Home • Policy • Purple Book • Ontario Public Sector Salaries • The New Ontario Vision REFORM ONTARIO...IN THE NEWS: Reform
Party seeks to 'Harness' the vote “We want to make a real impact in 15 to 20 ridings,” said 48-year-old Harness, a Strathroy resident and former naval officer who publishes a weekly newspaper in Middlesex County. Rising from the ashes of the federal Reform Party — and with a few distinct nods to former Progressive Conservative Premier Mike Harris’s Common Sense Revolution — Reform Ontario, as it’s also known, wants to see the province return to “its leading role in the Canadian Confederation”, while creating “the best place to live and work, and do business, in North America.” Born in 2007, the party ran two candidates in that year’s election. Job creation and tackling Ontario’s debt are among the party’s key issues today. With a complete program spending review, “there’s probably about 25 per cent of the budget you could do away with,” Harness said. A hybrid health care system would see some services, such as diagnostics, privatized. Responsible patients who pay out of pocket for preventive care would receive a partial rebate. On the energy front, clean coal technology would be retained, while wind, solar and hydro generation — especially in northern Ontario — would expand. In education, the party would disband existing school boards, turning the reins over to municipalities. Reform advocates free votes at Queen’s Park. There wouldn’t be party whips, and MPPs would vote according to the majority will in their riding. But ultimately, Harness wants to do away with all political parties, including his own, and embrace a consensus government system as practiced in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, where all candidates run as independents. “Our view is that we could be the party to end all parties,”
Harness said. - 30 - Leader
pushes Northern reform While there are officially 12 political parties in Ontario, the Reform Party of Ontario is looking to boost its presence. Leader Brad Harness recently visited Timmins during a tour of Northeastern Ontario. "The idea was to get current on the geography of the North, the demographics of the North and the current issues," Harness told The Daily Press. "But we wanted to do a deliberate swing through specific riding where we are interested in getting candidates for." The Reform Party platform is complete, but is still being kept under wraps for the time being. However, Harness said the party has a lot of ideas to make the North more viable. While there have been talk for decades about Northern Ontario becoming its own province, Harness said there are other things that can be done before that move is made. "The key thing we're trying to do is have a concept for the North in a totally different way, or maybe a way that hasn't been done for a century," he said. "It's not to look at the North as a colony to be pilfered by the south, but rather to be looking at it as the future of the province." Some of the party's ideas are to look at what it would take to bring more people to the North as well as come up with a development plan. The idea of an arctic seaport out of James Bay is nothing new, but is something the Reform Party supports. Harness said there are positives coming from global warming that could benefit the area. "Global warming is going to be cutting the maritime shipping distance from North America to Asia by 40% if you ship from Hudson Bay, which is a huge cost saving," said Harness. "There is a real advantage to Canadian exporters to ship up and out of James Bay." Other items part of the party's platform include hybrid health care, that allows some areas to be privatized so people can pay up front if they wish and disbanding both the local health integration networks and district school boards. "It fits nicely with our idea of governing by bringing the cost down if we can bring the level of service close as we can to the user," Harness said. "Whether it's health care or education, both can actually be run by the municipality. "They already collect the education taxes, all we'd be doing is eliminating the middle man." The plan also includes allowing principals to operate schools, with budget and the power to hire teachers, as well as looking at alternative energy sources, to remove communities from the North American power grid. "Right now, we're plugged into the grid and there's no particular reason we are," he said. "Why not have a town, like Cochrane for example, able to generate its own power?" Harness called the party, which was only officially registered in 2007, based on common sense politics. He said it offers up a new option for people unhappy with the current governing parties. "The fact that 51% of people don't like anything that's being offered, that is something that can be tackled with a new party," said Harness. "A lot of people aren't really as brand loyal to consumer goods or political parties as they used to be. "People are a little more fluid and willing to consider new options and was one of the reasons we concluded what we should be doing is putting another product on the shelf." Currently there are about 1,000 members in the party and 25 tentative candidates for the 2011 provincial election. Anyone interested can log onto the party website at www.reformontario.ca. - 30 - Reform
Party of Ontario wants change If the fledgling Reform Party of Ontario forms the next government,
it would do away with school boards in their current form and turn them
over to municipal control, get rid of the Local Health Integration Networks
(LHINS), allow for the recall of MPPs by their constituents, and also
cut MPP salaries by 20 per cent as part of a big push to reduce government
costs. The fledgling party is now recruiting candidates for the 2011 fall election. Hopeful to have several candidates in the North and possibly one in the Greater Sudbury area, Harness said as many as 80 candidates could be fielded. In the 2007 election, the newly formed party was looking to run eight, but ended up with just two candidates due to time restrictions and election rules. Harness, who was one of the two, ran in the riding of Lambton-Kent-Middlesex and received several hundred votes. A party that came about through the former federal Reform Party, Harness, who is a newspaper publisher (The Middlesex Banner -- a weekly) said the party has high hopes that its messages will resonate with rural Ontario and the North. "Would we appeal to suburban Toronto?," asked Harness. "Probably not ... We don't want to field candidates that are not suitable candidates. We will field candidates in every riding we feel there's a good potential. We don't want to be a joke party. It's a serious party." Harness said the North would rise in importance if his party came to power. "We would like to see a bigger voice for Northern Ontario, period," he said. "We see the North as the future of the province, not a colony, a place that can support a bigger population. We feel there's an opportunity for a Northern (sea) port. It's a 40 per cent shorter shipping route to get to Asia versus the East Coast. With forestry, there's a big opportunity there through a new mandate with the Ontario Building Code to use more wood (in home construction)." Another Reform Party of Ontario move, if elected, would be to eliminate the position of party whips (people who ensure MPPs toe the party line and vote accordingly in parliament) and allow for free votes. The Reform Party of Ontario would also cancel the Harmonized Sales Tax which goes into effect in Ontario Thursday. "We are the first party that came out in opposition," said
Harness. "As a businessowner who is affected by the HST, I just
don't see it being a positive thing." Harness' Northern Ontario visit was also going to include stops in
