just the $1000 hiring credit. Flaherty had a chance to address some of the concerns, but didn't.
And so, I return to Old Age Security. The age goes up by 2 years from 65-67, which affects those 54 years of age or younger. I see the need to do that, and I agree with it. But the whole thing is that as the older workers are in the labour force longer, there are fewer jobs for younger people. I would've loved to see this measure implemented with some sense of balance- raising the OAS age, while including measures to help younger people get into the work force.. and that didn't happen.
My verdict: Not a bad budget for a first one as a Conservative majority. It just didn't go far enough in a few areas.
It wasn't bad, I just have doubts as to whether it went far enough. It went big on saving money, small on spending. They cut Civil Service by 19 thousand, and are going to stop making the penny this fall. They raised retirement age by two years, and changed the environmental reviews process for resource projects.
The approval process for a resource project- the Northern Gateway pipeline for example can take up to 6 years to complete. The measure spoken of in the budget will shorten that to 24 months in what Flaherty calls an "accelerated regulatory process". Hand-in-Hand with this is are measures to grant Revenue Canada greater auditing powers to make sure that "Green" charities are in fact sticking to a limit of 10% of their overall budget when they lobby politicians. At the core of this is a realization that a lot of Canada's jobs are going to come from t he resource sector. This could be bad for the environment, but I think we should wait to see how this plays out before we offer a final verdict on this one.
The budget also raised the amount Canadians can bring back into the country from the United States from $50 over a 24 hour period to $200 starting in June, 2012. On the one hand this helps people who spend a lot of time down south, on the other it could backfire as people begin doing more of their shopping in the United States. What happened to the noises Flaherty was making late last year when he talked about asking Canadian retailers to lower their prices to the same levels as their American counterparts? I'd find a way to include a statement to that effect in the budget. Perhaps some tax cuts for those that do??
Part of the Conservatives' job creation plan appears directed towards innovation. The Conservatives propose reforming the current system of indirect tax credits to one based around innovation, and productivity. The grand scheme is to dedicate $1.1 billion over the next five years to support research and development; $500 will go to fund innovative companies already in existence. Additionally, the government is working on free-trade agreements that will increase the marketplace for Canadian goods, services, and labour.
Here's where it didn't quite go far enough. The ideas on free-trade and innovation are great ideas which, are going to end up helping the Canadian economy. But in my limited exposure to the business community, I've come to the conclusion that Canadian towns, and cities are fueled by their small businesses. The free-trade agreements, and the tax system reform will help them at some point, as will the $1000 hiring credit for new employees. But a lot of these smaller businesses- I speak of the mom& pop shops, need more direct help now more than just the $1000 hiring credit. Flaherty had a chance to address some of the concerns, but didn't.
And so, I return to Old Age Security. The age goes up by 2 years from 65-67, which affects those 54 years of age or younger. I see the need to do that, and I agree with it. But the whole thing is that as the older workers are in the labour force longer, there are fewer jobs for younger people. I would've loved to see this measure implemented with some sense of balance- raising the OAS age, while including measures to help younger people get into the work force.. and that didn't happen.
My verdict: Not a bad budget for a first one as a Conservative majority. It just didn't go far enough in a few areas.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Ontario Budget 2012 verdict
Finance Minister Dwight Duncan presented a so-so budget yesterday. It had its good points- the expansion at Milton District Hospital escaped the knife, and there are signs the Liberals really mean to clamp down on public sector unions. It gave a slight nod to both the Progressive Conservatives (P.C.)'s by asking seniors making over $100 thousand to pay for some drugs, and the N.D.P. by freezing hospital C.E.O. and M.P.P. salaries. It attempted to strike a happy medium by keeping the Green Energy rebate, but capping it at 3000 kWh.
Lots in there for the education system. The Liberals have moved to cut the so-called "lap year," where students take an extra semester or two to boost marks. They're continuing to implement their centre piece all-day Kindergarten program, and will offer 30% tuition grants for post-secondary students. And contrary to what the opposition says there is a Jobs& Prosperity fund; expected to save according to their numbers $250 million. How that will affect job creation remains to be seen.
