So after weeks and weeks of anticipation, after Dalton built up his new and exciting plan for health care in a great big honking speech, after we were told that things were really going to be different this time, promise, pinky swear, with sugar on top.....Deb Matthews got in front of a room and basically said that they were going to give the LHINs more authority. Surgery clinics will be doing more procedures but she won't say which procedures. Money will go to home care services instead of nursing homes.
These are, of course, the same LHINs that have been accused of being less than frugal by provincial auditors and other such people.
Now, I'm not going to write another post about how McGuinty has no clue what he's doing and that he's completely stranded himself. That much is obvious. The fact that he's killing his credibility with this shilly-shallying is also obvious.
No, instead I'm going to point out how McGuinty's predicament proves that if we let people to their own devices, they will never, ever, turn against the government like Principled Conservatives expect them to.
Deb Matthews isn't going to take one red cent out of health care because she knows that people will never accept the taking of one red cent out of the health care budget. Matthews is a Liberal. She's supposed to keep on blandly reassuring people that things are OK when they really aren't, because that's what keeps you elected. Sure the system is eventually going to collapse on itself, but that'll happen a long time from now. And thinking about what's going to happen a long time from now is hard. And McGuinty isn't going to pull a Paul Martin and start chopping away at the deficit even if he'd like to, because Paul Martin ended up going from Mr. Deficit Slayer to Mr. Dithers once he got control of the Liberals, and then he lost to Harper. And McGuinty won't make the same mistake.
The idea amongst Principled Conservatives is that if they were in charge, they'd privatize and slash and burn until the deficit was dead. Wouldn't that be beautiful. But it never happens. Those silly moderates keep getting to run the show, and they never can be counted on to do what needs to be done. When Conservatives get into government, they cut a tax or two, but when it comes to cutting spending, well....Mike Harris got called a murderer this week by kids at Ryerson who were probably 10 years old when Harris was Premier. The rest of them are quite happy to continue spending, and...well, then they end up on the Liberal War Room Boss's "Tory Times Are Tough Times" chart. Never mind that they wanted to cut spending, but didn't want to be called murderers for doing it.
So the last guy who got serious about cutting Ontario's deficit is a murderer in the minds of university students who never felt the pinch from those cuts, nobody likes the last Liberal Prime Minister who got serious about the deficit, and we've got everyone from Rob Ford to the leaders of the nations of Europe trying to keep from being ripped apart by restive citizens who don't want to let go of what they've gotten used to.
And that's the key. That's the real problem. Blaming the government is only part of the problem, because all governments are doing is trying to shield themselves from angry people who will turf any government that tries to make the kind of changes that are necessary to get through this crisis. They elected Rob Ford, then they devoted themselves to ensuring that not one dollar of city services would be cut.
I don't care how much Canada has supposedly shifted to the right over the last couple of decades. Until a politician can announce without hesitation that health care spending, or education spending, or city services spending needs to be cut significantly, it's all just a drop in the bucket. When Mike Harris is not called a murderer for doing what was necessary to dig Ontario out of the hole it was in after Bob Rae got done with it, then I might listen to what people have to say about "rationality" and "free choice."
Until then, any government, Liberal, Conservative or otherwise, that wants to get serious about cutting the deficit needs to force the cuts (or the tax increases, as the case may be) down the throats of the people that elected it. There's no other way, because people have shown that they are incapable of accepting that the party is over on their own. People want womb-to-tomb government care. They took to the streets a few months ago and Occupied various spaces around the country because they thought the government wasn't doing enough to help the 99%. They feel aggrieved. They feel hard done by. And God help you if you try to tell them differently, because they ain't listening.
The people of Ontario would rather blame Mike Harris for their troubles than accept that Dalton has anything to do with the current state of affairs. They will give all sorts of reasons for not voting PC, but they all stem from the fact that once upon a time, Mike Harris cut spending and that was unacceptable.
But Mike Harris had something going for him, and that was that he didn't care one whit for what people said about him. He doesn't even care to this day that people hate him. (Look, he says so himself.) And the instant that the PC Party started caring about what their haters had to say, the bottom fell out from under them and it hasn't been restored since.
