The Progressive Conservatives platform is very oriented around the pocketbook- consistent with some of their core fiscal beliefs you would traditionally associate with the Conservatives. They make several promises around cutting income taxes by 5% on the first $70 thousand per family; putting an estimated $258 into the pocket of a family of four. Who wouldn't want extra money back from the government? But I find myself repeating my criticism of earlier this year: What about the single person? What about the families earning less than $70 thousand; there are a few of those around you know.
Add this one up with the fact HST would be eliminated from hydro bills under a Hudak government and you've got some serious savings. I'm a huge fan of tax breaks- especially when it benefits me. And I can see the logic- give people more of their money back; and they'll spend more, which, will increase the economy and likely produce jobs. But what if this economy remains in its current "iffy" status? Always on the edge of another recession, but not quite prosperous either. This might cause people to pocket the additional savings, and that could freeze the consumer side of the economy.
There is some debate as to whether Hudak can legally exit the Samsung deal; he might have to let that one slide. It's not readily obvious in the platform what the P.C.'s would do in its place. What I would do, is to make it easier for companies dedicated to Green energy a bit of a tax break- developing that kind of technology could be expensive. I'd look for a way to make it a bit more affordable for the consumer as well.
It becomes obvious that Ontario will need more post-secondary spots. The P.C.'s like their Liberal counterparts have plans for 60 thousand new post-secondary spots over the next four years. Their plan is to have schools compete for them- Will there be some kind of criteria the schools have to meet? If so, then what? Will it be in the form of new campuses as the Liberals have promised, or based on program, scattered across the province? Sub question to this; a fair number of high school students around age 17 find themselves heading back to school for what's termed a "victory lap." How do you guys plan to deal with this trend?
The P.C.'s are proposing to give more of a say to municipalities. They seem to be the only party dealing with this particular issue; and it's something definitely pertinent to Milton. The only thing I can see on there is they would end the provincial tinkering with the official plans. What does "increased say" mean? Does it mean municipalities can say "no" to developers and for a change have it actually mean "no? Taking Milton for example again- does it mean municipalities have a bit of a say as to what can go on development charges- like say a hospital?
The Justice side of things is a little thin. Making inmates work on so-called "chain gangs" and the sex registry are both good ideas. But they also seem like populist ideas; things that can be done easier if Hudak is elected to a majority government. What about ways to clear the backlog of the court system? Or looking at tougher sentencing for provincial crimes?
They're planning to eliminate the L.H.I.N.S (Local Health Integration Network), and invest the money in front-line health care. Great- there is no need of an extra layer of bureaucracy that really doesn't help health care much. But how do you do define front line health care- hiring more nurses and doctors? Maybe building and expanding more hospitals? Or implementing more of the Prime-care Family health teams? Or maybe on.. dare I say it, electronic health records? There's lots of ways to spend that money.
Potentially this platform could find the P.C.'s on the government side of the house come October 6. But some of these ideas need a little more thought put into them for it to be fully workable. To read more check out the issues section of their website.
Showing posts with label provincial election platforms. Show all posts
Showing posts with label provincial election platforms. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
The N.D. P. Platform critique
The N.D.P. have always had great ideas. But when you ask how much it would cost... that's when it falls apart. This platform is no exception. They have the most realistic approach to the HST; they'd scrap it on home heating oils, and gas for cars- two places where it would save people the most. But the revenue has to be replaced somewhere.
Setting weekly gas prices is in theory a good idea. Nobody else has even tried to solve this problem, and it seems the instant there's an increase on the markets, within hours there's an increase at our local gas stations. There has to be something we can do. But the question I have here is: how do you manage the market increases?
Becoming equal partners in transit development with municipalities is a good idea as well. It is pretty much our collective faults for not developing our transit as we built our roads- this kind of spreads the burden of solving the problem. Where the weakness with their transit plan is in the freeze on fares for four years. Again- a good idea; who doesn't want to pay less for something? The problem is what happens when/ if you take the freeze off? After four years the increase could be a huge deciding factor in whether some people continue to use transit. A better idea might be to somehow tie the increase to the rate of inflation maybe.
The education plank is fairly non-existent. The N.D.P. is looking at tuition freezes, and forgiving the interest on student loans. Both good ideas, but it fails to address the system as a whole. The P.C.'s and Liberals both have grand plans of funding 60 thousand post-secondary spots.
Buying Ontario may be a great soundbite but in practical terms won't work. The provinces are too interdependent on each other. And Ontario is still a powerful part of the overall Canadian economy- Ontarians start buying exclusively Ontario, and the rest of Canada might fail.