North Bay, New Liskeard and Timmins. - 30 - Fiscal
responsibility tops agenda for Ontario Reform Party Brad Harness said he thinks he knows why such a low percentage of the population votes in general elections. It’s because politicians are usually forced to vote with their parties, even if that is against the best interests of their constituents. Harness, the leader of the Reform Party of Ontario, which was started in 2007, said if his party elects MPPs to the legislature in 2011, they will be free to vote how they choose. Harness, the publisher of a weekly newspaper called the Middlesex Banner, distributed just outside of London, Ont., is on a tour of northeastern Ontario to promote the party. His children, Russell, 14, and Ryan, 10, are accompanying him. Harness said the party derives its mission from the defunct Reform Party of Canada, in that it is grassroots-based, and stresses fiscal responsibility. After the recession, the province of Ontario is running “close to financial insolvency,” he said. “The debt is climbing significantly,” he said. The party has lined up candidates in about two dozen ridings throughout the province, although it doesn’t have candidates for Sudbury or Nickel Belt yet. Anyone interested in running is asked to phone the party’s northern Ontario co-ordinator, David Chirko, at 673-8043. - 30 - Time to dispense with LHINs and District School Boards by Brad Harness, Leader, Reform Ontario Last week the Ontario Health Coalition issued a report that called for the elimination of the province’s Local Health Integration Networks(LHIN). The reason? The LHINs are unresponsive to local needs and are merely an extra layer of bureaucracy (hence, costly) at a time when health care funds and accountability are in short supply. The Coalition’s report wrapped up hearings across Ontario which it held after the provincial government’s rural and northern health panel failed to hold public consultations. The LHINs replaced local health advisory councils. They were essentially mergers, with a new name, covering much larger geography, which explains why the public views the LHINs as disconnected from local wants and needs. Additionally, the McGuinty Government at Queen’s Park - the creators of the LHINs - then delegated hospital funding authority to the LHINs. This has allowed McGuinty MPPs to claim they have no responsibility for local hospital closure or funding decisions. It is a truism that no matter whether you are in Eastern, Northern, Central, Southern, or Western Ontario, the local LHINs are unanimously hated by the public. Much the same sentiment is expressed over the larger district school boards for similar reasons. We must keep in mind that Liberals like BIG government, with large, all-embracing government administrative units. This is efficiency, they claim. The reality is that the further you take layers of government away from the local users, the less responsive and more expensive government becomes. Those running the show at these new larger administrative units - be they LHINs, District School Boards, or larger municipalities founded out of the forced amalgamations of the late 1990s - insist on pay and perks that suit their new, lofty positions, as well as layers of underlings to handle things for them. Local control and accountability is the issue: Only by returning hospitals and long-term care facilities as well as schools to local (upper tier municipal) control can the needs of local citizens be both heard and actioned. Being smaller administrative units, the municipally-run health boards and education boards would be far cheaper, too, at a time of massive provincial government deficits which threatens the future of local hospitals and schools. It can work: The Ministry of Education would still set curriculum, teacher qualifications, and run standardized testing, as well as inspect the schools to ensure students are receiving what is laid down by the ministry. The Ministry of Health would produce standards for and run inspection services of health care facilities. Both ministries would provide funding directly to upper-tier municipalities, and municipalities would continue to collection local education taxes. Bottom line is this: Local people would be in control of the services which matter most to them, which is what they want. - 30 - LIBERAL DRUG PLAN ALL WRONG, AND HERE'S WHY by Brad Harness, Leader, Reform Ontario This week’s changes to the way generic drugs are priced offers us two reminders about Dalton McGuinty’s Liberal world: It doesn’t make sense (cents) and it creates more problems than it solves. The reality is that the existing business model for Ontario’s pharmacies was based on a mix of money from the Ontario drug benefit programme and from the drug manufacturers, plus an allowance to pharmacists to pay them for longer pharmacy hours and for staff time to consult with patients/customers of their pharmacy. The Liberal’s new plan which fixes the price pharmacies can charge for generic drugs at 25% of the price of name brand drugs certainly cuts prices for consumers, but also cuts the bottom out from under the pharmacies’ business model. We must all keep in mind that advances in drug research come after many years of often costly research and testing. Those new drugs hit the marketplace through pharmacies, initially as patent protected products. This is only fair, as that pharmaceutical company spent the time and money and had the foresight to research and develop a new product that both helps the sick and expands the business of drug companies and pharmacies. Once such patent protection ends – as they all do at some point – generic (no-name) companies are free to copy and sell at lower costs copy-cat versions of those brand-name drug products. It is at this point that consumers – whose initial benefit was the brand-name drug entering the marketplace - benefit again, as prices fall. If government’s desire is to see prices fall further, then it must take steps to increase supply. As supply exceeds demand, prices will fall. McGuinty’s lack of understanding of this point is what is behind the revolt by Rexall and Shoppers Drug Mart, and others. Whenever government tries to regulate (fix) prices by interfering in the operations of the free market, it is merely setting the stage for a chain reaction of unintended consequences. Reform Ontario recognizes Ontario’s health care costs are eating into more and more of the province’s budget, but trying to curb drug expenditures through price fixing is not the answer. Prices will fall with increased competition, and prices will fall with measures that see patients pay and then be reimbursed (after a basic deductible) for the drugs they consume. The latter will curtail some drug sales, increasing supply and causing prices to fall further. McGuinty is developing a bad habit of trying to control prices: Just look at the ludicrous prices offered for green energy, far above market rates. Pierre Trudeau messed around with wage and price controls in the late 1970s, with negative results. Rent control is another area where government interferes in the market’s price-setting mechanism. The result? A lack of new rental accommodations because the artificially low prices cannot attract the capital needed to build new rental units. Better to encourage an increase in supply, we say. As for the pharmacy hours and consulting with patients, well that’s merely part of good customer service and a means to offer a bit more for customers in a competitive marketplace. Pharmacies need to be free to set hours and consumers free to choose where they want to buy their drugs. Dalton, do away with the price fixing and the excess of government regulations, and let the economy work on its own.
