Reflections on John Tory

"Kathleen Wynne will continue to do us proud...She deserved to win. Tory should have known better than to pick a fight with her."
Oct. 10, 2007, following announcement of Tory's defeat on Election night

"he didn't resign? He wants to lead from outside the legislature? Who will give him their seat? How will he get past a leadership review later this year? I still say he's done. I guess he's asking for the same treatment Andre Boisclair got in Quebec, he will be hounded out, would have been better to go out gracefully like Martin did I think. I think Tory can be useful outside of politics though,"
Oct. 10, 2007, immediately following Tory's concession speech

"If I had to guess, I would say he doesn't make it past the month."
Feb. 23rd, 2008, immediately following Tory's 66.9% approval at the Ontario PC Convention

"If Tory thinks he's a shoe in he might want to think twice. Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock residents might actually be looking for a real representative over the next few years instead someone who will immediately go looking for a new seat for 2011 and focus all his attention there. They might looking for someone that actually knows the riding not someone who's only there to save his career. And given that it's a fairly right wing riding they might actually prefer ending Tory's career in the hopes that someone on the far right takes the leadership of the party from him."
Feb. 4th, 2009, the day the by-election in HKLB was announced
-----------------------------------

Today John Tory officially stepped down as Ontario PC Party leader and left his career in Ontario politics behind. I don't believe in kicking someone when they are down, but I do believe that as someone leaves the political scene it is worth looking at the good (and John did have many good qualities) and bad of their tenures and the lessons that can be learned from it. John Tory is a good guy at heart who has contributed to some great causes in his private life, but as I think many would now agree, it was his political judgment that prevented him from succeeding in Ontario politics. Ultimately, his own choices did him in on Election night and then left him leading a party for the past year and a half that he now probably wishes he left on Oct. 10 or 11, 2007. In each of the quotes listed above John Tory could have made a different choice than he did - he may now always wonder what might have been instead. But even though I was never rooting for him to win (and I'm very happy for Rick Johnson), I can't help but feel some sympathy for him and his fate.

John Tory did have some commendable qualities that I think any partisan could recognize. I'm sure many Ontario Liberals would agree that he's probably the most progressive leader the Ontario PC Party could ever hope to have. If we HAD to endure another PC term in government I would have preferred Tory to anyone else they have in their line-up (but since anyone else in their line-up is FAR less likely to win than Tory would have been, that suits me just fine as a Liberal and leaves me more confident of another McGuinty victory in 2011 :) ).

After the horrors of the Harris years and the shameful ways they dealt with the most vulnerable in society it was amazing to see the PCs have a leader who actually talked about poverty and had credibility on the issue (having worked for the United Way) and that's something we certainly don't see from Tory's federal cousins. Tory was also moderate on social issues and environmental policy, and he was quite critical of the Common Sense Revolution and Harris/Eves' combative ways of doing government, all dramatic departures from his predecessor (and frankly anyone else in his party).

After the 2011 election perhaps the PC Party will finally learn that that's where they need to be if they ever hope to win again, but I doubt they'll come to their senses - again works fine for us Liberals - Liberal majorities are serving Ontario well - but I suppose a part of me thinks it's good for democracy to have a credible opposition and at least John Tory brought that - while I never wanted to see him Premier, you could at least picture him in the job and not absolutely shudder at the thought (except perhaps when you started to worry about the pressure his caucus might put on him on to go back in time...).

But John Tory wouldn't be finished now in Ontario politics if he didn't make many mistakes. I think five stand out.

For one I think he picked the wrong party. I don't think he could ever have been a leadership candidate for the Ontario Liberal Party but I don't think he would have seemed too out of place with some of the party's right-of-centre crowd, we do after all have a much bigger tent than the PCs. Tory certainly seemed to have more in common with some of the right-wing in the OLP than with pretty much any member of his own party. It's no surprise really that his party hasn't truly been behind him since Election night - they don't see him as "one of them" - why else would none of the caucus give up their seat for an entire year? You'll be hearing refrains from many of them now how their "magic solution" is to move further right now and be as far from Tory's mould as possible. We'll see how that works out for them. But any façade of a "moderate" PC Party is now out the window for sure.

Second was his negativity. John Tory vowed to raise the standard for ethics and integrity and that he would espouse a positive vision for Ontario. Instead, he spent most of the Ontario campaign being relentlessly negative. Worst of all, he chose the attack dog role for himself. It's a wise rule that the leader try to stay above the fray and leave the sharpest attacks to subordinates. You don't see Dalton McGuinty take on the role of prime attacker and I'm still puzzled why Tory thought it suited him. I think it turned a lot of people off of him and contributed quite a bit to his poor performance on election night.

Third was his platform. Of course everyone knows there was the religious schools issue, as I said near the end of the 2007 campaign: "He had not even considered some of the most fundamental flaws with his plan such as what to do about the inevitable court challenges by scientologists and so on, how could he claim that he was going to treat the religious schools just like the Catholics and still let those schools charge tuition, how would he monitor these schools, what would happen when they started violating the curriculum, and on and on. It just give the impression that he doesn't give great thought to his most important policies which is the worst possible quality to have if you want to be the Premier who is tasked with handling education and health care in our province." His backtracking on the issue near the end of the campaign made him look even worse. I resent when people compare the religious schools issue to the Green Shift, because no one has made a convincing case as to why the Green Shift isn't good policy (of course it didn't prove to be good politics), whereas Tory's religious school's proposal was both bad policy and bad politics which I think is a very important distinction. But religious schools wasn't the only problem with this platform either, his platform claimed it would have cut taxes (which would have been a disaster in hindsight) and yet increase spending. It sounded like a re-hash of what we heard from Mike Harris and created suspicions as to who was really running the show and making policy for the party. PCs will learn again in 2 years that we REALLY don't want another Mike Harris type leading the province especially at a time of increasing unemployment and poverty.

But all politicians make mistakes with policies and ideas they put forth and John Tory at least seemed to realize that he had (though he seemed to mistakenly believe the solution was to move further right), and he could have overcome the problems in his platform to lead his party in 2011, but I think ultimately his biggest mistake was choosing to challenge Kathleen Wynne. It was a dumb move and it certainly diminished the respect some Liberals had for Tory that he would choose to take on one of the best ministers in McGuinty's government and arguably one of the top women in Ontario politics. In the end he was trounced for it, only scoring 0.1% better than David Turnball who ran before him in Don Valley West in 2003. Had Tory chosen a more PC friendly riding and run against a non-incumbent or just stayed where he already was I think he would still be PC leader today. It was not the election loss that doomed him, it was the fact that he had no seat. It proved impossible for him to have much profile sitting outside the legislature and well now we know what ended up happening in the end. The biggest lesson for party leaders from this I think is make sure you are confident of winning your own seat, because I think Tory's case should prove pretty clearly that if you don't win a seat on election night and can't find a replacement extremely quickly then it's time to go.

Finally, John Tory should have realized his party wasn't behind him and called it quits on the earlier chances he had like Election night or after the performance review.

So on balance John Tory had the ability to be a great public servant, but too many of his decisions backfired and his party was just too right-wing to ever be able to truly rally behind him. John Tory is better off without the PC Party though. I think he could still make a very positive contribution to society and I hope he does.

I wish John Tory nothing but the best in his life post-Ontario politics.