Scrapping the LHIN's (Local Health Integrated Network), is something the N.D.P. and their P.C. counterparts agree on. The money saved here (I think around $200 million) would probably offset some of the fees on medical exams, and ambulance fees they plan on getting rid of.
These are some decent ideas there, but is it enough to form a government on? It might be. The N.D.P. have so far been fairly clear on what they will do if elected, and the clarity might be enough to break through the clatter of the other two fighting it out on the negative end of things.
Setting weekly gas prices is in theory a good idea. Nobody else has even tried to solve this problem, and it seems the instant there's an increase on the markets, within hours there's an increase at our local gas stations. There has to be something we can do. But the question I have here is: how do you manage the market increases?
Becoming equal partners in transit development with municipalities is a good idea as well. It is pretty much our collective faults for not developing our transit as we built our roads- this kind of spreads the burden of solving the problem. Where the weakness with their transit plan is in the freeze on fares for four years. Again- a good idea; who doesn't want to pay less for something? The problem is what happens when/ if you take the freeze off? After four years the increase could be a huge deciding factor in whether some people continue to use transit. A better idea might be to somehow tie the increase to the rate of inflation maybe.
The education plank is fairly non-existent. The N.D.P. is looking at tuition freezes, and forgiving the interest on student loans. Both good ideas, but it fails to address the system as a whole. The P.C.'s and Liberals both have grand plans of funding 60 thousand post-secondary spots.
Buying Ontario may be a great soundbite but in practical terms won't work. The provinces are too interdependent on each other. And Ontario is still a powerful part of the overall Canadian economy- Ontarians start buying exclusively Ontario, and the rest of Canada might fail.
Scrapping the LHIN's (Local Health Integrated Network), is something the N.D.P. and their P.C. counterparts agree on. The money saved here (I think around $200 million) would probably offset some of the fees on medical exams, and ambulance fees they plan on getting rid of.
These are some decent ideas there, but is it enough to form a government on? It might be. The N.D.P. have so far been fairly clear on what they will do if elected, and the clarity might be enough to break through the clatter of the other two fighting it out on the negative end of things.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Liberal Platform Critique
I've read the Liberal platform. It flushes out the ideas on their website The Ontario Way," and adds some new ones. For me it comes down to money; there's some pretty good ideas in there. But how do you afford them?
Tuition money for middle-class families? Great idea; post-secondary schools are expensive enough. But how do you qualify "middle class?" Is it through parents' income level? Is it some kind of social definition? Or perhaps its a mixture of the two; some kind of socio-economic definition- "Parents income comes up to this level, and have more than two kids in the family."
Three post-secondary campuses promised for the Greater Toronto Area (G.T.A.). That's a great idea that would help address the problem of needed post-secondary spaces. It goes with their latest statement that a Liberal Government would decide where future campuses would go. It takes away the institution's ability to make decisions; who would know better about their own needs, than the institutions themselves? For example Laurier definitely needs a new campus- the campus at Waterloo, is tapped out for expansion.
They cover themselves when it comes to hospitals in their "Build Ontario"" document. The phrase "subject to fiscal capacity" is bandied about a lot. If they can't afford it, they won't do it. As I've increasingly blogged- that's not good enough for this community- or any other communities that have been promised hospital expansion.
Their job creation strategy leaves a lot to be desired. I understand how a $10 thousand credit for companies who hire them might benefit the economy. In theory the money is given to these companies who hire the foreign-trained workers and maybe will eventually pass on the savings to the customers, or invest in it back in their business. In reality, it's divisive and could create a really negative environment for immigrants. Speaking as a job-searcher for a moment; it's hard enough to find a job as it is for the rest of us. In my industry everyone wants experience, and yet few are willing to give you a chance at it. Imagine an engineer who gets let go after working for the same company for five years. He's got an incomparable resume; experience, management skills, sterling references. He won't get the job because he's up against a foreign-trained engineer who brings with them the $10 thousand tax credit.
What I've seen of the costing is fairly weak. Program expenditures, and interest on the debt outweigh net revenues. Even after the next four years; in t he event they a) win, and b) win with a majority the deficit will still be $7.8 billion. The full deficit won't be at 0 until 2017-2018- and that's assuming the economy continues any kind of growth.
The platform manages to mention the Progressive Conservatives, and N.DP every few pages. The Platform document isn't a place to tell me what your opponents won't do for me, it's a place to tell me what you will... I can't stand that kind of negativity.
To read the Liberal Platform for yourself click the link. Make an informed choice this provincial election.
Tuition money for middle-class families? Great idea; post-secondary schools are expensive enough. But how do you qualify "middle class?" Is it through parents' income level? Is it some kind of social definition? Or perhaps its a mixture of the two; some kind of socio-economic definition- "Parents income comes up to this level, and have more than two kids in the family."
