John Tory -- Redux

Well in the postmortem on the election Mr Tory has come to the realization that the religious schools proposal was not a smart idea -- well who knew. To compound this he now realises that he needed to listen to those amoung his team that were telling him to back off on this earlier in the campaign -- again who knew.

Had a chat with a Tory insider and they revealed that Tory has a hard time letting go of that back room role -- where you can push an issue, only to have it over ruled by a more street savvy politician. I guess he misses the advice, guidance, decision making for lack of a better description, of the Bill Davis's of the world. I think John has learned its a little tougher out there then he expected, and lets face it I don't think he expected the McGuinty liberals to play to the racist anti-muslim undercurrent in Ontario. But all is fair in love and war and the Liberals capitalised on the anti-Muslim vote -- and got themselves a majority with the support of 21% of the eligible voters. Ain't democracy grand.

A vote for Liberals is a Vote for bigotry

Thought I would put out a provocative headline and then like most of the news media report on some non event. The title has some truth to it around the baser prejudices the liberals are playing to on the religious school funding issues. The liberals are going to win, and frankly they should, they have run an uncontroversial campaign with few missteps. They have allowed Tory to self destruct, and they did not have to wait to long. Howard -- well he has unfortunately been irrelevant -- too bad -- lost me on the tax the rich crap.

While I am rambling how about the following headlines:

1. A vote for McGuinty is a vote for the pope!
2. Its time we elected a papist -- Vote Liberal
3. Hate homosexuals, abortion, want your kids not to use birth control -- vote Liberal

PC's -- Slip Sliding Away

In what appears to be a last desperate attempt to appeal to a larger block of undecided voters Tory has backed away from his moral high ground on the Religious schools issue. Tory as I indicated yesterday is now saying that he will put this policy initiative up to a free vote -- the initiative will be modeled by former premier Bill Davis (the guy who gave public money to to the Catholic Schools. The moral high ground was that of fairness and quelling the terms of the UN criticism of Ontario. Guess the high ground gets pretty lonely sometimes.

McGuinty characterised this strategy as as divisive and that it would take up three years of the legislatures time unnecessarily. Not sure I agree with that, I think any debate where we look at current funding, and the integration of new and existing Canadians into the public school system is of value. The current system is divisive by its very nature, we need to do more to remove barriers to a quality education for all of Ontario's children.

Tory embraces democracy (sort of)

Tory announced that if elected that he would allow a free vote on religious school funding in the legislature -- this is apparently to quell the divisions with in his own party and to appeal to the broader voter base. I would hope they would include the vote on whether to stop funding the Catholic Schools in Ontario in that free vote -- I somehow doubt that.

McGuinty replied to this announcement somewhat cynically, and Hampton wants the issue off the table so we can talk about real stuff.

The continuation of funding of the Catholic Schools at the expense of the other religions is pure unbridled bigotry and racism -- don't want those Madrassas set up in Ontario churning out terrorists. Now if they were to take a look at the policies of the Catholic church they may want to revise their stance on funding it -- institutionalised homophobia, unfettered sexism, protection of peadophiles, centuries of crimes against humanity including the recent native schools debacle .. need I continue.

The only real answer is to stop funding all religious schools in Ontario, politically this may not be palatable but at least I am honest.

The Ontario PC's

This Globe and Mail Cartoon really struck home for me. Apparently Tory is now starting to rethink his position on Religious schools -- don't think it will help.

Toronto Star -- fundamental and unethical bias

I could not be a reporter or work for the Star -- something about ethics and self respect. I always find it amazing the Star was quick to condemn Black and his newspapers for bias in reporting -- when they really have mastered the the wholer concept. What has me mad today -- the vote liberal bias is so strong it shows itself in every article, the editorials, the just general tone. McGuinty Is struggling -- he should be winning hands down based on the performance of both Tory and Hampton.
However the Star seems to now have decided that McGuinty needs to be elected at all costs -- including if it means they use propaganda and editorial bias in articles.

Earlier in the campaign after the debate the Star sold the front page of the Metro (one of their papers) to the liberals in a very misleading piece of advertising which looked like a real front page -- in which they proclaimed McGuinty the winner -- sleaze journalism. Can't blame the Liberals -- sleaze electioneering is the name of the game.

Dalton should be cleaning the floor with his opponents

John Tory is still struggling with his extension of funding to faith based schools, beer and wine in the corner store and a parallel private health care (paid for at public rates) service. He is getting slagged by his own party members -- questioned unmercifully at PC events as to why he is following this lose-lose strategy. He still has been unable to reach the undecided voters -- his manner is polished -- but lets face it it just ain't working -- whether he want to stick to his principles or not -- the game here is to form a government -- not to be in opposition.