The bad points have to start with getting tough with the public sector unions. The ultimatum that the Liberal government could legislate a wage freeze, coupled with noises about public sector pensions will anger unions. O.P.S.E.U and the teaching unions are all in various stages of contract negotiations and I can't see them willing to just take the freeze without a fight. And I'm betting it could be a messy fight as well. I have to give the Liberals points on this though to be willing to break with the union support. But I have to ask, is it too little, too late? The ship labelled "public sector wage freeze" set sail the moment they began selectively giving raises.
Did it do enough to create jobs? Honestly no. The province isn't expected to see the savings from the Job & Prosperity fund until 2014-2015. Meanwhile there is still unemployment; cancelling corporate tax cuts while glamorous, and something that will win points with the N.D.P. won't create jobs. It needs to be easier for businesses to hire; people need to be working it increases the tax base.
In my opinion this budget isn't worth fighting an election over. While the budget is lacking in parts, it isn't worth wasting 35 days, and $100 million over. However when you take the so-so budget, and combine it with the Ornge scandal, and public sector union back lash against the budget we may find ourselves voting sometime in early May.
Lots in there for the education system. The Liberals have moved to cut the so-called "lap year," where students take an extra semester or two to boost marks. They're continuing to implement their centre piece all-day Kindergarten program, and will offer 30% tuition grants for post-secondary students. And contrary to what the opposition says there is a Jobs& Prosperity fund; expected to save according to their numbers $250 million. How that will affect job creation remains to be seen.
The bad points have to start with getting tough with the public sector unions. The ultimatum that the Liberal government could legislate a wage freeze, coupled with noises about public sector pensions will anger unions. O.P.S.E.U and the teaching unions are all in various stages of contract negotiations and I can't see them willing to just take the freeze without a fight. And I'm betting it could be a messy fight as well. I have to give the Liberals points on this though to be willing to break with the union support. But I have to ask, is it too little, too late? The ship labelled "public sector wage freeze" set sail the moment they began selectively giving raises.
Did it do enough to create jobs? Honestly no. The province isn't expected to see the savings from the Job & Prosperity fund until 2014-2015. Meanwhile there is still unemployment; cancelling corporate tax cuts while glamorous, and something that will win points with the N.D.P. won't create jobs. It needs to be easier for businesses to hire; people need to be working it increases the tax base.
In my opinion this budget isn't worth fighting an election over. While the budget is lacking in parts, it isn't worth wasting 35 days, and $100 million over. However when you take the so-so budget, and combine it with the Ornge scandal, and public sector union back lash against the budget we may find ourselves voting sometime in early May.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Ontario Budget: It's in the NDP's hands now
To cause an election or not cause an election that is the question whether tis nobler to suffer the slings and arrows of outraged unions" (apologies to William Shakespeare for that one). That's essentially what it comes down to for Ontario's political parties after the provincial budget was read by Finance Minister Dwight Duncan.
Tim Hudak and the Progressive Conservatives have already said they will not support it, leaving it up to Andrea Horwath and the N.D.P to keep the McGuinty Government afloat. Andrea Horwath is taking a more measured approach, saying she wants to talk to Ontarians before making a final decision.
I think she's in a pretty sticky situation. There was in the budget a sternly worded ultimatum to the public sector workers from the McGuinty government to please take a pay freeze, or we'll legislate it. Both O.P.S.E.U (Ontario Public Sector Employees Union), and all teaching unions are in a contract year, and are at various stages of negotiating with their employer aka. the government. There has to be pressure from them to vote down the budget because of this, and that will be hard to ignore.
On the other hand as Andrea Horwath tours the province speaking to Ontarians she'll likely find the rest of us have little appetite for an election at this point. The economy is in a tough state of affairs, putting off fixing it for another 5 weeks for pretty much the same outcome is insanity itself really. Besides there is the money involved to consider as well: $100 million to be exact. And when offered a choice between a pay freeze and no job, most would probably take the pay freeze.
She'll probably find lots of anger over the Ornge scandal as well. Lately the provincial government has been using the line the money lost in the Ornge Ambulance debacle is only 3/4 of a percentage of the overall health care portion of the budget. In the context of a provincial budget it isn't much; but when you mention the disappearance of millions of dollars, and equipment sitting unused to regular Ontarians; some of whom can barely make ends meet then it's a lot of money, and a lot of waste.