Recommend this Post

Follow Up to "The Last Hoorah"

Someone asked if Liz Sandals' house was targeted with the signs I posted on her front lawn. I have been informed that is partially correct. A neighbour of Sandals' who is a strong Conservative supporter put them up on their own lawn as a statement of their strong Conservative beliefs.

Recommend this Post

4 MORE YEARS!

So I'm back at the computer and what can I say, it's a good night to be a Liberal!

Global went on the air at 9 PM to proclaim a McGuinty majority so you knew the night was going to go well.

My predictions were a bit off the mark, but I can't say I'm sad about that.

So my thoughts on the whole night (based on piecing together my memories from tonight and from re-watching CPAC coverage)....

HUGE victory for McGuinty, he's gotten a clear mandate from the people. The Liberals have done better than pretty much ANYONE had predicted.

HUGE defeat for Tory, who has seen his party popular vote plummet below what even Ernie Eves got. Way worse than I thought they'd get. How can he stay on as leader?

I was a bit wrong about the NDP though, their popular vote and seat count is a bit better than I thought it would be. Probably Hampton siphoned off some PC voters. Though early on in the night it looked like they might get as many as 20% of the vote and 14 seats but that took a bit of tumble later in the night down to 17% and 10 seats (which is what they started the campaign with). I don't think Hampton will get to stick around either though since this is his 3rd kick at the can, but you know what at least he can say he went out having increased his party's share of seats and popular vote.

And the Green popular vote was pretty high (8%), never thought they'd get that high. But still no seats, that's too bad, I think with that kind of support they deserved at least one.

As for specific ridings:
Levac wins big (by 20%!)!

Sandals wins big (by 15%)!

They were two of the earlier Liberals declared re-elected. Having worked on both campaigns this time I'm proud of that. This was a bigger victory for Sandals given that she only won by about 5% last time.

Laura Albanese looks like she's won in York South Weston. Good, she's a great candidate.

Ted McMeekin wins prety comfortably. Good job to the people I know in Hamilton who worked on his campaign.

Randy Hillier falls narrowly behind late in the night before coming back out ahead again. It's safe to say the legislature is better off without him, but sadly it looks like he's gotten a pass. Well at the least he should do wonders for PC popularity in the upcoming session at Queen's Park. Could give the Liberals some pretty good fodder, but still this man did not deserve a seat.

Tim Peterson gets to rue the day he left the Liberal family as he gets soundly defeated. I'm sure he'll be eating crow at the next family dinner.

Tory has NOW been DEFEATED! :) I see he actually didn't do much better than David Turnbull (yeah I know everyone remembers him now) in 2003 (39.7% for Tory vs. 38.9% for Turnbull). Kathleen Wynne will continue to do us proud. I think she'd make a great deputy Premier. Tory can move on to something else.

In other news...MMP Referendum has gone down soundly to defeat (only about 37% support). I didn't think it would crack 50% but I didn't think it would do this bad. So that's the end of electoral reform for good then and that's a bit of a shame.

Speeches came up at about 10:45 PM:

Oddly McGuinty went first (usually the opposition goes first).

Anyways as for his speech....

4 MORE YEARS!
The French part at the beginning (and French interspersed throughout) was a good touch, I really like that McGuinty never forgets the Francophone population we have in Ontario.
Gives the voters props. Shows his appreciation to his candidates and his volunteers. Good compliments paid to the candidates and leaders of the other parties. Very classy.Thanks his family and of course his wife.
The whole rest of the speech was about framing up what Ontario is and what Ontario said tonight. Some of the major lines:
-We (Ontarians) have not voted for the status quo, we have voted for progress
-We will embrace positive ideas, deplore negativity
-We do not want our children or society to be divided
-We expect our government to Improve medicare, Green the environment, and move our publicly funded schools forward
-We judge governments on their record, warts and all
-We value progress above all
-We want our government to look forward beyond the next election and to the next generation (borrowing a line from Dion it seems)
- We are a strong province at the centre of a strong country.
- We believe in medicare, not private health care
- We believe in public funds for public schools, not for private ones
- We will always be moving forward together!

Makes me pround to be an Ontarian and proud to live in a Liberal Ontario!

Kathleen Wynne talks next:"We DID IT!" She deserved to win. Tory should have known better than to pick a fight with her. She's the new giant killer of the Liberal party (the last one of course knocked off Kim Campbell, what a coincidence). The rest of her speech was not picked up well, just heard that Ontarians were saying that we believe in public education and she deserves to keep running the show there or at the very least to be kept in a very high profile cabinet and I think she should be deputy Premier.

John Tory's speech then next....

It was largely a pretty standard speech. Aside from the complaining again about Ontario (big contrast with McGuinty's speech) which wasn't necessary it was an ok job and classy enough. Though he didn't resign? He wants to lead from outside the legislature? Who will give him their seat? How will he get past a leadership review later this year? I still say he's done. I guess he's asking for the same treatment Andre Boisclair got in Quebec, he will be hounded out, would have been better to go out gracefully like Martin did I think.

I think Tory can be useful outside of politics though, maybe he'll go back to the United Way or something.

Later Kathleen Wynne was asked what does she think about John Tory continuing on and she thought that was all for the best. Yeah I wonder why? Still with Tory gone the Tories might veer further back towards the right which would just be bad for Ontario in general.

Howard Hampton came next for his speech....

Took a trip down memory lane at the start. From the get go it was sounding like a retirement speech. He was not sounding happy. Feel kind of bad for him, but I guss he's had a long run. Mentions support from First Nations, that's good (not mentioned really by the other leaders). Mentions his female canadidates good too. Makes it sound like he'll be working hard in elections to come. Again I don't see how this will work. Mentions that there will be 5-6 recounts. Kind of anti-climatic finish just about how we need a minimum wage and he'll work with the other parties. Still surprised that he didn't resign, his speech kind of sounded it was going that way at the start. I think Hampton will go out more gracefully over the next couple weeks than Tory. I don't think he'll have to be hounded out.

Final results as of 1 AM:

Liberals: 71 seats (42%)
Conservatives: 26 seats (32%)
NDP: 10 seats (17%)

So all in all I'm pretty happy, the Liberals won huge, but I'd also note that I think the Green Party were a big winner tonight as they've proven that that 8% that everyone was saying was a parked vote actually held.

This has big implications for the federal election given that the provincial Green party has received much less press than the federal equivalent.

Anyways that's it for me tonight. I think I'll be off on provincial issues for awhile yet and I'll be talking more about federal politics as Parliament comes back next week. But I'll be back to it as the new Cabinet is announced the MPP's return to Queen's Park.

Good night!

Recommend this Post

2007 Ontario Election Predictions

So it's voting day. As promised, here are my predictions:

Seat breakdown:
Liberals: 62
Conservatives: 36
NDP: 9

Key ridings (at least for me):

Brant: Levac (Liberal) by 15%
Guelph: Sandals (Liberal) by 10%
Don Valley West: I'm sorry but it's way too close to call. Tory's been at it hard in the riding the past few days and he may get some sympathy votes from those hoping he doesn't leave politics which could close the gap in that riding. Either way it'll be close, but I'm really hoping Wynn pulls it out.

If you haven't voted already, GO OUT AND VOTE!

Recommend this Post

Grading the Leaders: Dalton McGuinty: A-

When you're riding this high in the polls, and you started out almost even with the opposition it's hard to say someone has run a bad campaign even if you don't agree with their tactics. You have to give credit where credit is due.