I believe that the day that the PC Party of Ontario has the courage to get up in front of Ontarians and say, "We're going to kill the deficit, and we're going to cut a whole lot of services to do it, and we're going to impose Conservative principles on you, and we don't particularly care if you don't like it" is the day that they will start looking like the party that governed the province of Ontario for the better part of its existence.
Because if nothing else, doing that will get people to understand that they had better know what's best for them and that they had better be rational and make their own choices, because the government sure isn't going to be doing those things for them anymore.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
Put Up Or Shut Up
This looks exactly like a government that has hoisted itself on its own petard.
Backing off any plan to curb caesarean sections to save money, Health Minister Deb Matthews says new birthing centres outside hospitals may be a better way to accomplish the same goal.
I want to make this very clear: we are not delisting caesarean sections,” Matthews told reporters Thursday at the opening of a new family health team in Toronto’s Liberty Village.
Her comments came one day after she suggested reducing the number of C-section births would ease costs for the Ontario Health Insurance Plan costs as the province struggles to erase $16 billion deficit.
Don Drummond said he wanted C-sections delisted. Don Drummond's an Expert. Experts are supposed to promote "evidence based policy." Liberals like to wag their fingers at us about "evidence based policy." But when push comes to shove, and union queen bees get angry, Liberals change their tune:
Don Drummond, the former TD Bank chief economist who is advising Premier Dalton McGuinty on plans to slash spending, has warned that C-section births are “off the charts” and cost too much money because women spend more time in hospital.
The remark earned a rebuke from Sharleen Stewart, head of the Service Employees International Union representing more than 50,000 health-care workers.
“Women do not need a Bay Street banker telling them how or when to give birth. Don Drummond seems to have developed a god complex that has gotten out of control. He should get his hands off women’s bodies and out of our health care,” Stewart said in a statement.
If Liberals aren't prepared to do what we supposedly won't do, they should shut their mouths.
Backing off any plan to curb caesarean sections to save money, Health Minister Deb Matthews says new birthing centres outside hospitals may be a better way to accomplish the same goal.
I want to make this very clear: we are not delisting caesarean sections,” Matthews told reporters Thursday at the opening of a new family health team in Toronto’s Liberty Village.
Her comments came one day after she suggested reducing the number of C-section births would ease costs for the Ontario Health Insurance Plan costs as the province struggles to erase $16 billion deficit.
Don Drummond said he wanted C-sections delisted. Don Drummond's an Expert. Experts are supposed to promote "evidence based policy." Liberals like to wag their fingers at us about "evidence based policy." But when push comes to shove, and union queen bees get angry, Liberals change their tune:
Don Drummond, the former TD Bank chief economist who is advising Premier Dalton McGuinty on plans to slash spending, has warned that C-section births are “off the charts” and cost too much money because women spend more time in hospital.
The remark earned a rebuke from Sharleen Stewart, head of the Service Employees International Union representing more than 50,000 health-care workers.
“Women do not need a Bay Street banker telling them how or when to give birth. Don Drummond seems to have developed a god complex that has gotten out of control. He should get his hands off women’s bodies and out of our health care,” Stewart said in a statement.
If Liberals aren't prepared to do what we supposedly won't do, they should shut their mouths.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
There, I Said It
If it's between Option A, spending $5 million on a museum that's not even in Ontario and Option B, saying it's a waste of money and, as a result, being "against human rights", then I'm going with Option B.
Made a few Liberals' days there, I'll bet.
The cash-strapped Ontario government says it stands by a decision to send $5 million to a Winnipeg museum whose costs are spiralling skywards.
The province will send $500,000 annually for 10 years.
The Winnipeg Sun has reported that the Canadian Museum for Human Rights is wildly overbudget with the project’s tab — initially set at $270 million — now pegged at $351 million.
That newest tally does not include an estimated $5 million to complete the museum’s theatre.
Made a few Liberals' days there, I'll bet.
The cash-strapped Ontario government says it stands by a decision to send $5 million to a Winnipeg museum whose costs are spiralling skywards.
The province will send $500,000 annually for 10 years.