Personally, I'd like to see this settled without another election. It's been less than six months since the last one, and I don't think it'll change much in terms of the standings. The timing aspect has to be part of the decision for the Lieutenant Governor as well. But he has another option; he could ask Andrea Horwath or Tim Hudak to meet the Legislature and try and form a government.
The Liberals have stated they would fight an election on their budget. I think that like the Governor General, the Lieutenant Governor has to obey a government so long as it is in office; so if a non-confidence vote ends up happening then expect a return to the polls. In the meantime the fate of the Ontario Budget is in the hands of the N.D.P. and Andrea Horwath.
Tim Hudak and the Progressive Conservatives have already said they will not support it, leaving it up to Andrea Horwath and the N.D.P to keep the McGuinty Government afloat. Andrea Horwath is taking a more measured approach, saying she wants to talk to Ontarians before making a final decision.
I think she's in a pretty sticky situation. There was in the budget a sternly worded ultimatum to the public sector workers from the McGuinty government to please take a pay freeze, or we'll legislate it. Both O.P.S.E.U (Ontario Public Sector Employees Union), and all teaching unions are in a contract year, and are at various stages of negotiating with their employer aka. the government. There has to be pressure from them to vote down the budget because of this, and that will be hard to ignore.
On the other hand as Andrea Horwath tours the province speaking to Ontarians she'll likely find the rest of us have little appetite for an election at this point. The economy is in a tough state of affairs, putting off fixing it for another 5 weeks for pretty much the same outcome is insanity itself really. Besides there is the money involved to consider as well: $100 million to be exact. And when offered a choice between a pay freeze and no job, most would probably take the pay freeze.
She'll probably find lots of anger over the Ornge scandal as well. Lately the provincial government has been using the line the money lost in the Ornge Ambulance debacle is only 3/4 of a percentage of the overall health care portion of the budget. In the context of a provincial budget it isn't much; but when you mention the disappearance of millions of dollars, and equipment sitting unused to regular Ontarians; some of whom can barely make ends meet then it's a lot of money, and a lot of waste.
Personally, I'd like to see this settled without another election. It's been less than six months since the last one, and I don't think it'll change much in terms of the standings. The timing aspect has to be part of the decision for the Lieutenant Governor as well. But he has another option; he could ask Andrea Horwath or Tim Hudak to meet the Legislature and try and form a government.
The Liberals have stated they would fight an election on their budget. I think that like the Governor General, the Lieutenant Governor has to obey a government so long as it is in office; so if a non-confidence vote ends up happening then expect a return to the polls. In the meantime the fate of the Ontario Budget is in the hands of the N.D.P. and Andrea Horwath.
Monday, March 26, 2012
My Stories To Watch
We've got quite a week coming up in the news. Here's some of the stories I'll be watching for.
1.Provincial Budget: It has to be at the top of the list. The Provincial Liberals will present their first budget as a minority government. It's also quite a hot story locally, as local councilors await word of Milton Hospital expansion's fate. As the budget is financial issue, and it is a minority parliament it will be a matter of confidence. But what will happen? Will McGuinty have enough votes to pass it? Or will the opposition decide to flex its muscle and send us to another election? Or perhaps a more interesting possibility... are we going to see history of the '90's repeat itself and Andrea Horwath come to the forefront (Bob Rae anyone?)? What kind of role will Ornge play in it all?All of the drama will certainly play itself out over the next few days.
1a) In advance of tomorrow's provincial budget Ward 3 Councilor Cindy Lunau is presenting a motion at tonight's council meeting asking the Province to re-confirm its commitment to Milton Hospital expansion. Its text, along with contact information for you to make your wishes known to can be seen here. Just scroll down, it's near the bottom. Council meeting starts at 7pm in Chambers, or you can watch it here.
2. The Federal Budget: We're all being told this will be a document with modest cuts. We know there will be changes to Old-Age Security, the pensions system. They've been speaking of cuts to military spending, and the C.B.C. There will be cuts in the civil service. Politically it's going to pass with a majority- no guessing games here. But something to watch will be Thomas Mulcair's performance as he faces his first test the newly minted N.D.P. leader.