Of course I am biased but I think McGuinty ran a pretty good campaign that did what it needed to do to keep and enhance his lead.

First of all, he made Tory's biggest weakness the focus of the campaign and played it to his strength. It was a huge issue and it resonated with Ontarians and further cemented McGuinty's reputation as the education premier who would stand up for public education.

Second, he had a progressive agenda that took a lot of the issues Hampton was highlighting (such as poverty, dental care, senior care and so on) and provided realistic solutions for them within a fully costed platform. In fact it was the most fiscally conservative of the 3 main parties (which makes these last ditch tax hike accusations incredibly lame).

Third, he consistently gave a solid defense of the Liberal record and confronted all misinformation put out about it. He was up front about his broken promises, explained his decisions well and why we are all better for it. Big contrast with Tory's equivocations about where his "efficiencies" would come from.

Fourth, he made all the appropriate parallels between Tory and Harris without stretching or going over the top (e.g., he never said Tory wanted to pick on the poor or that he was a right-wing ideologue, etc....) and he consistently provided excellent contrasts between the Liberal record with the PC and NDP records. He excellently framed his party as defenders of the public interest and the Tories as defenders of private interests.

Finally (there are more, but I'll leave that to others) he managed the media incredibly well and much better than the other two leaders. There were no real gaffes or slip-ups, he never went too negative (left that to his surrogates as appropriate and as done in 2003) and it seemed he always got the media focused on what he wanted to talk about (something neither Tory nor Hampton managed to do very well).

However, McGuinty doesn't get an A+ for two reasons. First of all, while it was appropriate to put a lot of focus on religious schools given the monumental nature of what was being proposed I still think the Liberal campaign focused on it more than it needed to. Tory was already being barraged about it each day in the media so he was already doing himself in, McGuinty could have spent more days highlighting different aspects of the Liberal platform than he did and spent less time on the religious schools issue. He would have taken away the same supporters fleeing from Tory over the religious school's issue but also possibly won over others who wanted a more clearly mapped out vision of where the Liberals will take us over the next 4 years. Yes McGuinty mapped out of lots of good policies this campaign and a vision for the future, I'm just saying he should have put a bit more focus on that over talking about Tory's Achilles heel as often as he did.

Second, even though McGuinty is not near as guilty of this as John Tory, I still felt the Liberal campaign was too focused around him. He was in all the ads, pasted on the bus and was the centre of the campaign. Given that McGuinty has what many (even conservative) commentators have agreed to be one of the strongest teams behind him in recent memory I just don't see why there wasn't more focus in his ad campaign and on the campaign trail on the strength of his team as a whole. I don't see how it would have hurt to highlight the strong team McGuinty has versus the incredibly weak and hiding teams that Hampton and Tory had. McGuinty is a great guy and as the leader he's the face of the party so he's got to be the focus of course, I just think they could have added more focus on his team too.

Other than that though, McGuinty has dominated this campaign, controlled the agenda and has gotten results and I'm looking forward to 4 more years and I hope his next campaign in 2011 earns an A+.

So in summary of all 3 leaders, McGuinty definitely ran the best campaign and for those who care to differ take it up with the people of Ontario since it's clear he's earned more support in this campaign than the other two leaders. That said, while each leader had some unique flaws in their campaign, I fault all three of them for focusing their campaigns too much around their own personalities. Who would be in a Tory or Hampton cabinet if they had won? It seems neither wanted to showcase their team. Same for McGuinty though, which makes even less sense to me given the strength of his team.

But regardless of whether you wanted them to win, you always have to give the winner credit (even if you don't agree with their tactics), as it looks pretty damn likely we will see a McGuinty majority tomorrow.

I'll be back later tonight (or tomorrow morning) with my detailed predictions and then tomorrow night we can see just how psychic I really am.

Recommend this Post

Grading the Leaders: John Tory: D

What to say about John Tory's campaign? Well at least he'll probably do better than the last major campaign he ran (wonder if Kim Campbell is laughing now though).

Anyways there were many problems with John Tory's campaign that's left him in his currently very weak position. I'll only focus on three in particular though. First obviously there was the religious schools issue. It's coming out more and more now that Tory had been told by many people and even focus groups that this idea was toxic and he ignored them all. Tory says a good leader has to listen, but it seems to be that Tory only "listens" when his back is completely against the wall and he has no other choice (unless he really did want to re-live 1993). So his plowing through on this issue and continually beating us over the head on how he was standing firm on principle and that somehow this was going to win us all over was just completely lacking in judgment and as some commentators put "political suicide". While his reversal stopped a mutiny from occurring it probably lost him a lot of supporters that actually thought he was a man of principle (and he has continued to confuse voters on the free vote issue ever since). Basically I can't fathom what other terrible ill-thought ideas Mr. Tory would have rammed through the legislature had he be given a majority. You can argue that this issue shouldn't have dominated the campaign, but Tory's stubbornness on it really highlighted just how unfit for the Premier's office he was. He had not even considered some of the most fundamental flaws with his plan such as what to do about the inevitable court challenges by scientologists and so on, how could he claim that he was going to treat the religious schools just like the Catholics and still let those schools charge tuition, how would he monitor these schools, what would happen when they started violating the curriculum, and on and on. It just give the impression that he doesn't give great thought to his most important policies which is the worst possible quality to have if you want to be the Premier who is tasked with handling education and health care in our province.

Now it wasn't just religious schools that brought Tory down (though that in itself was probably enough to keep him out of the Premier's office). He also made a mistake I think in wrapping his entire campaign around himself as I discussed earlier. Everyone was a "John Tory candidate" and his bus and commercials were all about John Tory and not the PC Party. Pamphlets passed out at these candidates' events said nothing about the candidates themselves, only Tory. It's like he was ashamed of his team and ashamed of his party. It also made it appear as if these candidates would just be complete puppets with no mind of their own. Tory even took the role of attack dog for himself, something that almost always goes to a surrogate. I'm really not sure what Tory thought he was accomplishing other than his naive belief that everyone knew who he was or would like him and I guess Tory thought no one would really care who his candidates actually were. Anyways the whole thing came off as massive arrogance and really raised questions as to just what kind of people was he running and why was he hiding them? As well it feeds the impression that his team is weak and thus he would have a incompetent cabinet to deal with if he actually won. And it doesn't make me want to vote for someone if they're not even well advertised by name, he could have at least given us the illusion that these people won't be puppets. People would like to know about who they are voting for, instead all they hear about is the PC leader (and of course much moreso about that other leader that the Tories were so sure everyone hated).

Besides the John Tory we did see was always complaining and talking about how awful everything in Ontario is, so if he was going to put himself front and centre he should have at least projected a positive image with a positive vision, but he did neither. I'm biased of course, but I didn't like the John Tory I saw on TV, he seemed bitter and angry all the time. So I suppose a voter could assume the "John Tory candidates" were bitter and angry just like him. Anyways the whole image centred nature of the campaign was just one big mistake from the get go.

Finally compounding the other two factors, was Tory's platform. If religious schools was never brought up the $1.5 Billion gap would have been a bigger issue. It just reeked of Harris/Eves slash and burn policies. It also really ate in to Tory's credibility each time he was unable to spell out how he could find such savings. It just made parallels with Harris appropriate again. Tory could have easily really bolstered his credibility and just flat out said "ok I'm going to cut here and here's why". I might not have agreed with him, but your regular John and Jane might have. Instead, he ended up sounding like Hampton that we could all have our cake and eat it too which was basically the whole mantra of the Common Sense Revolution that was proved completely false. Plain and simple something would have to be cut and Tory should have been up front. Nobody believed that he would just find "efficiencies" and no services would suffer.