- 30 -
REFORM ONTARIO LEADER CALLS FOR MORE AGGRESSIVE CUTS TO 2010 PROVINCIAL BUDGET by Brad Harness, Leader, Reform Ontario The McGuinty Liberal government at Queen’s Park unveiled its 2010 budget for the province of Ontario last week. Foremost is a massive ongoing budgetary deficit, only slightly below 2009’s, and set to double the province’s debt. As a percentage of gross domestic products, Ontario’s debt will soon approach 40% of GDP, a very scary figure indeed. To put things another way, Ontario’s deficit is larger than all nine other Canadian provinces - combined. At 40% of GDP, our debt is 2/3 of the way towards the basket-case status now enjoyed by Greece, Portugal, Ireland, and Spain, such a worry in international finance circles. McGuinty finance minister Dwight Duncan says the deficit will take at least another 8 years to wipe out. His, he says, is the ‘go slow’ approach. He points out the province’s deficit was caused by the global recession. Wrong. It was caused by McGuinty, Duncan, and other Liberals cabinet ministers being unable to scale back government programmes in the face of massive government revenue shortfalls, something evident over the past few decades. For example, McGuinty’s desire to leave a legacy in the form of all-day day care through a $1.5-billion expansion of kindergarten for 3 year olds and doubling classroom time for JK and SK pupils. Nice idea but no money to do this, yet the programme starts this September. It’s time for common sense. Reform Ontario calls for an immediate 2010 budget expenditure reduction of 7% from what is proposed by the McGuinty Liberals, followed by freezing total expenditures at this new level for the next five years until growth in revenues can achieve a balanced budget (assuming our projections of an average 2.5% increase in annual revenues comes to pass. This projected level of revenue growth is 10% more conservative than that of the Liberals, so it is a safe bet). This freeze on the overall total expenditures would still, under Reform Ontario’s plan, allow for a 3% annual rise in health care spending (an area growing at 6% per year historically), as well as paying the annual $10-billion interest - but not principal - payments on our rapidly rising provincial debt (set to double over the 8 year life of the McGuinty budget plans). Ontario’s revenue supply is not bottomless: To allow for a 3% rise in health spending Reform Ontario calls for, an ongoing rationalization of ministry spending through a 2.3% annual reduction in ministry budgets (see tables below) is necessary, which illustrates just how bad the situation is at Queen’s Park. Reform Ontario’s Year 1 will require across the board cuts, while subsequent years would implement new ministry budgets that are sustainable over the long-term and based on the recommendations of a Programme Review Committee that Reform Ontario has been calling for since 2008. Liberal
Plan 2010 Expenditures -
Expenditures - REFORM ONTARIO Plan 2010-15 2010: REVENUE $106.9B
- EXPENSES $116.7B - DEBT REPAYMENT $0B - 10% CORP. TAX CUT $0.5B -
RESERVE FUND $0.5B = -$10.8B DEFICIT
The key to getting Ontario out of deficit is both an increase in revenues plus a decrease in expenditures. Both are necessary. To help ensure revenues do rise, corporate taxes will be reduced from 10% to 9% through targeted deductions aimed at increasing the research & development of new products (to protect current jobs) and through the hiring of new employees. These measures will produce a greater number of corporate tax payers and higher levels of employment across Ontario, coupled with higher numbers of ordinary Ontarians back to work and paying income tax. This will also allow Reform Ontario to do away with the unpopular HST. Under Reform Ontario’s budget, you’d see the budget balanced in 5 years (by 2014) rather than the Liberal’s 8 years, plus ministries and their programmes would be restructured for future affordability. At this point we would increase further cuts to taxes, including the health care premium. Bottom line is this: A more aggressive approach to balancing Ontario’s budget is urgently needed. It is imperative that the Ontario government take early and substantive action to cut spending this year. Reform Ontario’s recommended 7% cut for 2010 is the minimum needed. - 30 -
ONTARIO THRONE SPEECH - REFORM ONTARIO LEADER POINTS OUT THE OSTRICH WITH ITS HEAD IN THE SAND by Brad Harness, Leader, Reform Ontario It’s funny how things are urgent and need fixing, and yet the Liberals have been in office going on 7 years now and never tackled these urgent matters. The McGuinty Government’s Throne Speech last week was a bit of back to the future. His new-found interest in job creation, and Northern Ontario’s economic plight in particular, is case in point. So, too, is the need for a new vision of Ontario’s economy. Reform Ontario has been calling for gearing our economy up for the year 2100, not 1980. What is a shame is that the idea of Big Government shines through McGuinty’s plans, loud and clear. There is no mention of restructuring government to become slim, sleek, and cost-effective. Instead, the idea is for more spending and more programmes: The North; R&D; for every Ontarian who wants it, a university degree. With spending ideas pitched to the public without the budget estimates to reflect upon, they are selling the sizzle to Ontarians, hoping they pay little attention to the steak (the budget details, costings, deficit, and tax implications). Reform Ontario has long called for changes to help Northern Ontario: Mining incentives, a new northern port to Europe and Asia, new hydro projects on our northern rivers, and a change to the Ontario Building Code to permit wood to be used in up to 40% of each new building’s construction in our province. This is our plan for creating northern jobs. On the post-secondary front – another Throne Speech highlight - let’s not forget that renowned Canadian demographer Dr. David Foot (co-author of the book Boom, Bust & Echo) came out last year advising governments of all stripes to spend infrastructure dollars repairing existing university and college buildings rather than creating yet more student space. The bulge of students will pass, he warns, and we are too late in the cycle to add capacity in a cost-effective fashion. Hence, Dalton’s Throne Speech push for tens of thousands of additional foreign post-secondary students to make use of the space? To really make lasting changes to Ontario’s economic future, the question of demographics must be addressed. How many people do we want in Ontario? What should be the rural/urban split? How many should live in the North? How do we take steps to ensure Ontario’s aging workforce does not shrink to unsustainable levels? How much immigration do we needed and where should these folks settle? Population size and location will dictate economic growth and the future demand for education, health care, and a whole host of government services. These are vital points of public policy that were missing from Dalton’s 2010 Throne Speech. He’s had 7 years to address them, and has not. Sadly, the province’s journalists never ask about them either. The public remains like an ostrich with its head in the sand, oblivious to what’s going on around it. It’s time for a discussion, a dialogue, and decision-making to address these fundamental issues.
- 30 -
Harness comments on Dalton's Samsung power deal: Is playing favourites fair business practice? by Brad Harness This
week Premier Dalton McGuinty signed a power deal with Samsung, the huge
South Korean business conglomerate that is known for a vast empire of
products involving electricity, such as consumer electronics and more
recently, and in Dalton’s deal, electrical power generation. - 30 - SENATE REFORM MUST BE NEGOTIATED WITH PROVINCES: MCGUINTY'S CALL FOR ABOLITION 'SHAMEFUL' by Brad Harness Canada’s parliamentary system is based on a long-standing tradition of two houses, an upper and a lower house, which fulfill similar yet different roles. Both are necessary. The House of Commons is were the population is represented, were debate is supposed to occur, and where legislation ideally is introduced as the laws of the land are changed to meet our evolving needs. Such legislation – once passed in the House – then goes up to the Senate for scrutiny and approval. The Senate’s role is one of balancing off representation by population as seen in the House, with representation by province. As Canada grew, other provinces were added to Confederation, and additional senators were created for them. However, not all provinces are represented equally, and this uneven treatment – one of the key flaws with the Senate - has been explained away as being part of an overall plan to represent Canada’s regions – and not provinces – in the Senate. To top off this reality, our senators are appointed by the prime minister, one of his key patronage plums. This merely engrains the grip of party politics within Parliament, and often leads to antics trumping substantive debate on important issues of national policy. Most advanced nations use a similar system of lower and upper chambers and for the same functions we do. Most – such as Australia, the United States, and Germany - have adopted elected senators. In Canada, ever since the 1982 Canadian Constitution, we have a constitutional amendment process which requires the agreement of 7 provinces with 50% of the population. This reality means any changes to our guiding “national rule book” will be few and far between. Significant Senate reform requires just such an amendment. Sadly, the only real way to get half way to an elected or even an equal senate (with each province having the same number of senators as in the US) and limiting the senatorial terms (for now they are near life-terms) is to go with the half-measure of the PM appointing senators selected by voters within each province (as Alberta already does). As leader of Reform
Ontario, I state unequivocally that abolishing the senate is not in
the national or provincial interest, and for Premier McGuinty to call
for such a change, he is doing Ontarians a real disservice by not underlining
the safety factor which the Senate affords not just Ontario, but all
provinces and territories in our Confederation. Shame on you, Dalton!