3. Ontario Superior Court strikes down Prostitution law: The Ontario Superior Court has begun the process that will make prostitution legal. The decision could potentially open the door to legal common bawdy houses, and allowing sex trade to hire body guards for example. The federal government has one year to respond to the ruling, but both sides have indicated they want to take it to the Supreme Court of Canada, which could lengthen the process to two years.
These are just some of the stories crossing my radar. Thoughts? Agree or disagree by all means leave a comment below.
1.Provincial Budget: It has to be at the top of the list. The Provincial Liberals will present their first budget as a minority government. It's also quite a hot story locally, as local councilors await word of Milton Hospital expansion's fate. As the budget is financial issue, and it is a minority parliament it will be a matter of confidence. But what will happen? Will McGuinty have enough votes to pass it? Or will the opposition decide to flex its muscle and send us to another election? Or perhaps a more interesting possibility... are we going to see history of the '90's repeat itself and Andrea Horwath come to the forefront (Bob Rae anyone?)? What kind of role will Ornge play in it all?All of the drama will certainly play itself out over the next few days.
1a) In advance of tomorrow's provincial budget Ward 3 Councilor Cindy Lunau is presenting a motion at tonight's council meeting asking the Province to re-confirm its commitment to Milton Hospital expansion. Its text, along with contact information for you to make your wishes known to can be seen here. Just scroll down, it's near the bottom. Council meeting starts at 7pm in Chambers, or you can watch it here.
2. The Federal Budget: We're all being told this will be a document with modest cuts. We know there will be changes to Old-Age Security, the pensions system. They've been speaking of cuts to military spending, and the C.B.C. There will be cuts in the civil service. Politically it's going to pass with a majority- no guessing games here. But something to watch will be Thomas Mulcair's performance as he faces his first test the newly minted N.D.P. leader.
3. Ontario Superior Court strikes down Prostitution law: The Ontario Superior Court has begun the process that will make prostitution legal. The decision could potentially open the door to legal common bawdy houses, and allowing sex trade to hire body guards for example. The federal government has one year to respond to the ruling, but both sides have indicated they want to take it to the Supreme Court of Canada, which could lengthen the process to two years.
These are just some of the stories crossing my radar. Thoughts? Agree or disagree by all means leave a comment below.
And the New N.D.P. leader is... Thomas Mulcair
I'm a total a political junkie who never gets tired of talking all politics This past weekend's N.D.P. leadership convention was interesting viewing for me. And when I wasn't watching it on television, I was certainly following along on twitter.
It took four ballots, but as we all know by now the new N.D.P. leader is Thomas Mulcair from Quebec.It wasn't really much of a surprise; well before the convention he was touted as the front runner, and as near to a gauranteed winner as there was. What was a surprise to me anyway was that it actually took four ballots. I had my doubts whether Mulcair would win if it went beyond 2 ballots.
I find myself greeting the party's final decision with a mixture of skepticism, and disappointment. The N.D.P has been an ideals party that has made a general habit of going against the status quo. I would've thought just to be contrary, they'd pick an outspoken woman- Peggy Nash who I believe could really take Harper on, or the dynamic young person in Nikki Ashton. Or maybe they would choose to completely remake the image of an NDP'r by choosing Martin Singh. Or they could look to the future and the possibility of uniting with the Liberals by picking Nathan Cullen, or go the sentimental route and pick one of Layton's favourites Brian Topp as leader.
The very fact the N.D.P. had such a depth of choice speaks well to the diversity of their membership, and the abilities of the candidates. That Mulcair won against these five others was no small feat, and demonstrates his own abilities, but I'm skeptical he's the man for the job. The one phrase that springs to mind when I'm thinking of Thomas Mulcair is "wolf in sheep's clothing." He's got style, but he also comes across as being the guy that keeps you guessing, wondering what will he do next. That unpredictability will make him an interesting figure as he attempts to continue molding the N.D.P. into a serious contender.
Where does this leave the Liberals? I'm wondering that myself. Thomas Mulcair is fairly clear on the fact he doesn't want to unite with the party, for now that's okay. The thing is such an alliance may be necessary for either to find their way to government; so I wouldn't be so hasty to count out such a course of action. If I were Mulcair I would spend some time worrying about the Liberals, if only because they tend to sneak up on you when your back is turned. And because people are at their most dangerous when you count them out. Bob Rae has been stealing lots of attention while the N.D.P. has been running the leadership contest after all.