Three post-secondary campuses promised for the Greater Toronto Area (G.T.A.). That's a great idea that would help address the problem of needed post-secondary spaces. It goes with their latest statement that a Liberal Government would decide where future campuses would go. It takes away the institution's ability to make decisions; who would know better about their own needs, than the institutions themselves? For example Laurier definitely needs a new campus- the campus at Waterloo, is tapped out for expansion.
They cover themselves when it comes to hospitals in their "Build Ontario"" document. The phrase "subject to fiscal capacity" is bandied about a lot. If they can't afford it, they won't do it. As I've increasingly blogged- that's not good enough for this community- or any other communities that have been promised hospital expansion.
Their job creation strategy leaves a lot to be desired. I understand how a $10 thousand credit for companies who hire them might benefit the economy. In theory the money is given to these companies who hire the foreign-trained workers and maybe will eventually pass on the savings to the customers, or invest in it back in their business. In reality, it's divisive and could create a really negative environment for immigrants. Speaking as a job-searcher for a moment; it's hard enough to find a job as it is for the rest of us. In my industry everyone wants experience, and yet few are willing to give you a chance at it. Imagine an engineer who gets let go after working for the same company for five years. He's got an incomparable resume; experience, management skills, sterling references. He won't get the job because he's up against a foreign-trained engineer who brings with them the $10 thousand tax credit.
What I've seen of the costing is fairly weak. Program expenditures, and interest on the debt outweigh net revenues. Even after the next four years; in t he event they a) win, and b) win with a majority the deficit will still be $7.8 billion. The full deficit won't be at 0 until 2017-2018- and that's assuming the economy continues any kind of growth.
The platform manages to mention the Progressive Conservatives, and N.DP every few pages. The Platform document isn't a place to tell me what your opponents won't do for me, it's a place to tell me what you will... I can't stand that kind of negativity.
To read the Liberal Platform for yourself click the link. Make an informed choice this provincial election.
Friday, July 29, 2011
The Liberal Platform: "The Ontario Way"
if the Ontario Way website is it for the Liberal platform, then that party is in worse shape than I thought. The platform rests on a questionable government record (putting it kindly), and pretty much does nothing accept brag about their own achievements. They make few promises that are really comparable to the Progressive Conservatives' Changebook, unlike that document no realistic numbers or detailed plans are provided here. The party breaks the platform down to five main categories: Jobs, health, community, education, and family finances.
Under the Jobs category it states Ontario recovered 124% of jobs lost in the 2008 recession "faster than our major trading partners," with a graph featuring the United States (U.S.) and the United Kingdom (U.K.) Arguably the United States, and the United Kingdom were both worse off than the Canadian economy to begin with. The sub-prime mortgage crisis, and collapse of some financial institutions in the U.S. were contributing factors to America's recession. The United Kingdom is part of the European Union, and was likely affected by what happened in other parts of the trade zone. Couple that with the job creation caused caused in part by Canada's Economic Action plan, and the government bailout of the auto sector and is it any wonder Ontario recovered its jobs faster?
As for Health...Their website says the Liberal government hired "thousands of nurses," offered spots to more international grads than any other province, and have built 18 new hospitals. By the way in their 10-year infrastructure plan they've promised to build more hospitals, and expand others "should fiscal capacity allow," aka if they can afford it. My question is how much of this success has been borne on the backs of Ontarians through the much maligned health tax? The party also mentions eliminating coal fire generators- I'm all for it, if it can be done safely, and we have alternatives ready. In the mean time, what about looking into ways you can cleanly burn coal instead?
Under community it trumpets the government's cosmetic pesticide ban. That's a good thing for the environment and for people's overall health yes, but in 8 years is that all you've done for Ontario's communities? What about investment in community infrastructure (roads, arenas, arts centres)? Or what about keeping communities safe? I find it hard to believe a pesticide ban is the absolute best achievement you can think of for this section.
The education section announces the government's intention to completely implement the full-day Kindergarten by 2014-2015; 3-4 years away. Does this even belong on the platform for now? It's not yet completed, and there's no guarantee it will be carried over should McGuinty lose the election. I think a future government's hands are tied on this one; it's too far into the process now. And as for the estimated $6500/ year in savings to parents- how much of that goes back to the government in taxes?
Parents save $1400 on children's vaccines according to the family finances section of the platform. The provincial Liberals have offered 10% off on hydro bills in the form of an Ontario energy benefit. I'm naturally suspicious- or cynical, but I have to ask: If re-elected where will the provincial liberals make up that 10%? In new user fees? or maybe a new tax?