Harmonized sales tax moving ahead with no debate by Brad Harness Well excuse me for thinking we Ontarians are living in a democracy! Big changes deserve big discussion. Dalton McGuinty and company have decided that they know better than the voters who put them into office, and they have decided two things: First, that the Harmonized Sales Tax - blending the federal and provincial sales taxes together - is best for us. Second, he has also decided that we do not deserve the opportunity to have a say on this major tax shift. And to keep you all quiet, he is going to give you three cheques, starting next July, of about $400 or so each. You’ll get the third one two months before the next provincial election. By then he hopes you’ve resigned yourself to the fact that the HST is here to stay. He hopes you’ll be happy paying an extra 8% on things currently exempt from sales tax. For me, as a person who believes deeply in the right to have a say, especially on important matters such as this, Dalton’s HST moves are sad. They make me sad. Sad that since 51% of Ontarians don’t vote any more, perhaps they do not care what their provincial government does short of stealing money and stuffing it in their own pockets. It is interesting to note that Reform Ontario (the first opposition party which spoke out against the HST), the Ontario NDPs, and the Ontario PCs all agree that this new tax is a bad thing. As it involves the federal government, the House of Commons had to pass legislation to allow it to happen, and they did so last week, with 138 Conservatives supporting the change. None voted against the bill (although 7 did not vote), which passed second reading (of three readings) on 8 December. As for the Liberals, 64 voted in favour and 13 abstained. Remember that Dalton’s brother is one of them, and he voted for it, too. Another thing to note about this HST legislation is that the deal worked out between Ontario and Ottawa has a penalty clause attached, such that Ontario cannot get out of it for at least four years unless they want to pay a penalty of $4.3-billion! Incredible that something this serious did not merit public hearings before going forward. So what’s the rush, eh? The reason is obvious. Both levels of government are in a hell of a mess financially. Both have promised no new taxes, and yet both desperately need new sources of tax revenues to pay for the massive debt they are now carrying. At some point you and I can have our credit cards cancelled by the bank. Sad this ain’t so for governments. Oh, ya: To further buy your silence on the HST, minor income tax reductions are planned to kick in as of New Year’s Day. Kind of reminds me of the old saying “Might is Right”. Well that might be right (correct), if you live in a dictatorship.
- 30 - The
Reform party is alive and well; Harness HURON-BRUCE - The Reform Party is alive and well. Reform
leader visits RIDEGTOWN - Brad Harness, leader of the Reform Party of Ontario, sat
down over a coffee recently with Councillor Jim Brown to discuss not
only municipal issues, but provincial matters as well. Reform
Party leader wants vote on amalgamation Harness, who was on a publicity tour last week in Southwestern Ontario, is making a presentation to the Chatham-Kent Community Governance Task Force asking for a public vote on the Chatham-Kent governance structure. A binding referendum in Chatham-Kent should occur in the next few months, Harness said, so results can be implemented in time for the next municipal election in the fall of 2010. One of the options in Harness' planned referendum includes returning to the pre-merger Chatham-Kent where there were 22 different councils. The Reform philosophy contains a strong element of populism, admits Harness, with the government doing what the majority of people want done. "So in this context we felt this was a timely opportunity to talk about deamalgamation," Harness said. Since Chatham-Kent amalgamated in 1998, Harness said the majority of voters feel that things are going badly due to amalgamation in Chatham-Kent. He said towns such as Wallaceburg have lost their focus since amalgamation took place. "This issue needs to be laid to rest one way or another," Harness said. Currently the governance task force is not looking at actively exploring deamalgamation. Its focus has been on ward boundaries and the size of council It is not even expected to report to council on its findings until 2010. "I just think it's the right way to go. (The task force) needs to be open with people and let people decide," Harness said. Harness was the Reform Ontario candidate in Lambton-Kent-Middlesex in the 2007 election and is the candidate for 2011. Currently the Reform party has no provincial or federal members.
Reform
leader would do away with LHINs, district school boards
"Other parties are very dogmatic, they don't change much over time," he said, adding, "we want to hear from the people what they want and go from there." Aside from the role of party leader, Harness is also a candidate for the riding of Lambton-Kent-Middlesex and plans to run again in the upcoming provincial election. Harness said the Reform Party is more of a grassroots approach to governance and wants to put the control back into the hands of municipal government. "Let's keep services as close to people as you can so the local politicians are accountable to the people." Harness said that there are rules in place for deamalgamation, though admittedly the final decision is with the province. He said the fact that the Chatham-Kent community governance task force is considering community councils points to the need to revert back to what once was. "Voters are best served by providing services – and control of those services – at the most local level possible," he wrote in a letter to the task force. "This statement in its fullest extent means that the original municipal pre-merger boundaries were better for voters than the single-tier Chatham-Kent structure, and likely better than any modified organization utilizing community councils." He noted that he has little faith in community councils' effectiveness as they are "a great big mess" in Toronto. Another two layers of bureaucracy Harness said he would do away with are the Local Health Integration Networks and district school boards. "This is a layer of government that wasn't there before and is costly and unnecessary," he said of the LHINs. He called many of the action plans that have come out of the serving governments "cookie cutter" solutions. Another future issue the party is ready to tackle, he said, is electricity.
"It's overtaking health concerns in the next few years," he
said, adding that alternatives need to be found by asking the people.