The Winnipeg Sun has reported that the Canadian Museum for Human Rights is wildly overbudget with the project’s tab — initially set at $270 million — now pegged at $351 million.
That newest tally does not include an estimated $5 million to complete the museum’s theatre.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Kevin Gaudet: Let's Get It Right Next Time
Like I said before, real Principled Conservatives act.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Time For Another Thoughtful Post
Do we want to fix Ontario, or do we just want to get back into government?
I pay a lot of attention to the federal Liberals and their trials and tribulations. Because, in case you haven't noticed, the PC Party of Ontario and the federal Liberals have a lot of the same problems.
-Preoccupation with past victories
-Base that is split into different camps
-Lot of complaining about the government while not offering as many solutions
-Fruitless complaining about leadership
-Resistance to change and input from the party rank-and-file
-Party rank-and-file assuming that the people in charge know better than they do and not speaking out against things that they feel are wrong
How do the Liberals approach these problems?
Past victories: The Liberals still don't get that they aren't the preferred choice of most Canadians. More people voted for other parties than they did for the Liberals. The "60% of Canadians didn't vote for Harper" argument that they like to toss around ignores the fact that the Liberal share of the vote has been declining for a long time now.
Split base: When people are writing books about your intra-party warfare, it's not a good sign.
Complaining about government: They've been doing this for years. Everything the Conservatives do is the worst thing ever, but the Liberals don't ever tell us how they'd fix things or do things differently. They want legislation banning attack ads by third parties (as noted by the War Room Boss here) but they ignore the fact that Dalton does the same thing. They complain about conditions in Attawapiskat, but ignore that they didn't fix the problem when they were in government. They try to scare people into thinking Harper wants to destroy gay marriage, but ignore the fact that they didn't close the loophole that led to that whole kerfuffle.
Leadership: Bob Rae was supposed to be interim leader, and now it looks like he's permanent leader, and the Liberals say they're OK with this. Despite the fact that David McGuinty announced that he wanted to complete the Daltonian takeover of everything at their biennial.
Party rank-and-file not speaking out: See above.
Resistance to change: The Liberals decided they wanted to replace the current voting system with some form of ranked ballot. I can't find a single person outside ther LPC who thinks that there's a serious problem with the way we elect politicians in this country. The federal Liberals think it's a problem because they suddenly can't get elected anymore under the old system. When the old system gave them Trudeau, Laurier, Chretien, Pearson, King, etc., it was fine. Now that it gave them Harper, it's gotta go. I bring up this example because it shows how the Liberals are so stuck on defeating Harper that issues like this take precedence over issues that actually affect Canadians.
How do we approach these problems?
Preoccupation with past victories: Sadly, there are still people who think bringing Harris or Tory back would fix everything, and many people still think the same things that worked in the Bill Davis days will work now. However, we didn't get relegated to third place like the federal Liberals did, so we must be doing something right.
Base split into different camps: You could say that we have that problem. I don't think people in the PCPO want to fight the battles of the past the way the Chretienites and Martinites have done for decades, though.
Complaining about leadership: Yep. "Time for a really conservative leader!" "Like who?" "Um...." Fortunately, we don't have every other elected official in our party trying to do an end-run around the leader, and we are less preoccupied with who leads us than the federal Liberals.
Not offering solutions: Pretty much the #1 complaint people had about changebook. Recent moves by Hudak are suggesting he's gotten the message, though.
Rank-and-file not doing enough: On this one, I think we're worse than the federal Liberals. We complain a lot, and do so publicly, but nothing changes. Remember: when changebook was announced, a room full of people gave it several standing ovations.
Resistance to change and input: If the central party doesn't change, it's because the rank and file doesn't give them any reason to change. The Liberals' marijuana resolution is useless, but at least they're trying to put resolutions forward. Are we going to have any resolutions at our AGM?
Now, the Liberals have basically decided that they don't need to address their past mistakes, and that coming out of their biennial, all is well and the natural order of things (permanent Liberal majority governments) will soon be restored. We'd better not do that. Our AGM had better be a loud, raucous, breast-beating, mad-as-hell-and-not-going-to-take-it-anymore affair where we address the following questions:
a) What are the problems facing Ontario that are not being addressed by McGuinty?
b) How are we going to address these problems?
c) Do our solutions make sense? Do voters agree with them?
d) What are we doing that is preventing these problems from being solved?
e) What are each of us going to do to solve these problems?