All these things together just showed that Tory doesn't think through his policies, isn't straight with people and doesn't think much of his team. There's much more issues wrong with Tory's campaign (the complete focus on promises as if that's all that mattered, his horribly negative ads, his fear-mongering on crime that was out of touch with reality, etc....), but I can't go on forever (I do have a Master's program to keep up with) so I've highlighted 3 things that I think basically sunk his chances that's really enough justification for an F.

Ok so I'm being pretty negative, so I'll give Tory some credit. I did like to see that he visited a lot of poor communities in this campaign and some farming communities too that other parties didn't pay as much attention to. That was a good touch and I do get the sense that Tory cares about the impoverished in Ontario (though I still think the rest of his team would rather continue the Harris/Eves war on the poor).

Other than that though, Tory was way too negative all the time which should have been left to his surrogates and when you're on track to do even worse than Ernie Eve's it's really hard to give you anything much beyond a failing grade.

For the few nice touches he showed he avoids an F, but I can't say I'll miss John Tory in politics, he seems better suited elsewhere and I'm sure he'll still make a difference in a positive way as I think he's a good guy at heart.

And then there's McGuinty's campaign.....

Recommend this Post

Campaign Overview: Grading the Leaders: Hampton: C+

So with the campaign coming to a close I thought I would steal Adam Radwanski's idea of grading the leader's (I'm sure it's been done long before Adam so I don't feel so bad) as a way of summing up how I feel about each of their campaigns.I'd like to hear others grades too.

Now many of you may disagree with my analysis, but I think we all have to admit that in giving out such grades for each leader's campaign you really do have to take into account the results, so for all you Tories out there, I don't see how you could justify Tory having run a better campaign when he's doing worse now than when he started.

Anyways.....

Grading the Leaders: Howard Hampton: C+

Suffice it to say the NDP and Howard Hampton haven't had an easy time this time around (I guess they haven't since 1990 though). It's tough when the people know you'll never form the government to have your ideas taken seriously. But a good leader has to be able to deal with that. Hampton means well I'm sure but he just couldn't get the job done. He came up with his "six priorities" and I guess he thought that if he kept it simple people might actually listen to him, but you know aside from eliminating the health tax(while raising corporate and income taxes for the highest bracket), uploading services, and re-listing eye exams and physio, I don't remember what his other policies were. He kept talking about seniors in soiled diapers, but I don't remember hearing a fully costed plan on how to deal with that. Basically, he raised a lot of good issues, but he suffered from a real credibility problem in that he didn't have realistic solutions.

It seemed like he was just full of were pie in the sky promises with no fully costed platform to back it up. Basically, Hampton seemed to be telling us we could have the world and not suffer any consequences (unless you were rich I guess, then you get taxes raised). He also started out the campaign claiming he was going to form the government which no one really believed which took a further hit to his believability.

But then there were his actual ideas that just didn't stand up to scrutiny. This was nowhere more true than with energy: Hampton wanted to close our nuclear plants and coal power plants and then hope and pray we could replace it all with renewable energy. Pie in the sky thinking as I said. When people think you're full of BS on some matters they don't really want to hear what you have to say about the rest. Next time, the NDP should really come forth with a fully costed platform and actually test out their ideas on non-NDP supporters to see if they actually hold up to any kind of scrutiny. I won't hold my breath though.

Anyways I guess Hampton not being listen to or believed came to full a head last week, as he fell back on the old adage that when your campaign isn't going well just play the blame the media card. I don't think the media was completely wrong to focus on religious schools. It could after all be making one of the biggest change to our education system in decades. Of course I did agree with Hampton that it would have been good to hear more coverage on all the others issues that he mentioned. But Hampton, like Tory should have been able to see the forest from the trees earlier on religious schools and how important it would be. The Liberals saw it and were front and centre talking about it. Hampton instead kept talking about "smokescreens" while McGuinty was establishing himself as the only true defender of public education. Hampton could have taken a clear stand like McGuinty, but like Tory he just couldn't see how much this issue would matter to Ontarians (and maybe moreso the media) and didn't make enough of a splash on the issue. If he wanted to talk about other issues, he should have gotten in on this one to get the attention, and while he had it, took the opportunity to his advantage and brought up the other issues. He could have taken the lead to talk about other issues this way, and he didn't do it, so all the while he got ignored and fell behind in the race.

I do give Hampton some credit though for at least realizing that thata lot of this was John Tory's fault for bringing up this wrong-headed religious schools idea in the first place. It was good to see HoJo "take a break" for a short time, but Hampton should have left it at that, but instead completely melted down in front of the media. It was not exactly the way to make a comeback. He came off sounding desperate and demoralized and plunged his credibility down further. It was as close to officially throwing in the towel as you get.

He's rebounded a bit these past few days, showing just a bit more confidence, but nothing that would lure away many Liberal supporters. His latest claim that the Liberals would have to raise taxes is a bit rich from the party that had the most expensive platform of all (and relies on much rosier economic predictions than the Conservatives or Liberals). Again he really suffers from a credibility gap and I think that's partly what's done him in.

So in summary, I give Hampton some credit for raising some good issues and for in the final days finally criticizing Tory for the disaster he's been. He's also likely to at least also increase his party's share of the popular vote (and possibly seat count) over 2003, so results do have to be factored in there. But by and large he didn't get the job done as he failed to get much attention most of the campaign (something the leader of the NDP has to be adept at and something Layton does a better job of), put out ideas that didn't really stand up to scrutiny and he looks like he's failed to hold the Liberals to a minority which was his main task.

I feel for Hampton, I think he's probably in politics for the right reasons, he (by his own admission) just might not be the right guy for his job. I imagine a new leader will take the reins soon of the NDP and if I were an NDP supporter I would hope he/she learns from Hampton's mistakes.

Next up is John Tory...

Recommend this Post

The Last Hoorah

Yes, I want four more years of Dalton McGuinty. Four more years of good government focusing on the things that actually matter to Ontarians, unlike what we've been hearing from the other guys.

Though I wonder who put up these anonymous signs in just the last 24 hours? Hmm? Gee? What's the one at the end in perfect alignment with the others?

And some of these weren't even really broken promises to begin with, but I guess they made a list at the start of the campaign and screw the facts they're sticking to it.

One last desperate attempt I suppose. I guess they think if their messaging hasn't worked by talking about it, somehow printing it and putting a signature card at the end will be less evasive but more effective.

I guess last week's distasteful and deceptive mail out wasn't enough. At least they took credit for putting that one out. Though I must say at least a name is on the sign, up till this point I just thought the PC candidate's name was "my John Tory candidate". Oh well won't matter.

See you at the victory party.

Recommend this Post

Tory's nonsense on crime finally called out

This Globe article was good to see. Perhaps the most completely dishonest part of John Tory's campaign are his rants on crime. He would have us believe that it's gang warfare everywhere and no one feels they can safely go outside anymore (so that we need him as our protector to restore society from anarchy). He's totally wrong on many counts on this one and it's good to see he's been finally called out.