Howard Hampton -- is rolling out nothing new -- had hopes when he started talking about extending dental coverage to children and the $10 minimum wage, I thought we might actually have some new proposals to talk about -- however we have gone back to the old canards of protecting the auto sector, protecting this and that, rolling back this and rolling back that -- the past is a wonderful place to remember -- you tend to forget the imperfections -- however the past is not a place I want to move Ontario forward to.

Dalton what is happening -- you just are not getting the message out. They are handing you this election on a silver platter and the best you can do is talk about a minority government (Harper is at it as well). Smitherman is running around -- well being Smitherman. Where is the campaign? Guess you just need to want it more.

The Debate -- the killer blow

I heard a guy name Guido had some killer blow in the washroom at the debate -- really excellent stuff.

The debate in my opinion plodded on McGuinty being accused of broken promises, McGuinty attacking the former Harris Government and the former NDP government (liked Tory quip on Sir John A), Tory looking very well polished -- not really saying anything (except the broken promise thing), Hampton -- well nice try but really did not seem to even be part of the debate at times.

Now when I call it a debate I am doing so very loosely -- in most cases they did not really answer the questions or debate their answers -- we just went back to broken promises , accusations of negativity, and how terrible previous governments were.

The moderator Steve Paiken did an absolutely terrible job of keeping this anywhere on track -- this needs to be debate -- not a series of quotes for the media.

I am shocked the Toronto Star proclaimed McGuinty the winner based on the fact the other two did not land a killer blow. That unbiased bastion of honest reporting obviously was not in hte washroom with Guido.

In my opinion nobody won -- nor could they have it was not a debate! Guido however .......

Tory -- trying very hard to lose the election

Just after the massive success of his religious school funding program was not endorsed by over 70% of Ontarions in a recent survey, Tory has decided to change his strategy -- he has decided to raise the issue of parallel provision of private healthcare in Ontario as part of his non-election strategy. I think he has another winner.

I think everyone is well aware that these private services are being well provided to all Canadians by our neighbours to the south. Why mess with success? Contrary to public perception it is just not the well heeled, Belinda Stronach comes to mind, that are availing themselves to private healthcare but also the average joe is driving to Buffalo for their knee or hip replacement surgery.

The prices from I understand are reasonable -- fitting on credit cards. The question is why are people doing this considering the enviable state of Canadian Healthcare -- why are people spending their money south of the border -- do they just like the American's so much? More than likely it is the 2 to 3 year process most Canadian must endure to get through the Ontario system -- referrals to specialist who are not taking appointments.

A former colleague of mine went to Buffalo for knee replacement surgery -- he was a practically disabled but could not get a firm date for a replacement in Ontario -- he voted with his chequebook.

But seriously folks in Canada and especially in Ontario you dare not talk about private delivery of healthcare services -- it is political suicide (lets keep those elephants in the closet where they belong). That way we can continue to extol the virtue of our truly public system, apart from those pieces that are already delivered by private firms, and tell the Americans they are philistines for operating a private healthcare system, while still availing ourselves to it. How Canadian!

In truth I think we can learn alot from places like France, Germany and the Netherlands in public/private delivery of Healthcare -- but we first have to get over the hating the American thing.

The hob nailed boot on the back .....

Howard decided that it was time to bring out the old tax the rich and the corporations plank to reduce the tax on middle and lower income brackets. At least this time he calls rich over $150,000 -- last time I think it was $80,000 lost him Oshawa and most of the auto workers.

The ads running on youtube are great -- at least we are seeing some creativity in the non-negative campaigning -- and of course everyone cleared the rights for these.






And I really agree with Dalton -- there is no negative campaigning going on -- yes really -- where was that bottle of scotch, going to have a non drink to go with it.

Its a long way to tipperary, its a long way to go to the sweetest girl I know

So we had the launch -- the emergence of the super hero the McGuinty "Education Premier"; the stumbling John Tory -- always seems to be on his back foot trying to explain what he really means: Howard Hampton the .... well not sure on that one -- really light on details and well he is driving around in a hybrid -- lets call him the hybrid contender; and then there is the Green Party's Frank de Jong -- the abolish the Catholic School Board guy and we are greener than anybody else guy.

Is there a point to this rambling well not really but there has not been much of a point to this election so far -- the Liberals and Tories trying to come up with a wedge issue (Liberals -- preservation of public education, their definition includes Catholic as part of this; the Tories broken promises and leadership of Dalton) the other parties well hate to say it are along for the ride.

The Liberals are starting with the strategic voting approach early to get NDP voters and will probably be backed up by a TV campaign from the Working Families Coalition (AKA Ontario Liberals).

The Tories, well Tory in my opinion is hopeless -- someone needs to work with this man -- drive the message -- don't react to Dalton's.