Notice that I advocate a relative absence of complaining about the leader and the central campaign. That's been done. Our job now is to ensure that the leader and the central campaign gets the message from us that if something's going wrong, we will TELL THEM, loudly, right away.
The difference between us and the federal Liberals must be that we are willing to take a hard look at what we're doing wrong and fix it, while they aren't. Or else we will share their fate.
I pay a lot of attention to the federal Liberals and their trials and tribulations. Because, in case you haven't noticed, the PC Party of Ontario and the federal Liberals have a lot of the same problems.
-Preoccupation with past victories
-Base that is split into different camps
-Lot of complaining about the government while not offering as many solutions
-Fruitless complaining about leadership
-Resistance to change and input from the party rank-and-file
-Party rank-and-file assuming that the people in charge know better than they do and not speaking out against things that they feel are wrong
How do the Liberals approach these problems?
Past victories: The Liberals still don't get that they aren't the preferred choice of most Canadians. More people voted for other parties than they did for the Liberals. The "60% of Canadians didn't vote for Harper" argument that they like to toss around ignores the fact that the Liberal share of the vote has been declining for a long time now.
Split base: When people are writing books about your intra-party warfare, it's not a good sign.
Complaining about government: They've been doing this for years. Everything the Conservatives do is the worst thing ever, but the Liberals don't ever tell us how they'd fix things or do things differently. They want legislation banning attack ads by third parties (as noted by the War Room Boss here) but they ignore the fact that Dalton does the same thing. They complain about conditions in Attawapiskat, but ignore that they didn't fix the problem when they were in government. They try to scare people into thinking Harper wants to destroy gay marriage, but ignore the fact that they didn't close the loophole that led to that whole kerfuffle.
Leadership: Bob Rae was supposed to be interim leader, and now it looks like he's permanent leader, and the Liberals say they're OK with this. Despite the fact that David McGuinty announced that he wanted to complete the Daltonian takeover of everything at their biennial.
Party rank-and-file not speaking out: See above.
Resistance to change: The Liberals decided they wanted to replace the current voting system with some form of ranked ballot. I can't find a single person outside ther LPC who thinks that there's a serious problem with the way we elect politicians in this country. The federal Liberals think it's a problem because they suddenly can't get elected anymore under the old system. When the old system gave them Trudeau, Laurier, Chretien, Pearson, King, etc., it was fine. Now that it gave them Harper, it's gotta go. I bring up this example because it shows how the Liberals are so stuck on defeating Harper that issues like this take precedence over issues that actually affect Canadians.
How do we approach these problems?
Preoccupation with past victories: Sadly, there are still people who think bringing Harris or Tory back would fix everything, and many people still think the same things that worked in the Bill Davis days will work now. However, we didn't get relegated to third place like the federal Liberals did, so we must be doing something right.
Base split into different camps: You could say that we have that problem. I don't think people in the PCPO want to fight the battles of the past the way the Chretienites and Martinites have done for decades, though.
Complaining about leadership: Yep. "Time for a really conservative leader!" "Like who?" "Um...." Fortunately, we don't have every other elected official in our party trying to do an end-run around the leader, and we are less preoccupied with who leads us than the federal Liberals.
Not offering solutions: Pretty much the #1 complaint people had about changebook. Recent moves by Hudak are suggesting he's gotten the message, though.
Rank-and-file not doing enough: On this one, I think we're worse than the federal Liberals. We complain a lot, and do so publicly, but nothing changes. Remember: when changebook was announced, a room full of people gave it several standing ovations.
Resistance to change and input: If the central party doesn't change, it's because the rank and file doesn't give them any reason to change. The Liberals' marijuana resolution is useless, but at least they're trying to put resolutions forward. Are we going to have any resolutions at our AGM?