"How do Ontarians want to put their money to work, is it nuclear,
solar, wind..." The nearby coal plant in Sarnia should remain operating,
he said, as it is "far less harmful than (those plants) across
the boder. "And at a time when jobs are scarce, why would you eliminate
400 jobsin Sarnia and 1,200 in Port Dover? "This has not been though
through very well." He said another change he and his party would make is in the office where politicians do business. As of right now, he notes that the two larges parties sitting on opposing sides, which he said begs for debate. Instead, all MPPs should be seated alphabetical, he said, adding that all MPPs are equal and should be given equal time during question period. Harness said he believes operating hospitals, schools and other essential services can be done from the municipal level and could be cost efficient if the senior level of government "report readers" were eliminated. "A closer look sees that such an arrangement hearkens back to the old township model of a reeve and council with police village trustees to handle local matters," he said. He questioned whether the more things change the more they stay the same. There is currently no Reform Ontario candidate for the Chatham-Kent-Essex
riding. Reform Party
of Ontario leader campaigning early Brad Harness wants
to see municipal governance changes in time for next year's election. H1N1 vaccination campaign shows how not to do it, says Reform Ontario Leader by Brad Harness Line-ups, worried parents, panicky hypochondriacs as well as the rest of us anxious to know what to do and when. That’s what we have been witness to with the H1N1 scare. It’s not over yet. The national media’s focus on a few albeit tragic deaths of healthy youngsters - coupled with an inexplicable need to follow daily federal political parties’ finger-pointing in what is a provincial health matter - and to have health officials at three levels interviewed on television news casts, has led to dissatisfaction among many of us. The current H1N1 vaccination campaign across Ontario is an example of how not to inoculate a large segment of the population. Problems have arisen with respect to planning, vaccine production and distribution, as well as how to get the drug into the arms of about 6-million Ontarians who want to get it. By focusing largely on a small number of centralized vaccination sites, line-ups are lengthy. Queue jumpers determined to get at the head of the line is not what we should have to deal with. Rather, the vaccinations need to take place in an orderly fashion, with recipients priorized by those who know them best, their family physicians. Some counties in Ontario have distributed half the vaccine to family doctors. Who better? They have an intimate knowledge of the medical state of each of their patients and can say who must be inoculated first. A relatively small number of centralized vaccination sites have caused confusion, disappointment, anxiety, and long line-ups. And what is the chance sick people could infect healthy ones in the line-up? The federal government has confused the issue, as health care is a provincial affair. Why the Public Health Agency of Canada is involved is not clear. Ontario’s Ministry of Health is quite capable of ordering sufficient vaccine from the maker and providing shipping addresses to facilitate speedy delivery. Local health units are quite capable of local distribution of the vaccine. 90% of Ontarians could be vaccinated by their local doctors rather than at centralized clinics run by the health units, whose staff have no idea who we all are and what our medical situation might be. Family doctors, on the other hand, are the proper filter through which to decide who is a priority and who needs the drug at all. With a bit of provincial money to allow doctors to hire temporary administrative staff to contact the 1,500 patients who need to be called, an orderly, priorized, no fuss, no disappointment campaign could be run. They could set appointments to maintain order and reduce long lines with the young, the old, and the sick standing for hours when they need not. Each doctor/nurse team could tackle up to 100 people per day. Over two or three weeks they could handily vaccinate 1,500 patients, representing the half of their registered patients who want the medicine. And for the 10% of the population without a family doctor, they could be dealt with at walk-in clinics. Bigger doctors offices might need backup personnel from the local health unit, which would be an appropriate use of the unit’s manpower. Will we see another such pandemic in the future? Probably, so it is high time to impose common sense and order now so that we all are familiar with how it works next time.
- 30 -
ALL-DAY KINDERGARTEN NOTHING MORE THAN ALL-DAY DAY CARE by Brad Harness
Where will the McGuinty Liberals stop? Have they no guilt about ramping up more additional and expensive social programmes? This week’s reiteration by Premier McGuinty that his government will move ahead quickly to implement full-day kindergarten programmes starting September 2010 is irresponsible. Falling poll numbers might be scaring Liberals – fans of state-run child rearing – into committing the province to public day care, disguised as full-day kindergarten. He said his plan includes seeing schools transformed into daycare centres with before and after school child care. Ontarians should be concerned about this new programme because there are six things very wrong with this proposal: First, the cost. Our provincial budget is already 27% short the money it needs to cover its costs. This new programme – to cost $1.5-billion annually – will be funded by borrowed money. This is unsustainable. Perhaps all-day daycare should be covered by user fees. Second, parental responsibilities: early childhood education is a family issue. By taking this crucial role away from parents, parents will really have no role in the education of their children. We can do better teaching your kids, says the Elementary Teachers Federation. But if parents cannot help a child with learning at the kindergarten level with basic literacy and numeracy, how will they in elementary or secondary school? Third, and this goes to the very heart of our social problems: Putting kids in non-family settings means diminishing the role of the family in socializing their own children. Liberal plans have always been based around big government, big brother. “We can do a better job raising your children than you can”. Rather than provide free care to place kids in costly classroom settings, why not provide tax breaks for parents to remain at home raising their children? Allow the same $650 per month, per child care tax deduction permitted parents who use day cares. Fourth, McGuinty’s plan undercuts the privately-run day care centres. It is an attack on free enterprise, plain and simple. It will cause unemployment. Fifth, the impact on labour relations: Can you imagine how the unionized kindergarten teachers and the ECEs will battle to dominate in the classroom? ECEs are college-trained early childhood educators, and yet the Elementary Teachers union is already insisting that only their members can be trusted to deliver whatever curriculum the Ministry of Education would develop for all-day day care. Apart from the cost difference between these two kindergarten teachers – which is significant - the plan seems to be to have the ECEs fill in for teachers, doing the “heavy lifting” and the menial work, in the class and before and after school. Sixth, the McGuinty plan is based around 8am-6pm care, with non-school hours costing a “nominal” fee. And summer holidays will be exempt, as will all kids under 4 years of age and over 6. Where will these kids go? To a different location, in all likelihood. How is this simplifying things for parents? How are the existing day care centres, once raided of their paying customers in the September to June period, supposed to be there for paying customers in the summer time? Dalton, this plan is nothing more than a Liberal effort to launch public daycare, and we cannot afford it. Were there any free money to spend – and there is not – it needs to go into health care and debt reduction. Reform Ontario proposes a minor modification to the existing kindergarten schedule: Full-day kindergarten every other day. It works very well in rural Ontario and will do so in urban Ontario, too. It leaves parents a better schedule, allows for family child-rearing on alternate days, allows private daycare centres to remain profitable. Best thing, it will cost nothing! - 30 - REFORM
ONTARIO's HARNESS OFFERS SUGGESTION TO FINANCE MINSTER DUNCAN: CUT SPENDING
NOW Ontario’s Finance Minister Dwight Duncan released his fall economic outlook for Ontario’s finances today. The bottom line is that this newest Have Not province is bleeding red ink, and lots of it! The gap between revenues and expenditures has widened to produce a 27.4% shortfall. That means we are spending $27.40 more than the $100 we get in revenues. Such deficits are unsustainable. Duncan’s statement notes that such deficits will be here for many years, with 21% and 19% for each of the next two years. At that rate of reduction (2% per year), we can expect to be in the red for another decade. Keep in mind that all of this borrowed money is heaped on top of Ontario’s debt. That debt mountain is already $213-billion, and will double before the province comes out of debt. At this point $1 in $10 is spent just to pay the interest in this debt. That will become $2 in $10, an unacceptable waste of scarce tax dollars, in our view. The recent scandals at several provincial agencies and with the excessive hiring of consultants show clearly that belt tightening has not yet happened. It should. Now. As Minister Duncan begins budget preparations for the next fiscal year, it is imperative that he reduce provincial expenditures. Cuts need to be made. Much of the pre-stimulus spending was already too rich for Ontario. The benefits of the stimulus spending are dubious in that these were all “shovel ready” projects that were next up on the part of municipalities, the province, and its agencies. Point being, they would have happened anyway on their original timelines without provincial money. The bailout of the automakers is a done deal, but it demonstrates the need to stop throwing money at problems in the marketplace. The public’s reaction to the eHealth debacle illustrates that old-style politics and government is not what Ontarians want or deserve. It’s time to cut spending, seriously. - 30 - HEALTH & LONG-TERM CARE MINISTRY NEEDS TO BE SPLIT INTO MORE MANAGEABLE PIECES by Brad Harness TORONTO – Reform Ontario leader Brad Harness was at Queen’s Park yesterday when the Auditor-General's report on