I hope there is more to the Liberal platform than this. The "Ontario Way" right now lacks the vision, and new ideas I'd hope to see from a party that has the significant advantage of having been in power for 8 years and is asking for a third mandate. It's as if the Liberals have given up before the campaign has really begun.
Under the Jobs category it states Ontario recovered 124% of jobs lost in the 2008 recession "faster than our major trading partners," with a graph featuring the United States (U.S.) and the United Kingdom (U.K.) Arguably the United States, and the United Kingdom were both worse off than the Canadian economy to begin with. The sub-prime mortgage crisis, and collapse of some financial institutions in the U.S. were contributing factors to America's recession. The United Kingdom is part of the European Union, and was likely affected by what happened in other parts of the trade zone. Couple that with the job creation caused caused in part by Canada's Economic Action plan, and the government bailout of the auto sector and is it any wonder Ontario recovered its jobs faster?
As for Health...Their website says the Liberal government hired "thousands of nurses," offered spots to more international grads than any other province, and have built 18 new hospitals. By the way in their 10-year infrastructure plan they've promised to build more hospitals, and expand others "should fiscal capacity allow," aka if they can afford it. My question is how much of this success has been borne on the backs of Ontarians through the much maligned health tax? The party also mentions eliminating coal fire generators- I'm all for it, if it can be done safely, and we have alternatives ready. In the mean time, what about looking into ways you can cleanly burn coal instead?
Under community it trumpets the government's cosmetic pesticide ban. That's a good thing for the environment and for people's overall health yes, but in 8 years is that all you've done for Ontario's communities? What about investment in community infrastructure (roads, arenas, arts centres)? Or what about keeping communities safe? I find it hard to believe a pesticide ban is the absolute best achievement you can think of for this section.
The education section announces the government's intention to completely implement the full-day Kindergarten by 2014-2015; 3-4 years away. Does this even belong on the platform for now? It's not yet completed, and there's no guarantee it will be carried over should McGuinty lose the election. I think a future government's hands are tied on this one; it's too far into the process now. And as for the estimated $6500/ year in savings to parents- how much of that goes back to the government in taxes?
Parents save $1400 on children's vaccines according to the family finances section of the platform. The provincial Liberals have offered 10% off on hydro bills in the form of an Ontario energy benefit. I'm naturally suspicious- or cynical, but I have to ask: If re-elected where will the provincial liberals make up that 10%? In new user fees? or maybe a new tax?
I hope there is more to the Liberal platform than this. The "Ontario Way" right now lacks the vision, and new ideas I'd hope to see from a party that has the significant advantage of having been in power for 8 years and is asking for a third mandate. It's as if the Liberals have given up before the campaign has really begun.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Progressive Conservative "Change Book"
The Progressive Conservative platform Changebook is a winner from a communications standpoint. It hits on the themes of voters who want change, family, and general fatigue with the broken promises and scandal of the McGuinty regime. Reading it, you can practically hear Hudak's voice in parts of it. I think it captures a mood in Ontario that maybe the Liberals haven't caught onto yet.
And it really does promise change for families; income splitting for parents; tax breaks for caregivers with elderly family members. Help with red tape for small business, a promise to put more money into healthcare. The idea of "Justice for all," to make prisoners in Ontario Jails work for their privlages. Hudak wants to clean up government and has promised no tax increases unless they have a mandate to do so. A noble promise yes, but who actually gives their government a mandate to raise taxes? It's ridiculous.
But; what's in it for me? I'm not a family yet. I'm not a caregiver for an elderly family member, or a small business. I'm a little bit past the initial university/ college stage to benefit from changes to the apprenticeship program. I'm just a single person trying to make my way in the world; keep up with all my bills. It appears there's nothing really in the platform for me for people like me... I was hoping for an HST cut at least. It's all well and good to base a platform around families; just remember single people live here too.
And it really does promise change for families; income splitting for parents; tax breaks for caregivers with elderly family members. Help with red tape for small business, a promise to put more money into healthcare. The idea of "Justice for all," to make prisoners in Ontario Jails work for their privlages. Hudak wants to clean up government and has promised no tax increases unless they have a mandate to do so. A noble promise yes, but who actually gives their government a mandate to raise taxes? It's ridiculous.
But; what's in it for me? I'm not a family yet. I'm not a caregiver for an elderly family member, or a small business. I'm a little bit past the initial university/ college stage to benefit from changes to the apprenticeship program. I'm just a single person trying to make my way in the world; keep up with all my bills. It appears there's nothing really in the platform for me for people like me... I was hoping for an HST cut at least. It's all well and good to base a platform around families; just remember single people live here too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)