Now, the Liberals have basically decided that they don't need to address their past mistakes, and that coming out of their biennial, all is well and the natural order of things (permanent Liberal majority governments) will soon be restored. We'd better not do that. Our AGM had better be a loud, raucous, breast-beating, mad-as-hell-and-not-going-to-take-it-anymore affair where we address the following questions:
a) What are the problems facing Ontario that are not being addressed by McGuinty?
b) How are we going to address these problems?
c) Do our solutions make sense? Do voters agree with them?
d) What are we doing that is preventing these problems from being solved?
e) What are each of us going to do to solve these problems?
Notice that I advocate a relative absence of complaining about the leader and the central campaign. That's been done. Our job now is to ensure that the leader and the central campaign gets the message from us that if something's going wrong, we will TELL THEM, loudly, right away.
The difference between us and the federal Liberals must be that we are willing to take a hard look at what we're doing wrong and fix it, while they aren't. Or else we will share their fate.
Hudak On Caledonia
Well, it's not the *particular* miscarriage of justice we all think about when the word "Caledonia" comes to mind....but it's something.
Also, the LCBO likes to waste money and energy producers are leaving for the U.S., citing over-regulation in Dalton's Ontario.
Isn't it amazing what we can accomplish when we point out actual examples of Dalton's incompetence?
Also, the LCBO likes to waste money and energy producers are leaving for the U.S., citing over-regulation in Dalton's Ontario.
Isn't it amazing what we can accomplish when we point out actual examples of Dalton's incompetence?
Saturday, January 21, 2012
ORNGE You Glad?
Well, I'll be jiggered. A few bad headlines for Dalton and Co. and things start looking up for the PC's. Now the same media won't talk about Tim Hudak's plan to slash out of control public sector spending and horrific examples thereof because the media is notoriously unreliable, so that's where I and this blog come in. Do ye the same.
Stratford firefighters: In December 2011, an arbitrator awarded city firefighters and dispatchers retroactive pay hikes of three per cent in each of 2007, 2008 and 2009, and pay increases of 3.6 per cent for 2010 and 3.8 for 2011 and 2012. Total estimated cost: $1.5 million – which has delayed approval of the City’s 2012 budget and raised the threat of a tax increase to finance it all.
University professors and librarians: In October 2010, arbitrator Martin Teplitsky rejected the Liberals’ plea for wage freeze, saying he refused to be “a minion of the government.” He awarded U of T employees a 4.5 per cent salary increase over two years, explicitly saying he did not take the university’s negative financial situation into account.
Hydro workers: In March 2010, arbitrator Kevin Burkett awarded 3,400 unionized OPG employees increases of six per cent over two years. Burkett said that without legislation backing it, there was “no binding force or effect” to the government’s plea for a wage freeze.
And, um, this ORNGE story is going to get a whole lot worse. And then, there's still this.
I wouldn't start celebrating yet because the media, as I said before, is notoriously unreliable. And we don't want to be the federal Liberals, who broke out the champagne this week because they are still in third place, but not by as much.
People are mad at Dalton. That doesn't mean they love us.
Stratford firefighters: In December 2011, an arbitrator awarded city firefighters and dispatchers retroactive pay hikes of three per cent in each of 2007, 2008 and 2009, and pay increases of 3.6 per cent for 2010 and 3.8 for 2011 and 2012. Total estimated cost: $1.5 million – which has delayed approval of the City’s 2012 budget and raised the threat of a tax increase to finance it all.
University professors and librarians: In October 2010, arbitrator Martin Teplitsky rejected the Liberals’ plea for wage freeze, saying he refused to be “a minion of the government.” He awarded U of T employees a 4.5 per cent salary increase over two years, explicitly saying he did not take the university’s negative financial situation into account.
Hydro workers: In March 2010, arbitrator Kevin Burkett awarded 3,400 unionized OPG employees increases of six per cent over two years. Burkett said that without legislation backing it, there was “no binding force or effect” to the government’s plea for a wage freeze.
And, um, this ORNGE story is going to get a whole lot worse. And then, there's still this.
I wouldn't start celebrating yet because the media, as I said before, is notoriously unreliable. And we don't want to be the federal Liberals, who broke out the champagne this week because they are still in third place, but not by as much.
People are mad at Dalton. That doesn't mean they love us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)