Good Luck Mr. Mulcair. You've a tough job ahead of you. I look forward to seeing what you'll make of the party.
It took four ballots, but as we all know by now the new N.D.P. leader is Thomas Mulcair from Quebec.It wasn't really much of a surprise; well before the convention he was touted as the front runner, and as near to a gauranteed winner as there was. What was a surprise to me anyway was that it actually took four ballots. I had my doubts whether Mulcair would win if it went beyond 2 ballots.
I find myself greeting the party's final decision with a mixture of skepticism, and disappointment. The N.D.P has been an ideals party that has made a general habit of going against the status quo. I would've thought just to be contrary, they'd pick an outspoken woman- Peggy Nash who I believe could really take Harper on, or the dynamic young person in Nikki Ashton. Or maybe they would choose to completely remake the image of an NDP'r by choosing Martin Singh. Or they could look to the future and the possibility of uniting with the Liberals by picking Nathan Cullen, or go the sentimental route and pick one of Layton's favourites Brian Topp as leader.
The very fact the N.D.P. had such a depth of choice speaks well to the diversity of their membership, and the abilities of the candidates. That Mulcair won against these five others was no small feat, and demonstrates his own abilities, but I'm skeptical he's the man for the job. The one phrase that springs to mind when I'm thinking of Thomas Mulcair is "wolf in sheep's clothing." He's got style, but he also comes across as being the guy that keeps you guessing, wondering what will he do next. That unpredictability will make him an interesting figure as he attempts to continue molding the N.D.P. into a serious contender.
Where does this leave the Liberals? I'm wondering that myself. Thomas Mulcair is fairly clear on the fact he doesn't want to unite with the party, for now that's okay. The thing is such an alliance may be necessary for either to find their way to government; so I wouldn't be so hasty to count out such a course of action. If I were Mulcair I would spend some time worrying about the Liberals, if only because they tend to sneak up on you when your back is turned. And because people are at their most dangerous when you count them out. Bob Rae has been stealing lots of attention while the N.D.P. has been running the leadership contest after all.
Good Luck Mr. Mulcair. You've a tough job ahead of you. I look forward to seeing what you'll make of the party.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Media and the Rafferty Trial
There's been a lot said regarding the extensive media coverage of the Rafferty trial; specifically that it's too graphic. Even I cringe at some of the tweets coming from the two CBC Reporters who are inside the courtroom; the summary of Terri-Lynne McLintic's testimony about her actions in Tori Stafford's murder... the way she describes turning away while the accused allegedly committed sexual assault. That part made me hate twitter, and yet...
I understand why it's covered so extensively. Much of what McLintic has said was previously under a publication ban, and from that standpoint no matter how despicable and hateful the details it's news. We journalists wouldn't be doing our job if we didn't at least report on it. To their credit that's what the two CBC reporters are doing; summarizing the testimony in 140 character bursts. It's how I've been following the trial; I haven't been able to bring myself to read the print coverage.
There's a human need to understand, to try and figure out the puzzle; to ask how. How can someone ignore an innocent little girl's cries for help as Rafferty allegedly sexually assaulted her. How can someone knowingly abuse, and eventually kill another person as Mclintic now testifies she did? Where was the compassion as they kidnapped, then killed Tori Stafford?
In an effort to understand, reporters, and columnists are often driven to go deeper into the details; to analyze and speculate on those questions. In a trial like this it can get extremely uncomfortable for the viewer/reader/listener. If Journalists didn't at least try to provide some understanding; we wouldn't be doing our job. And we probably would be getting just as much flack for that too.
I understand why it's covered so extensively. Much of what McLintic has said was previously under a publication ban, and from that standpoint no matter how despicable and hateful the details it's news. We journalists wouldn't be doing our job if we didn't at least report on it. To their credit that's what the two CBC reporters are doing; summarizing the testimony in 140 character bursts. It's how I've been following the trial; I haven't been able to bring myself to read the print coverage.