******************************************************

Defence, prosecution alike reject PC attack on bail system

KIRK MAKIN From Saturday's Globe and Mail October 6, 2007 at 9:19 AM EDT

A campaign assault on the bail system by Ontario Conservative Leader John Tory has accomplished the rare feat of uniting both the prosecution and defence bar against his claims. Even hard-line police advocates are having trouble defending Mr. Tory's claims as well as the targets he has identified in a series of recent commercials and speeches.
******************************************************
Basically, it's made clear that most of what Tory complains about ("catch and release") is a federal matter and also that's he's completely wrong that Ontario has a soft record on bail. Of course he cites the 7 out of 10 figure but that's for one year and one year does not make some big long pattern. The actual pattern is of crime going DOWN, but of course he's never once made mention of that, he'd rather we cower in our homes, except perhaps to go out to vote Conservative on October 10th so Big Brave Mr. Tory can save us from all the ills of the McGuinty justice system.

What's so interesting of Tory trying to pin crime on McGuinty aside from the points mentioned above is that he's blaming a small number of judges' decisions on bail and one or two plea deals made by Crown prosecutors on the Premier and is not able to point to a single policy/decision that the McGuinty government has put forth that would has actually aggravated the crime problem. The reality is we actually have more police on the streets and Crown Prosecutors are actually taking a tougher stance on crime and bail. So if it's a McGuinty "catch and release" system now there was an even greater Harris/Eves "catch and release" system before but the reality is that a lot of the crime issue can only be dealt with at the federal level or within the justice system itself (which if Tory doesn't remember is supposed to be independent of government). If there are actually any Ontario government policies that made the crime problem worse it would have to be the Harris/Eves war on the poor from 1995-2003 but somehow I don't think Mr. Tory will be talking about that before Election Day.

But let's remember that Ontario is in general one of the safest jurisdictions and the city of Toronto one of the safest cities in the world. I lived in Toronto for 5 years and never ONCE felt unsafe when alone at any hour of the night, but Tory would have us believe it exactly the opposite. Meanwhile he talks about how Brantford has a higher crime rate than Toronto and both are pretty low by any comparative standard.

Being a B-dot (Btfd) home-girl I don't think anyone there really thinks there's a crime problem. Crime is an issue yes, but it is everywhere and don't dramatize it so that it's like we are living in a war zone now it just insults our intelligence. Tory is making Brantford's reputation awful, bringing it up like 5 times in a televised debate. We don't need that! We just got over being known for the worst downtown in Canada! Worrying about this supposed crime rate will be more problematic than any actual crime. Does he want us to be fearful for stepping outside? Give me a break John, cuz when I want to go to Telly's convenience past dark to rent a video, you won't be there holding my hand and nor will I have a provincially paid cop as my personal bodyguard. I'll still go on my own and "risk it".

Anyways...a very close friend of mine currently lives in a U.S. city of 70,000 (Champaign-Urbana, IL) and he's been told not to go outside past 11 PM nor visit certain parts of the city because he could easily get held up at gun point or even shot. It gives me some real perspective on how lucky we are and makes me really puzzled how Mr. Tory opposes a hand-gun ban (which no matter which way you look at it reduces supply) while saying he's tough on crime.

So stop your fearmongering Mr. Tory almost NO ONE who actually deals with crime believes what you are saying so if you really want to be known as someone who is "straight with the people" (like he claimed in his closing statement at the debate) then stop deceiving the people of Ontario. Of course deception is a pattern of Mr. Tory's (religious schools comes to mind) that will continue and probably get worse till Election Day. Maybe he can come forward with some sensible things to say about the topic once this is all over. But that will probably be in his provincial retirement, cuz I think someone very shortly, if not already, has their eyes on his job.

Recommend this Post

Tory's bluster on doctors

So it's back to blogging on the Provincial front.


First of all, I'd like to talk about John Tory's day today which was spent talking about his plan to bring more doctors to the Province and how McGuinty has supposedly failed in this regard. Though it seems to me that Tory's plan involves things McGuinty has already done such as increase space in med schools (done) and set up a program to bring back doctors from the US (done). The only thing new is that Tory says he'll go to the U.S. himself and he "won't come back empty handed", as if he's such a master persuader than just seeing John Tory on your doorstep south of the border will be enough to pack your bags and return home. I guess he also promised "cold hard cash" to bring doctors back, but is it just me or is that sending a message to today's med students "go to the U.S. now and I'll give you a raise to come back". Thankfully it seems Tory won't have such power.


Tory also mentioned that 1 million families still don't have a family doctor and that's the same as 4 years ago. Of course he's just fooling with numbers, as that statement only means something if the province's population has not changed over the past years. In fact, the province has more people now, so the percentage of people with family doctors HAS gone up and in fact that half a million more families now have a family doctor compared to before. I myself am someone who found a family doctor in the past four years, but Mr. Tory doesn't want to talk to people like me of course who have positive stories to tell about where our province has been going.


I especially liked this line from the article:

Mr. Tory acknowledged that he could not fix the problem overnight if he becomes premier; the ideal solution is to create more spaces in medical schools to train doctors but that takes time.


Ok Mr. Tory remind me again why you are complaining about McGuinty and how you think it's his fault not all Ontarians have a family doctor. Didn't he increase med school spaces and doesn't that take time? Oh well John Tory is not the best with consistency these days.


Now don't get me wrong this is a real issue and more Ontarians definitely need a family doctor, but John Tory has basically admitted that McGuinty has taken the right steps and that it will take time to solve the problem. So I'm not sure this topic is that best thing for Tory to be talking about less than a week before the election since it's something McGuinty has done a decent job on.


And according to Kinsella Tory may be breaking election laws too? Well it just keeps getting better doesn't it? Still we'll see if the media picks up on that one.


It was another great day for Mr. Principle on his road to victory....

Recommend this Post

Keeping Promises Would not have been Leadership

Broken Promises Have Consequences???

So we’ve all been beaten over the head for the past while with this saying from John Tory “broken promises have consequences?” Has anyone stopped to wonder what this actually means?

Take Tory’s ad trying to blame asthma and deaths from pollution as resulting from a broken promise. So Dalton promised to close coal power plants and they’re not closed yet. Ok well at least Dalton will be closing them (with a realistic plan to get it done) while John Tory wants them to keep spewing for decades to come.

But apparently to John Tory, it’s all about promises, not good public policy. So as long as Tory doesn’t promise to close the coal plants, if they’re still open in 30 years, no one should blame him, as long as he kept all his ill-thought out “promises”. He wouldn’t have broken a promise and that’s apparently all that matters, not what’s the right decision to make.

But John, don’t keeping promises have consequences too?

Let’s say after Dalton found out just how bad things were with Ontario’s finances, his response was “you know what, I made some promises, and damned the consequences, I’m gonna keep them all!” So he could have closed more hospitals, fired more teachers and continued the Eves/Harris path so he could balance the budget or he could have made a tough choice as he did. I think it’s safe to say “the consequences” of his broken promise are better than the consequences of if he had kept it.

Same thing with coal power plants. Imagine where we’d be if Dalton had just plowed ahead and closed them by 2007 anyway regardless of reports he commissioned that told him it couldn’t be done. I think in 2003 Dalton really believed he could do it, but after learning the ropes of government and obtaining reports on the issue he found out he couldn’t. Again, he made the RIGHT choice and we’re better for it. Now if breaking a promise is the wrong call (like how federal Conservatives handled income trusts), then I’ve got a problem, but if we’re all better for it then that’s what matters. For those who think I’m just shilling for Liberals, if Harper breaks his promise on further cuts to the GST, I will applaud him for it because that would be the right call.