Howard -- nice man met him a number of times, would I vote for him -- right after hell froze over.

De Jong -- good Dutch name -- got to like that, and yes he should be part of the leadership debate and I have gone green have those really neat new lightbulbs and led lights on my sailboat, however the gas guzzeling SUV I drive probably would entitle me to a good flogging.

Liberal and PC fiscal platforms

I have spent some time looking at both the PC and Liberal fiscal platform -- guess what they pretty similar apart from the pledge to eliminate the health tax over a three year period. The revenue projections are similar the planned expenditures are similar -- the concentration of monies to envelopes are similar --except for the health tax thing -- the pledge to fund religious schools and the Tories pledge to find efficiencies.

I personally think the Tories if elected (which I doubt) will stall the elimination of the Health tax draw it out over a few more years to protect their revenue base. It really is not as hot an issue as the politicians think -- it is a construct of the political camps and the media in their need to create issues around the election. To further my point if it had been such a strong voter driven issue -- you really think the Liberals would be saying they cannot afford to get rid of it -- and it needs to stay -- on the eve of an election.

The Toronto Star Editorial board has obviously renewed its Liberal Party Membership based on their September 10 editorial. Their tacit support of the Liberal Fiscal plan is without basis -- not saying the PC one is any better -- the Toronto Star should leave the electioneering to the politicians -- but then it wouldn't be the Toronto Star. Their analysis is a typical slippery slope argument where by challenging one part of the plan the whole world goes to hell in a handbasket.

It does remind me of the time I was in the lock up and had a rather candid conversation with the Toronto Star staff that was there at the time -- (s)he said (s)he had very little freedom in what they wrote, rather (s)he was given the message and then told to fill in the facts to meet the message. I did ask her/him what happens if the facts don't match the message -- well then you don't report the facts. But I digress.

On the issue of efficiencies -- it can easily be done -- without the world coming to an end. Been there done that -- seen where the bodies or in this case money is buried. Cricket anyone?

Ontario's NDP

Reading the Tor Star they had an article by Urqhart on the NDP and it did strike a cord with me -- the basic hypothesis was that the NDP although not poised to form a government will influence the direction of the government. I as a former provincial bureaucrat well understand that message -- having worked under all three of the parties -- I can honestly say that they are pretty much of a muchness when they get into power -- self interest does tend to reign.

That all being said the NDP does tend to have some real gems in their policy platform -- they actually consult with real people -- as compared to the Tories and the Liberals who tend to talk to the same 5 or 6 people and their pollsters and roll it out to their party faithful as the publics latest greatest needs and wants.

As a bureaucrat we routinely borrowed recycled from the NDP platform, added the correct wording made some vague reference to consistency with the Government platform and helped them to make it their own.

The NDP in power is a scary thing -- not because of their platform -- but because they are just not able to make decisions -- everything is done by consensus and takes far too much time -- I actually had to consult with a sowing circle (yes like knitting) out of some small town in Ontario when looking at ag stabilization programs. Very nice people but they had absolutely no idea what they were there for.

The NDP the official supplier of some good policy -- and damn good at it too. Now take this with a grain of salt as some of their ideas were just plain wacky -- take this lets just freeze everything in Ontario back in 2003. Howard needs some better advice.

New holiday -- February

A new stat holiday -- brilliant -- disagree with February -- too damn cold -- but from an election strategy who could disagree -- time off with the Family -- can I have some apple pie too?

Prudent -- what in the name of all that is%^&$# is that for a strategy

John Tory presented a prudent election campaign -- what is prudent -- is that showing leadership with health care, education, falling competitiveness, an auto sector that is going the way of the buggy whip manufacturers league. Just not sexy, and not the leadership that Ontario needs --maybe that is what he is peddling -- dependable leadership -- Tory(ies) need to repackage it to more than just that -- it should be aspirational leadership -- over the top and visionary. It should be driving the province to a better and more successful future -- it should be big and with cahonas!

McGuinty is rolling out the goodies -- not a day has passed in the last two months that we have not had an announcement for more money for this that or the other thing -- very little policy -- nothing new, just money. To the Liberals credit the voters are buying it -- they recognise the strategy is divisive -- pitting group against group in their struggle to get as much $$ as possible -- but it works. Boy does it work.

I have it on good authority the Tories are going to go negative -- looking for the Achilles heel -- nasty personal attacks on individual senior Ministers -- I also hear the Liberal are not worried -- they know they can sacrifice a few for the greater good -- all the while doling out the goodies and keeping their core team intact.

Boy is this going to be fun.

Working Families Coalition

The Tories have decided to challenge the legitimacy of the Working Families Coalition -- which they say is a front for the Ontario Liberal Party to get around the Elections act. (Globe and Mail story)

The coalition is fronted by a number of unions and liberal party staffers -- and amazingly he says tongue in cheek some of these very organizations got payouts in the latest round of Liberal pork barreling.