There's a human need to understand, to try and figure out the puzzle; to ask how. How can someone ignore an innocent little girl's cries for help as Rafferty allegedly sexually assaulted her. How can someone knowingly abuse, and eventually kill another person as Mclintic now testifies she did? Where was the compassion as they kidnapped, then killed Tori Stafford?
In an effort to understand, reporters, and columnists are often driven to go deeper into the details; to analyze and speculate on those questions. In a trial like this it can get extremely uncomfortable for the viewer/reader/listener. If Journalists didn't at least try to provide some understanding; we wouldn't be doing our job. And we probably would be getting just as much flack for that too.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
The Measured Response to Ontario's Finances
Over the last couple of days the McGuinty government has made a pair of announcements that will end up making them more money; an increase in license renewal fees, and the possibility of an additional casino. In principle I don't have a problem with either; licensing charges haven't gone up in 15 years- an argument could be made for a slight increase on that alone.. just not the full $8 that is forecast for this year. If delicately handled more casinos could work; however they come with their own set of problems in the form of gamboling addictions, etc. And as some point out the revenue generated by the casinos potentially takes money away from somewhere else.
I have a problem with the general concept these two represent. These two specific solutions make it look like the Province is simply making more money while trying to avoid a lot of the cuts. More money always helps especially if people have to spend it as in the case of license fees. It should probably be part of the solution it shouldn't be the only solution. If the province is going to return to prosperity then it has to be a mixture of making money and cuts. It should be an increase of say $1 to licensing fees while cutting funding to the LHIN's (or eliminating them altogether. It should be putting a Casino in while cutting or eliminating the Green Energy benefit.
The measured response has been pretty much ignored by the McGuinty government. As I cynically predicted in a previous entry they've ignored pretty much all of the Drummond Report. They've said no to charging parking fees at Go Transit lots, no to slowing the implementation of all-day kindergarten. Instead of closing a casino at Niagara Falls, they are closing slot machines at three sites (Windsor, Sarnia, and Fort Erie). The McGuinty government is also trying to negotiate a pay freeze for the elementary school teachers; if it happens it would be a significant sign they are willing to do what's necessary to balance the books.
We ontarians are generally reasonable folks who would meet the government halfway by paying slightly increased fees. The government has to meet us halfway and put together a measured response that includes cuts, as well as increases.
I have a problem with the general concept these two represent. These two specific solutions make it look like the Province is simply making more money while trying to avoid a lot of the cuts. More money always helps especially if people have to spend it as in the case of license fees. It should probably be part of the solution it shouldn't be the only solution. If the province is going to return to prosperity then it has to be a mixture of making money and cuts. It should be an increase of say $1 to licensing fees while cutting funding to the LHIN's (or eliminating them altogether. It should be putting a Casino in while cutting or eliminating the Green Energy benefit.
The measured response has been pretty much ignored by the McGuinty government. As I cynically predicted in a previous entry they've ignored pretty much all of the Drummond Report. They've said no to charging parking fees at Go Transit lots, no to slowing the implementation of all-day kindergarten. Instead of closing a casino at Niagara Falls, they are closing slot machines at three sites (Windsor, Sarnia, and Fort Erie). The McGuinty government is also trying to negotiate a pay freeze for the elementary school teachers; if it happens it would be a significant sign they are willing to do what's necessary to balance the books.
We ontarians are generally reasonable folks who would meet the government halfway by paying slightly increased fees. The government has to meet us halfway and put together a measured response that includes cuts, as well as increases.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Robo-Calls and Revisionism
Let's rewind the clock. It's late April, 2011- mere weeks left in the federal election campaign. The Liberals under Michael Ignatieff have spectacularly imploded, and Jack Layton is coming thisclose to actually getting the keys to 24 Sussex Drive. We all know how it ended; The Liberals lost their Official Opposition status to Layton and the NDP, sliding into a dismal third place finish.
Fast forward to now- approximately a year later. There are now allegations of fraud, and Elections Canada is now looking into 31 thousand robo-call complaints. This could turn criminal as the agency has called in the R.C.M.P to investigate. As the saying goes where there's smoke, there's fire. That's too many people to be a mere coincidence, too much allegedly illicit behavior to ignore. And it does make me angry to think someone somewhere would presume to try and take away people's votes... this is Canada for goodness sake one of the standard bearers for democracy.