So this “broken promises have consequences” stuff is BS and is just trying to pull at the heart strings of Ontarians and Tory’s hoping they don’t think too hard about his ads. You make promises based on the info you have, but then you have to adjust to reality when you get new information.

The real question should be did Dalton do the rights things while in power? So far it seems all the opposition can talk about is broken promises. With the exception of the grants issue, there is hardly anything that the Liberals actually DID while in government that anyone is able to criticize. So they fall on this promises stuff.

It’s as if they want Dalton to be judged on the campaign he ran in 2003 rather than the government he ran these last 4 years.

A good politician has to be able to adapt to the reality on the ground. Dalton thought the province was in better shape than it was (and let’s be real here hardly anyone thought the deficit was as large as it was). He made promises on that basis. Dalton also had no experience in government. Once Dalton found out just how bad things were and had more governing experience, we should all be thanking our stars that he made the calls he did because keeping promises isn’t everything. Just where would we be if he had kept them all? People might want to think about that and what’s more important.

Dalton’s learned a lot over the past 4 years about the workings of government and all his promises this time are very reasonable and would likely all be met if the Liberals are returned to power. But I want a government that can adapt to reality not one that has to be straight jacketed to promises made under different circumstances.

If a huge recession hits Ontario (more likely these days, given news south of the border) would Mr. Tory still cut the health tax, damned the consequences, just to keep a promise? If so, he’s got his priorities all wrong and he’s not fit to be Premier. But his ads already tell us that don’t they?

Recommend this Post

Some Highlights from Focus Ontario with John Tory

I heard John Tory was on Focus Ontario tonight, so like a good student, I procrastinated and decided to focus on the TV rather than my thesis proposal.

It was a short interview, 20 minutes at best. Tory looked a little nervous, as if he had pre-determined what he was going to say and was just anxious to get it all out. From the get-go, he got on the defensive and was focusing his responses on McGuinty. So much so that the host, Sean Mallen, had to re-direct him at one point to get at the issue at hand – Tory’s own position and plan, instead of Tory spilling out all the negative McGuinty rhetoric that he’s memorized to say.

Tory said he wants the public’s involvement in how the public funding of religious schools will take place. Mallen pointed out that the public doesn’t want anything to do with this issue as polls have shown. Furthermore, Mallen pointed out that the standard Ontario curriculum doesn’t address seating arrangements, so in theory, males could be seated in one side of the class together and females on the other in private-religious schools if Tory’s plan is adopted. Tory believes there’s a better chance, a chance, that a more inclusive arrangement would occur if such schools are in a publicly funded system than outside of it. It’s a nice thought Mr. Tory, but you haven’t really spelled out how these schools would be checked up upon.

Tory also believes that he has much more experience than McGuinty when it comes to cutting inefficiencies. He’s half right, the PC party does have a very good record when it comes to cutting things. I just don’t think he realizes how much cutting would have to be done to find $1.5 Billion. Mallen wanted a direct answer to whether or not there would be any cuts to programs, which Tory answered by saying that “reallocations of people” may occur in government/civil service jobs. So yes I’m sure there would be cuts.

Mallen stated that as a former Toronto mayoral candidate, Tory could have created a better plan for Toronto. Tory said he’s got a plan, but obviously not good enough one for Mallen.

In regards to the environment, Tory said that promising to close coal plants was an irresponsible promise from McGuinty. But I personally believe that scrubbers are also irresponsible and are not the answer. Scrubbers will only keep coal plants operating in Ontario longer as the government waits decades for the scrubbers to pay for themselves before scrapping them. Tory also stated that as a province, we’re going to run out of power, but did not state how he would deliver more power. Instead he stated that McGuinty would have us using “dirty American power” and be at the mercy of another state to obtain it. We’ll what’s your plan Mr. Tory?

Tory stated that McGuinty has shown the crown attorneys a lack of direction when it comes to court releases. That’s not true, as Michael Bryant has instructed crown attorneys to oppose bail for gun crimes, while Tory still wants these people out on bail but just with ankle bracelets. It’s also interesting that he takes every opportunity to bring out the issue of safe communities, but doesn’t want to get tough on a gun ban.

Tory finished by stating that he will be back on Mallen’s show in four years, and that he will win his riding and the election. But he also stated he’ll be back to “defend” his tenure and platform. I am increasingly sure that won’t have to happen, but if so, he’d definitely right that he’d have some “defending” and explaining to do!

Recommend this Post

Who is “John Tory” Hiding?

Recently, I went to an all candidate’s debate in the Golden Horseshoe. The PC Candidate, who I will not name (because all you need to know is that the individual is YOUR John Tory Candidate), was distributing campaign materials: 4 to be precise. None of these pieces of literature gave me any information on the PC Candidate, who would be representing the people, if elected. The PC information was roughly divided up this way: 50% focusing how evil an influence Dalton McGuinty has been in Ontario, 25% introducing to me to John Tory, and the remainder 25% about a vague PC "plan" for Ontario. I imagine that this PC info and materials was the template-norm for all PC candidates that were distributed in Ontario.

The bottom line seems to be that the people, who vote for a representative, don't need to know who their representative is, only that they are a JOHN TORY candidate. Supposedly that representative will only be representing John Tory and his views, not their own or their constituents. But we all know that everyone has their own motivations, ambitions and ideas. More importantly, this is potentially the person who you'll be dealing with when it comes to issues, not John Tory. Additionally, I’ve noticed the party is not promoting the fact that it is a PC/Progressive Conservative party, but again, rather a “John Tory” party, as “John Tory” is more prominently and frequently displayed on PC materials than is “PC” or “Progressive Conservative” actually is. I can be led to assume that the party is almost ashamed of its own party and candidates. I can only wonder and imagine why…...

The fact that all the PC candidates are hiding behind John Tory is scary. It's scary because just who in fact are his candidates? We have a right to know. Why aren't we being told their story and their motivations and life history? Why aren’t these candidates themselves even telling us their own story? Because obviously more than one of the PC candidates has something to hide from Ontarians that would keep us from voting for them if we really knew who they were and their beliefs. Now granted a PC candidate's bio can be found on the PC website, but to actually find that takes interest and work on a voter's behalf.
The only information about this PC candidate that I got from attending this debate was from one of his own campaign workers: he was formally in the religious life, but is no longer as he now manages a multi-million dollar company. Ok: one priority of his is big business, got it, and what a surprise from a PC candidate.

The PC Candidate at the event I attended also had the opportunity to meet me, but he didn’t take the initiative. I say it like this because really, a candidate wants to meet as many people as possible to make a good impression, and if you don’t take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves, then you deserve not to get that vote. Granted, I was wearing a Dalton.ca t-shirt, but it would have been very nice for him to introduce himself to me when I was standing right in front of him in a non-busy situation. Let’s relate this to a very practical similar scenario: when canvassing, another party’s sign on one’s lawn is not a deterrent to any candidate of another party to still approach that house and inquire if they are really sold on their vote and if that sign truly does represent their views. Furthermore, any candidate is running because, we assume, that they want to win. If they do win, they will represent everyone, not just PCers. That's the reasoning behind the fact that no constituency office is allowed to have any party materials/logo in that office. I did expect an introduction, and I was let down by this "John Tory" candidate. He clearly doesn't want to represent me.