My take on this is if looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck -- it probably is a duck.

Guess the provincial Liberals learned a lot at the feet of their master Chretien.

This however will not be resolved during the course of this election -- the liberals are safe for now.

Funding for Religious Schools

I strongly believe in a secular school system, religion in my opinion has no place in publicly funded schools. That being said I am not a fool either, I recognize as we do fund the catholic schools, and that no party in their right mind is going to remove the funding for the catholic separate school boards that we in all eventuality will end up funding other religious schools.

Interestingly enough I saw a statistic a couple of days ago that 75% of Ontario residents believe in a secular education system. However we also know that 52% of Ontarians list their religion as Catholic -- from a political standpoint you can see why there is going to be no change.

The liberal governments stand on this issue is completely irrational -- and plays the majority against the minorities -- it is alright and non divisive for catholics to be educated in a separate system but not the Jews, Muslims, Hindi, etc would cause a general failure of society as a whole. Personally I think these are cheap political tactics aimed at an underlying mainstream of polite racism.

As i said if I ran the world, or Ontario at least, we would have a secular education system. However I don't and we will end up with a true Ontario compromise -- we will fund everyone -- to some extent at least. However this will not come as a result of this election.

As a friend of mine just reminded me -- when the Liberals came in they canceled the previous conservative governments tax credit for private schools and there was nary a whisper of dissent. The conservatives are very silly to make this a stump issue in this election -- lack of political acuity or just plain desperate.

Background:

Separate school

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

A separate school is a publicly funded school which includes religious education in its curriculum, as opposed to a private school or public school.

In Canada these are usually Roman Catholic schools which are run parallel to the public school system which historically had been either Protestant or Roman Catholic, but which in recent years has become secular. The separate schools in Ontario, however, are fully denominational and not secular. In some communities, there is a Separate Protestant school district (board) alongside the public system (and possibly Separate Catholic), but this is generally the exception.

Protection of the Separate School system was a major issue of contention in the negotiations that led to Canadian confederation, due in large part to racial and religious tension between the (largely Francophone) Roman Catholic population in Canada and the Protestant majority. The issue was a subject of debate at the 1864 Quebec Conference and was finally resolved at the London Conference of 1866 with a guarantee to protect the separate school system in Quebec and Ontario.

In the Quebec education system there were separate Protestant and Catholic school systems until 1998 when the system was replaced with linguistically based secular school systems. Similarly, Newfoundland and Labrador had schools organised on a confessional basis with separate denominational schools for Catholics, Seventh-day Adventists, Salvationists, Pentecostals, and an integrated stream. This was abolished by referendum in 1997 and a single secular system was introduced to replace the previous streams.

The question of separate schools has been most controversial in Ontario and Manitoba. The ending of public support for separate schools in the latter province in the 1890s prompted a national crisis known as the Manitoba Schools Question, and led to Pope Leo XIII's papal encyclical Affari Vos.

In Ontario, funding for the Catholic separate school system was initially only guaranteed until grade nine under the British North America (BNA) Act. This funding was gradually extended until 1984 when the government of William Davis extended funding to include the last three (Grades 11-OAC) years of secondary school after having rejected that proposal fifteen years earlier. The historically Protestant system was eventually transformed into the present day public board, and school prayer was banned in the early 1980s.

A province-wide newspaper survey conducted between 1997 and 1999 in 45 dailies indicated that 79% of 7551 respondents in Ontario favoured a single public school system. But rumours that the Catholic Church had instructed its parishioners not to respond to the survey suggest that it may have produced inaccurate results. Regardless of whether the results were accurate or not, no widely supported movement to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 has developed.

In Ontario the only separate schools are Catholic (except for one elementary school in Penetanguishene, Ontario, the Burkevale Protestant Separate School, under the Penetanguishene Protestant Separate School Board, which has no other schools); other faith groups do not receive similar funding. This restriction has often been criticized as contrary to the spirit of official multiculturalism. The provincial policy has been ruled as discriminatory by the Supreme Court of Canada, and on November 5, 1999 the United Nations Human Rights Committee condemned Canada and Ontario for having violating the equality provisions (Article 26) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Committee restated its concerns on November 2, 2005, when it published its Concluding Observations regarding Canada's fifth periodic report under the Covenant. The Committee observed that Canada had failed to "adopt steps in order to eliminate discrimination on the basis of religion in the funding of schools in Ontario."

In Alberta in some areas that were originally populated by Franco-Albertan French Catholics before the province came into existence, the Catholic church controls the public schools and the separate schools are protestant. This applies to St. Albert and St. Paul.