Here's a question for the ages: If we knew about the robo-call scandal then would it have really changed the outcome that much? I'd say no. I would argue that there are too many other mitigating factors to tell if Robo-calls would've made much of a difference.
Voter turnout was so low partly because of the election timing. the 2011 federal election was the second of three elections in the space of a calendar year (October 2010- municipal elections, and October 2011 provincial elections to come). The electorate was tired out; everywhere we looked there was a politician promising us something if we voted for them.
And then you have the Liberals. Their campaign imploded almost from the first day when Michael Ignatieff fell right into the trap of mentioning the word "coalition." Not even former Prime Ministers Paul Martin, and Jean Chretien could help as they campaigned with the party close to election day. Ignatieff's personality was enough to put off even the most faithful Liberal voter, as that party's supporters ended up turning away and either voting Conservative, NDP or just staying home.
It was more than just Jack Layton's personality going for the N.D.P. It was a positive message that cut through the negativity being put forward by the other two parties. It was the party's determination to stick to their policies instead of playing in the mud with the others, as well as Canadians' thirst to believe that things could be different in Canadian politics.
We'll never know for certain whether the robo-call scandal affected the results, or whether it was one of these other factors. To try and apply it retroactively is madness. Our system doesn't have any mechanisms in it to allow for recall, or to force another election in the majority setting. The Governor General was appointed on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, and is bound by the constitution to obey a government so long as it sits in office. Besides honestly, another election won't solve anything- and would leave the country a few hundred million shorter. And I think something similar can be said of holding by-elections. But holding them would be a sign that allegations are being taken seriously.
If fraud was committed, someone will pay for it either through the justice system, or at the ballot box in the next election because Canadians will remember this. I think it's pointless to try and play revisionist history with this and say that robo-calls had a big impact on the results when there's so many other factors to consider.
Fast forward to now- approximately a year later. There are now allegations of fraud, and Elections Canada is now looking into 31 thousand robo-call complaints. This could turn criminal as the agency has called in the R.C.M.P to investigate. As the saying goes where there's smoke, there's fire. That's too many people to be a mere coincidence, too much allegedly illicit behavior to ignore. And it does make me angry to think someone somewhere would presume to try and take away people's votes... this is Canada for goodness sake one of the standard bearers for democracy.
Here's a question for the ages: If we knew about the robo-call scandal then would it have really changed the outcome that much? I'd say no. I would argue that there are too many other mitigating factors to tell if Robo-calls would've made much of a difference.
Voter turnout was so low partly because of the election timing. the 2011 federal election was the second of three elections in the space of a calendar year (October 2010- municipal elections, and October 2011 provincial elections to come). The electorate was tired out; everywhere we looked there was a politician promising us something if we voted for them.
And then you have the Liberals. Their campaign imploded almost from the first day when Michael Ignatieff fell right into the trap of mentioning the word "coalition." Not even former Prime Ministers Paul Martin, and Jean Chretien could help as they campaigned with the party close to election day. Ignatieff's personality was enough to put off even the most faithful Liberal voter, as that party's supporters ended up turning away and either voting Conservative, NDP or just staying home.
It was more than just Jack Layton's personality going for the N.D.P. It was a positive message that cut through the negativity being put forward by the other two parties. It was the party's determination to stick to their policies instead of playing in the mud with the others, as well as Canadians' thirst to believe that things could be different in Canadian politics.
We'll never know for certain whether the robo-call scandal affected the results, or whether it was one of these other factors. To try and apply it retroactively is madness. Our system doesn't have any mechanisms in it to allow for recall, or to force another election in the majority setting. The Governor General was appointed on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, and is bound by the constitution to obey a government so long as it sits in office. Besides honestly, another election won't solve anything- and would leave the country a few hundred million shorter. And I think something similar can be said of holding by-elections. But holding them would be a sign that allegations are being taken seriously.
If fraud was committed, someone will pay for it either through the justice system, or at the ballot box in the next election because Canadians will remember this. I think it's pointless to try and play revisionist history with this and say that robo-calls had a big impact on the results when there's so many other factors to consider.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)