Recommend this Post

PC Ads: Despicable

Have you seen the new PC TV ads? One implicitly blaming McGuinty for thousands of Ontarian deaths due to smog and for not closing coal plants (which the PCs will not do), and the other blaming McGuinty for all murders committed by people out on bail? No real solutions proposed in those ads of course, just reckless negativity and totally unwarranted accusations.

These commercials have brought the PC party down to a brand new low. John Tory: Taking advantage of other’s misfortune for his own benefit.

I’m sure we’ll see much more of this (and worse) from “classy John” as the campaign wears on. He sure has kept his promise to bring things up to a new level hasn’t he?

Recommend this Post

Debate Thoughts

See below for my live thoughts on the debate as it was going on. I think everyone got their shots in, but overall McGuinty came out the winner. Even though he was attacked constantly, he answered everyone with a comment on his own record and called Tory and Hampton when they were twisting things.

McGuinty threw out some of new ideas that are in his platform and kept going back to his own record and getting great shots in on the NDP and Conservative records.

Tory and Hampton did seem to faze McGuinty a couple times but he always came back with a bigger jab at their parties records and ways his government have fixed the problems they created.

Hampton really needed to wow people to win and everything he proposed was something McGuinty had already been doing or was totally unaffordable (remember Hampton's platform costs $2 Billlion more than the other two parties). Hampton knows he can't be Premier and I think sometimes (like on nuclear power) it was just obvious he was coming off like an idealist.

Tory plainly came off as far too negative all the time. He get the feeling he just hates this province as it is. Just as Harper used to rant how awful Canada was, Tory is doing the same and I just don't think that wins people over. McGuinty responded with positivism and how Ontario was doing better than he was saying. Tory needed to one come off as positive nad really get off all his ideas, instead he was 90% negative, got off a few points here and there and scored no knock-punches like he needed to do.

It was a tough debate for McGuinty, but I think taking into account what everyone needed to do tonight, McGuinty wins.

UPDATE: Watched the press conferences afterward. Tory's french was awful! He ended up saying several words in English. I really think a Premier should still speak at least decent French as we do have a significant Francophone minority and obviously a French media that can't be communicated to if you can't speak French at all. He had to dodge the last French question without even letting the reporter finish his question with "je ne sais pas, I tried my best" and moved on to the next person, lol. Meanwhile Tory struggled to explain why he was so negative all the time. Finished by saying what sounded like he would fund all private schools (wants to bring all Ontarians in from the private system to the public). So is a funding scheme for all private schools in the cards? (I know I know, likely slip of the tongue, but Freudian slip perhaps?)

Hampton come out and was asked how he had such a love-in with John Tory (12 times he praised him apparently). Hampton had to spend 2 of his 5 minutes saying where he disagreed with Tory (of course none of these things were said in the debate). Basically Hampton didn't have much to say.

McGuinty came out and noted how he enjoyed the debate and expected all the negativity. He noted all the positive things he got out about his government and his new ideas and how obviously he knew he would have to spend most of the time on the defensive because Tory and Hampton's job was to gang up. McGuinty of course handled the French questions very well (being from Ottawa, he's fluently bilingual). Looks forward to talking to talking to Ontarians for the rest of the campaign. Good job.

Recommend this Post

Blogging the Ontario Leaders' Debate

Tonight I will try live-blogging the debate. Check out Cherniak's as well.

6:29 PM.

Starting any minute now....

6:31 PM

Tinkering with the standard?? Videos instead. Liberals first...Oh tackling the broken promise on the health tax right away. Smart thinking for getting that out the door.

NDP: Ok video, at least it wasn't all full of attacks. But the "Get orange" slogan is incredibly lame.

Conservatives. Parent of autistic child to start. I don't think this was appropriate to use her to attack McGuinty. Otherwise the usual about "broken promises have consequences"


6:35 PM


First question on inclusiveness of different cultures in education to Tory.
Tory starts talking about fairness, you either fund all or none, of course he dodges all the serious issues surrounding his plan.
McGuinty talks about his own record on education, good job highlighting how much better things.
Hampton wants to fund neighbourhood schools and fix the funding formula, ok how are you going to do that?


6:40 PM

Now fuller discussion on issue...
McGuinty raises some of the serious about the religious schools plan, which religions will be funded and which not? How do you decide? Do we want to keep moving forward in the direction we are going with higher graduation rates, higher test scords, smaller class sizes or force Ontarians into a huge divisive debate.
Tory says other provinces have done it, not true though, no one funds it 100% like Tory proposes or brought all religions in with public shcools boards, etc....
Hampton talks about funding formula again. McGuinty talks about how much more he has invested in education. Lots of yelling now over the religious schools issue. No one is getting heard now.


6:45 PM


Question again about education. Moderator notes McGuinty accomplishments but also mentions the funding formula and bigger class sizes in some grades.

McGuinty notes his progress again. Hampton again talks about funding formula, infrastructure problems and apparently. Both Hampton and Tory say they will fix funding formula, except Tory is promosing much less for education over the next 4 years than McGuinty so I'm not quite sure how he will do that, while Hampton's platform is way over budget by $2 billlion.

McGuinty: More money in 4 years and that Tory's party did in 8. Good line.

Tory notes how he's met parents frustrated with schools and there being more portables now. Hampton talks about board cuts. I think a lot of these problems originated with Harris.
McGuinty notes we've come along way.

Tory notes how McGuinty said he would fix funding formula and real leaders do what they say they are going to do. I'm guessing that line will be repeated a lot tonight.

Talking about autism now...McGuinty says 3x as much funding for autism than under NDP gov't and $10 million for therapy in classrooms.


6:50 PM


Next question about transit. Hampton says he'll upload 50% of costs from municipalities. He'll get to work on it right away. Tory says he'll get on it right away and will use every cent of gas tax, says McGuinty's plan doesn't do anything until 2011.

McGuinty talks about his transit plan and the impact it will have in Toronto.

Hampton says the plan will take too long to implement. McGuinty talks about projects getting under way now that plans out decades to come.

Tory says McGuinty waited to election time to put out plan. McGuinty notes he gave out 2 cents of gas tax right at the starts and the Cons never offered that.

Hampton complains about downloading of services. McGuinty notes fights Harris govt picked with municipalaties and how they're the ones who did all the downloading, McGuinty is starting to upload.

Tory says he will upload some services after a report comes out. McGuinty says it hasn't been easy to fix the mess left behind by Harris/Eves. Notes the services they have uploaded and the progress they are making.

Hampton says cities are worse off than under Harris and McGuinty said he would reverse it (and he has started to reverse it). Notes property taxes going up.

Tory claims McGuinty doesn't care about rural communities. McGuinty notes the 100 schools lost in those communities under Harris and the plan he has put in place to keep the at risk schools in place.

Hampton claims schools are worse off in Northern Ontario, McGuinty says it's not true.

McGuinty summarizes: 2 cents of gas tax, uploading social services, investing in schools


7:05 PM

Next question a bit surprising: Does McGuinty support having recall elections?

Answer: No he doesn't. Goes into an explanation as how hard it was to raise taxes and the difficult choice he had to make given the hidden deficit.
Hampton says everyone knew there was a $5 billion deficit (bs, no one thought it was that high).