the health ministry spending scandals was released. Harness told members of the press that "The Ontario Government deals in big, round figures. Millions of dollars are minor annotations in reports and press releases. It is easy for millions to seep through the cracks of proper accountability and the legally-required tendering aDalton McGuinty’s Liberal government has been throwing money at a variety of problems for the past six years." He explained that Health and Long-term Care spending amounts to 42% of all provincial government spending. It is our largest ministry, and ironically the most likely place to waste money despite efforts to save money in the long run. Ministerial accountability is the foundation of our system of government, and so it is crucial that ministers who are found to have caused problems do the honourable thing and “fall on their swords”. "Yes, current Health Minster David Caplan was the minister in the hot seat when the spending scandals came to light, so he should have subscribed. However, George Smitherman was the man responsible for making the mistakes. He contravened the law. When you or I do that, we can expect serious consequences. For Smitherman, he is allowed to get off scott-free. Why?" The latest health dollars spending scandal at Cancer Care Ontario simply add fuel to the fire, a blaze that threatens to grow into an inferno of waste and illegal behaviour by Ontario government ministers. The Ontario Lottery & Gaming scandals suggest that “rot and waste” are not confined to the health ministry. Deb Matthews, the new Health Minister, has a very hazardous course to steer. It is likely that she, too, will also fall upon more scandals during her watch. Let’s face it: Her job is too big to be done well. Harness added that "Reform Ontario is calling for the Ministry of Health & Long-Term Care to be split up into more manageable pieces. $45-billion a year is a huge budget in its current form, and all health ministers will likely experience the same problems of an over-stretched “span of control”. Chopping this behemoth down to bite-size pieces means using taxpayer money more wisely." Harness called on new smaller ministries of Health and Long-Term Care as a minimum, important step in reigning in improper spending. - 30 - ARE ONTARIO'S AGENCIES ‘SACRED COWS TO BE MILKED’? by Brad Harness First it was the scandal at eHealth Ontario over misspent public dollars, misallocated expenses monies, and inflated contracts. This resulted in resignations and firings. Next up was the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Commission (OLG). More wrong-doing by the leadership with contracts and expense accounts, and that after last year’s big blow-up over the unusually high winning ratio among the OLG’s lottery and scratch ticket merchants. More firings and resignations. Now we hear this week of questionable contracts at yet another Ontario agency, the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), which has earned the disdain of many Ontario property owners due to incorrect property valuations that have lead to significant property tax hikes and liabilities. To stop these complaints MPAC has been busy hiring consultants, it seems, which is alright. But they have been renewing and extending contracts well beyond what MPAC’s own regulations allow. In a report in the Globe & Mail, MPAC’s VP of corporate services acknowledged that its own draft audit report dated May 2009 uncovered problems with the agency’s procurement practices in 2005 and 2006. He went on to insist the report - the latest - is already out of date and such practices it pinpointed have been rectified. Maybe so. The missteps included violating the rules for consulting work, which say that contracts can only be extended from their initial term by no more than twice the value of the original contract. The audit found that agency had extended contracts from 5 to 14 times their original value. It is good that the report in question was MPAC’s own internal audit. It is bad that MPAC is merely the latest Ontario agency to exhibit a lack of respect for taxpayers’ dollars. Government is supposed to treat such monies as sacred trusts, not sacred cows to be milked for everything from coffee to cars washes and meals on the town, to dry cleaning. While ministers of the crown need to be called to account for such extensive and ongoing problems, it is clearly our premier, Dalton McGuinty, who is the one to be held to account overall. Ontario has over 600 agencies, boards and commissions, each one provided with budgets from tax coffers. True, they also provide revenues back to the government, just under 5% of provincial government revenues annually. It is only a matter of time before more such scandals are revealed. And it is a matter that seems to be important to every voter, unless you are on an agency board or in a McGuinty cabinet post! EI changes need to be sensible by Brad Harness Various Media Press Release 10 August 2009 There is a debate happening about how Employment (read “Unemployment”) Insurance - also known as EI - should be reformed. This discussion is taking place between the federal prime minister and the provincial premiers. For starters, government assistance programmes such as EI ought to be at the level closest to the user, in this case, at the province level. However, EI is a federal programme, and perhaps that’s where much of this struggle emanates from. EI gives the feds visibility in communities right across Canada. Yet for practical purposes, labour issues, business matters, and employment insurance should be provincial programmes, not federal. Workers Compensation and labour standards are both provincial matters, so why not EI, too? The way EI operates now, the country is divided up into 58 districts based on economic centres. The rate of unemployment is tracked in each, and the bar workers must measure up to qualify for EI financial payments once workers lose their job varies from district to district. Often - for crass political reasons - in districts where unemployment is high and the prospects of landing a replacement job are low, workers can qualify more easily than in districts with rosier outlooks. Federal Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff is calling on the PM to lower the qualifying standards across Canada to the a single standard, that being the lowest one around of having to work 360 hours before being eligible for benefits. The question of the size of such benefit payouts and the duration are also up for discussion. Ontario’s illustrious leader Dalton McGuinty is also arguing for single level, but a higher one of 420 hours qualifying time. I think that if we did not have this system in place and were interested in putting one together, we’d give serious thought to the purpose of EI. It is meant to provide temporary financial relief in the event of unforeseen redundancy. Job losses due to someone quitting - as opposed to being laid off (ditched) or fired outright - ought not to be covered at all. Also, should self-employed persons be allowed to participate in EI? That question is perhaps at the very heart of the matter. Employment “Insurance” suggests that the worker will pay premiums now to buy future insurance payouts in the event that the thing they are insuring against - namely unemployment - does indeed take place. True insurance is about risk assessment. The higher the risk the higher the premiums in order to get the same benefit paid out. Workers who lose jobs often or who insist on staying in dead end careers whereby the prospect of job loss are significant, pose risk to the EI system and should rightly pay higher premiums. Anyone working in “the arts”, or Atlantic fishermen, for example, will likely be filing claims for EI more often than other folks. Another key feature of the current EI system is that the programme is run by premiums paid jointly by the worker and his or her employer. To make matters worse, the employer pays 1.4 times the premium the worker pays. Next up, should the system of EI be run by the government at all? Government programmes should be those we all need but which nobody else can reasonably provide, such as national defence. Car insurance, life insurance, disability insurance, business and crop insurance, are all privately-run. Why not let private industry set up and run the EI system? The provinces and the federal Liberals calling for simply relaxing the system because it’d be popular and because the system has $120-billion in it and can afford, it is not sensible. EI premiums may well entice workers to remain on the pogey instead of taking the next job that comes along. We can’t all have that perfect job: Some jobs are more enjoyable than others. But the others need to get done, and somebody needs to fill those jobs, too. Workers always have the option of self-employment, to try to create that perfect job rather than “putting up with that SOB of a boss”. Private Unemployment Insurance would be affordable for those who take reliable jobs, and less so for those taking more flakey ones. It would allow the self-employed to be covered, too, if they chose to participate, not something I feel should be mandatory. The creation of this new private insurance would be a boon to the insurance industry, who are skilled in operating in the black and staying that way, unlike the government. Until the 1990s, the EI fund was close to bankruptcy. And that is precisely where a laxer EI arrangement such as Iggy is proposing would put us. How long should EI benefits last? A private system would allow workers to pay higher premiums for longer duration benefits, and higher premiums for bigger EI cheques in the event the worker started collecting them. No doubt a company would offer discounts if the customer had other types of insurance with them. And best of all, a private EI system would see competition amongst insurance companies. It would also mean that the large federal entourage of civil servants shuffling paper at our expense will no longer be needed. Finally, business would not need to pay their share of the premiums, as it is purely a matter between the worker and the insurance provider. This would mean a sizeable savings for business, money which could be reinvested in more employees and more research and development. And what of that $120-billion of our EI premiums sitting in Ottawa’s EI fund now? That money is earmarked for each one of us, so the account marked with my name would be transferred to my new insurance company as part of the savings for the future, or, it could be refunded to me directly. This matter deserves
the attention it is getting, but sadly those at the table will not tinker
much with it. They are afraid of making any major changes to anything,
lest voters punish them at the polls.