Tory essentially says it was ok for McGuinty to break his promise on the health tax (basically he accepted McGuinty's explanation - let's see how much he still uses that example down the line anyway), but he has other broken promises too.....

Hampton asks about clawback National Child Benefit, why didn't he eliminate it? McGuinty mentions Ontario Child Tax Benefit and how it gives them back more money but Hampton voted against it.

Tory says voters aren't fooled. And only McGuinty won't eliminate health tax. McGuinty notes how Tory is proposing the same slash and burn policies as Harris (raise spending, cut taxes, and balance budget somehow without cuts)

Finishes up with a clarification does anyone support recall? No no one does on the stage.


7:10 PM


Manufacturing question: Asks what Hampton thinks about NDP record on decimating manufacturing. Hampton says nothing about that. Talks about current troubles in Manufacturing sector.

McGuinty notes how unemployment in North and East is lowest in 17 years and unemployment is down since 2003. Tory complains some more, says Ontario is worst in the country. McGuinty says he refuses to be so negative about Ontario.

Hampton complains that McGuinty doesn't care about the North. McGuinty notes that under the NDP Ontario lost 1300 jobs a week, under him gained 1800 a week. No reply from Hampton of course.

McGuinty is good to mention that 340,000 jobs have been created and 95% earn $19.50 an hour or more.


7:15 PM

Next quesiton about poverty to Tory, what will Tory about affordable housing, low welfare rates and helping communities.

Tory says he spent time in impoverished communities and he has a plan to fix those communities.

McGuinty says Ontarians need to think of themselves as a family and can't leave others behind. Increased social assistance 3 times, disability payments 3 times, brought back student grants, Ontario child benefit, 120,000 young people getting grants, new dental plan for working families. Very good answer.

Hampton says the answer is to raise the minimum wage (leaving aside the job losses that would ensue).

McGuinty talks about his own record on health care and how they are getting better services and wait times are down. Tory says he's going to stand up the low income earner and McGuinty says that's pretty rich giving his party's background on bullying the poor (not those exact words of course). Tory praises McGuinty's Ontario Child Tax Benefit, says he'll keep it. Good for him.

Lots of yelling now.


7:25 PM


Question 8 now....

This one about crime. Moderator notes how crime is going down, but people think it's important.

McGuinty notes the 1000 new police officers and the plans he has put in place to help communities.

Hampton says he'll help communities.

Tory fear-mongering like crazy. Everyone is afraid to go outside now apparently and it's all McGuinty's fault. This is low. Tory says he'll fix justice system, just doesn't really say how.

McGuinty mentions how Ontario's crime rate is lowest in Canada essentially. Said he's asked Harper to have tougher sentencing and asks Tory if he'll support a handgun ban because crimes are committed with stolen handguns from legal owners. Tory parrots the Harper line that "handguns are already banned" which is not true, guns get stolen from legal owners and are out on the street the next day, it's choking the supply to ban them.

Tory says crime rate higher in Brantford that in Toronto he says. Wow crime must be pretty low in Toronto, cuz there's virtually none in Brantford (that is my home after all). Shame on Tory for trying to spin it this way.


7:30 PM

Next question.

A bit surprising, I know the next questioner. He asks Hampton about tuition and what his party will do.

Hampton says he will lower and freeze tuition. Tory says he still wants to regulate tuition and increase grants (which is what McGuinty is doing), meanwhile Tory wants to give less funding to universities.

McGuinty notes how he was first to freeze tuition for two years. They added $6.2 billion in funding. Helping students now with textbook grants and more student grants.

Hampton says McGuinty said tuition was too high in 2003. McGuinty notes how NDP once promised to eliminate tuition and it increased 51% on their watch. Later notes how it increased 81% on Tories and families were contributing more then Govt was putting in (same under NDP btw). McGuinty notes the govt puts in $3 for every $1 a student puts in.


7:40 PM


Next question about energy.

Tory asked is nuclear necessary. He says yes it is.

McGuinty agress with nuclear, but also stressing conservation and renewables.

Hampton says nuclear is dangerous and expensive.

Tory asks why McGuinty didn't close coal power plants (why won't Tory commit to ever closing them?).

McGuinty asks Hampton how Ontario can take out nuclear which is 50% of its power supply. Hampton says California and Manitoba were more efficient (do they use 50% nuclear?).


7:45 PM

Next question about health care. Woman asks McGuinty what has been done with health care money.

McGuinty notes investments in wait times and how half a million more Ontarians have a family doctor.

Hampton says invest in home care.

Tory says health care system is no better than 4 years ago. Fudges the number a little on who has a family doctor.

McGuinty reminds people of Tory's voodoo economics plan. Tory claims the money is there.

Tory says McGuinty is complacent for bringing down health care wait times apparently. Throws out the leadership matters line for no reason.

7:50 PM

Final question. Got distracted missed it.

Hampton talks about global warming.

McGuinty talks about moving Ontario forward.

Tory complains some more.

Hampton talks about the need for minimum wage.

McGuinty notes the consequences of that.

Tory downs all over Ontario saying we are the worst at everything and are going nowhere in Canada. Why do you want to be Premier?

McGuinty notes Tory always stands up for the private sector and McGuinty for the public.

Lots of yelling back and forth again.

7:55 PM

Closing statements....

Hampton goes over his "six priorities". Hampton says we can count them!

McGuinty notes how we are moving forward. Closing hospitals to opening hospitals, teachers fired to teachers hired. New environmental plans and health care plans noted.

Tory says he is something different. He is straight with you on everything (like on religious schools?? Somehow I don't think so). He can make a difference. Leadership matters.

That is the end.

Recommend this Post

www.ispeakto.ca

Re: Saturday September 15, 2007

Enthusiastic young Liberals from across Ontario came on their own initiative to Toronto on Saturday to celebrate and show their support for team red, and to kick off a great interactive website with the bare bone facts for youth on voting and the facts on what’s been going on in Ontario over the last 15 years. Check it out, it rocks: http://www.ispeakto.ca/ What do you speak to? If I had to pick one ‘category’, I would speak to opportunity.

The drive on the part of the youth from Ontario to get out to this event just goes to show how much the youth believe in this party and in Dalton. The amount of youth enthusiasm is second to none in any party, and that says a lot. These are smart young individuals with great ideals, methods and sincere interests for society. They are not in some club for the fun of it, for popularity or "connections", and nor are they easily misled.

McGuinty also unveiled some of his friendly-student platform:

12 months to start paying off student debt/OSAP, instead of 6 months
$300 for technology goods and/or text books grant
$500 grant at the start of the academic year instead of waiting for $500 back at tax time
$500 for transport if you travel more than 80km from mom and dad

If only I was still an undergrad student….

And there was of course a guy there who wants to be a distracter to the Liberal enthusiasm and success. He must want to be like Dalton, because he follows him everywhere and is always waving and trying to get in media photos. Awe, now that is true adoration. He seems to have nothing better to do than follow Dalton around. He must think he's making some sort of impact. Yet he’s so far away he’s on nobody’s mind who matters. This guy has no impact on any of the events. Who ever is giving him the premier's schedule and funding this guy (I’m guessing Taxpayers Federation, but could be 'others' too), should just send in a cardboard cut-out to sub in for him and save some money. 'Cuz that will really have the same effect.

Recommend this Post