Harmonized
sales tax still a bad idea Various Media Press Release 11 July 2009 Since it was announced this spring by the McGuinty Liberals at Queen’s
Park, the plan to harmonize federal and provincial sales taxes into
a single Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) continues to bring heaps of scorn
onto the idea and the Ontario Liberals. - 30 - REFORM ONTARIO'S HARNESS SPEAKS OUT ON GOVERNMENT WASTE by Brad Harness Various Media Press Release 9 June 2009 LONDON - Wasting money in good times is one thing, but doing so when times are tough is next to criminal. Dalton McGuinty’s Liberals have been at the levers of power in Ontario for the better part of six years now. With two years to go, things aren’t looking so good. In fact, they are the worst they’ve ever looked, and that’s includes the financial mess he inherited from the PC’s in 2003. Now it’s more financial mess, scandals, and calls for ministerial resignations. This week’s eHealth Ontario spending scandal is merely the latest example of what has become a big taxing, big spending Liberal government. Now that we’re into this global economic downturn, the stimulus spending is merely more spending on top of existing spending and only serves to muddy the waters. Where was the ministerial oversight, eh, Minister Caplan? Since 2003 the Liberal government has not exercised good spending management. Billions is spent and plenty of it misspent. When the governing party sees its role as that of wealth re-distributor – be it to laid off manufacturing workers, forestry and mining workers, farmers, welfare recipients, the unemployed, the retired, children, public sector workers, municipalities – it’s not hard to see why screw ups such as eHealth Ontario occur. Big government means width – and depth. It becomes like an onion, with many layers. Each layer costs we, the taxpayers. Now the deficit is soaring anew, again by a very sizeable amount, surpassing $15-billion for the year. All this spending and misspending (on executive bonuses, consultants, and their meals, hair cuts, and travel expenses) is paid for by the Ontario Debt, which will surpass $160-billion this year. Reform Ontario has a cure for this disease: It’s called a Programme Review, and it’s aim would be to save money. Trim fat, cut waste. Is there any to be found? Well, look no further than eHealth Ontario. It is as many political journalists have pointed out but one of hundreds of such agencies, commissions, boards, and crown corporations that employ over-paid and under-worked “experts”. If they are so expert at their jobs, why do they rarely produce savings? Because it would put them out of work. Two things need to happen. First, let’s see Health Minister David Caplan fall on his sword, as he rightly should in our system of ministerial responsibility. Next, let’s roll up our sleeves in a multi-party way and together review each and every programme run by the Ontario government and all its appendages and tendrils, asking these questions of each one: Is it still needed? What is it costing? Is it becoming too costly? Can we deliver this service more cheaply and effectively in another way? And let’s have no more eHealth Ontario stories! - 30 - Liberal budget ‘09 just a boondoggle by Brad Harness Various Media Press Release 15 April 2009 We’re more than two weeks past the 2009 Ontario Budget’s unveiling, and for me, there is still something which needs to be said. A review of the government’s financial situation and budgets over the past few years and the current fiscal year, indicates a lack of direction in financial management. There appears to be little obvious strategy employed by the Liberal government in this, there second majority term. They ought to - by now - have a clear strategy. Instead, money is regularly thrown at problems in repeated “one-time” and “time-limited” initiatives. For 2009/10, these “Other Expenses” will account for almost 10% of all provincial government spending. Past budgets also included “one-time” spending, over multiple years! This government continues to exhibit an inability to tighten its belt: Faced with revenue losses this year, rather than cut spending, the shortfall has been borrowed. Furthermore, this same amount has been allocated for even more spending, necessitating further borrowing. Deficit financing is back with a vengeance. The Liberal Government projects deficits until 2015/16. “If” they are able to eliminate deficits by then, Ontario’s debt will have ballooned by nearly 40%, to a staggering $205-billion. If they cannot cut deficits as planned by 2016, due to poor spending controls, additional “one-time” expenditures, or overly optimistic projections of provincial government revenue growth, than this financial mess we are now in will only worsen. For example, will government revenues really rise by 8% this year as the budget calls for? How can it, given the decline in personal income taxes, corporate taxes, and sales taxes, as well as drops in other revenues from licensing, user fees, and the LCBO and Ontario Lottery Corp.? Overall spending in 2008 and 2009 has risen 13% - while our inflation rate rose a mere 5% in the same period - let’s take a closer look at where Dalton McGuinty chose to boost spending over just those same two years: Aboriginal affairs is up 115%; Agriculture up 53%; Culture up 36%; Energy & Infrastructure up 91%; Finance Ministry up 47%; Government services up 38%; trade and investment up 31%; R&D up 60%; Revenue Ministry up 47%; Other Expenses up 31%; School boards up 16% (despite declining student enrolment and school closures across Ontario); Childrens services up 18%; and Correctional services up 14%. Hospitals, Northern affairs, Education Ministry, Social services, colleges and universities, transportation, tourism, and health promotion were all under the average spending increase, in the range of just a 9%-10% increase. Liberal overspending is nothing new, although in his first two years in office - having inherited the Ontario PC’s deficit and debt mess - McGuinty was careful. Then, as re-election loomed large, the spending began. While Ontario’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) rose by 3.3% in 2003 and 2004, provincial spending rose by 7.4%. The next year a 4.7% GDP rise was met with a 7.5% spending binge at Queen’s Park. In election year 2006, GDP and spending increases were almost in step. But the year after re-election, Dalton pushed up spending by a whopping 9.5% compared to a 4.5% rise in GDP. This year, with Ontario’s GDP falling by at least 3%, government spending is at it’s highest level yet, soaring 12% over last year’s highs. Ontario cannot continue to spend what it does not have. That foolish approach is what led to the world economic crisis we face today. Rather than panic and try fruitlessly to spend our way out of this recession - which the US is trying (so far without any success) and which the Europeans are not keen on - I advocate belt-tightening so that the budget remains in balance. We should not add to our provincial debt: If we do, we only further delay the benefits of freeing up $10-billion that annually goes to pay interest on our province’s debt. $10-billion can be used more productivity elsewhere, such as in health care and tax reform. I propose that the Ontario Legislature draw up a fresh budget for the fiscal year ahead, one that trims expenditures to 2007 levels, totalling $95-billion instead of the $109-billion in McGuinty’s recent budget. At $95-billion, everything still got done in 2007, and it would match the $95-billion expected in revenues this year (assuming that does not worsen: What are the odds of that, eh?). From that point forward, budgets must not rise faster than our GDP does. Further, we must lay out a schedule to retire Ontario’s debt and begin down this long but most necessary path to sound finances. Ontario’s future budgets should include reduced revenue projections to take into account tax reform. One such change would be to do away with the sale tax harmonization planned by McGuinty with the federal and provincial sales taxes and instead, trade off tax areas, so that only one level of government handles sales tax while the other handles corporate tax. This would simplify
paperwork and still give us sole control over Ontario’s
vital revenue flows, no strings attached. REFORM
ONTARIO STRONGLY OPPOSES SALES TAX HARMONIZATION Press Release 25 March 2009 How can Premier Dalton McGuinty stand up – so often – and scream about Ontario being $23-billion worse off in Confederation and then turn around and accept sales tax harmonization with the federal government? Does Ontario really need another patronizing arrangement with Ottawa whereby we’ll have our tax revenue handed back to us with strings attached? Harmonized tax rates can no longer be easily adjusted to suit the needs of Ontario under harmonization, so there, too, we’ll need federal permission to do what is legally ours to do. And what about all those previously exempt items? From the poor with basic footwear to buyers of new homes, Ontarians will be worse off by this tax grab by Ottawa. Reform Ontario strongly urges that our province retain every revenue-generating lever in its arsenal, and even opt out of the tax treaty whereby Revenue Canada collects income taxes on Ontario’s behalf. We need to run our own show, with our own funding through our own tax base, no strings attached.
NEXT WEEK'S ONTARIO BUDGET NEEDS CREATIVITY Various Media Press Release 19 March 2009 On 26 March, Ontario Treasurer Dwight Duncan will deliver his much anticipated 2009 Ontario Budget. This document, which will spell out the McGuinty Government’s spending plans for the year, needs to be creative in its management of taxpayers’ contributions to the province’s future. Simply doing the same as last year – which means spending at last year’s levels, which were 5% and more above a year earlier – means that taxpayers won’t see any improvement in Ontario’s financial health. Last year we became a Have Not province, with a deficit of $500-million. This year, a $5-billion predicted deficit has ballooned and looks to be approaching $10-billion, a frightening figure to be sure. So why has the province slipped so badly? For one, it has been too easy to do the same as the year before, and throw additional money into existing programmes and services, hoping to keep voters content. What is desperately needed in Ontario in 2009 is a complete review and overhaul of every programme and service the province provides. Such a thorough look will reveal – as they always do for governments on all levels – programmes no longer required and services which can be delivered in a more efficient manner. Such revelations translate into immediate savings for taxpayers. Apart from analysing what is going out as expenditures, we need to assess very clearly why revenues – as they are currently structured – have dropped off so sharply. The fact that Ontario’s finances were so precariously balanced upon revenues whose future viability should have been in doubt says much about the McGuinty Government’s approach to governing. Liberals like big government and wealth redistribution, while average Ontarians really only ask for good management, reliable services, all economically affordable through low taxation and user fee levels. Ontario business understands that the marketplace is highly competitive, and so the cost of doing business here in Ontario must be kept as low as possible. Tax reform is needed urgently, and not one that includes sales tax harmonization of the GST and PST. Ontario must retain full control over all of her economic levers. Budget 2009 needs to address economic stimulus, but in a sensible way. Most people understand that there are few quick fixes. The only good infrastructure investments Ontario should be making are those which will require 5-10 years to realize: New large hydro electric dams in our north, a Hwy.401 parallel rail line for through-truck traffic, a high speed rail link between Windsor and Ottawa/Cornwall, a variety of provincial highway upgrades, as well as a new border crossing at Wallaceburg, and a decentralized rural electrical generation/distribution system which would free up power for urban areas (which in turn would help revitalize manufacturing). Finally, job skills retraining grants, targeted only in those occupations where present and future labour shortages exist, are a must. Harness glad Haliburton voters opted for local representative Various Media Press Release 5 March 2009 LINDSAY – Reform Ontario Leader Brad Harness watched the Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock byelection very closely, even after announcing his party simply had insufficient time to run a proper campaign. Harness stood strong against strong pressure to run in the high profile byelection, saying that “While I relished the thought of debating John Tory, I knew from talking to voters in this riding that they wanted one thing: A local candidate, and I am not local.” While the core PC vote remained for Tory mirroring, 10,000 conservatives stayed home on election day yesterday. The winner, Liberal Rick Johnson, only garnered a mere 1,000 votes more than in the 2007 election. The NDP vote fell by half, the Green vote fell by 50%. The Big Story is that only 35,408 voters cast ballots out of 89,160, a dismal 39.7% of eligible voters. “I think that we were correct in underscoring what voters said they wanted in the weeks leading up to the election call: A local candidate,” said Harness in the aftermath of the byelection. “While I do think we could have benefited hugely by running a candidate in this high-profile byelection, ethically-speaking, someone has to take a stand and restore ethics to politics. Opportunism is the Old-Line parties, in the past and sadly into the future. Why do we think 60% didn’t see the point in coming out to vote? It was merely an unnecessary election, caused by an opportunistic, old-style, Establishment politician playing voters for fools. I deeply believe voters have had enough of that nonsense. They want Obama-style hope, Manning-style Reform/Populism to make the system work better, and a Harris style leadership that speaks plainly and focuses on common-sense solutions to everyday problems.” Whatever the announcement by John Tory this afternoon as to his own future plans, Brad Harness thinks the Ontario PC Party is the big loser. They lost a strong MPP in Laurie Scott and a safe seat, and with a leadership change, they’ll lose their best fundraiser (John Tory) that they’ve had in years, all this while they are $6-million in debt. How do they go to voters and say “Only we can run the province’s finances, so vote for us”?
Reform
not running in byelection 9 February 2009 Two local individuals (one from Lindsay and the other from Pontypool) interested in the Reform Ontario nomination in Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock decided over the weekend that there was insufficient time to organize a credible run now that the date was announced with only four weeks’ time. Reform Ontario Leader Brad Harness said in a press release that despite requests that he himself run in the byelection, “…Which is something I very much relish… I believe the voters of Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock deserve election choices based on strong local candidates who know the riding inside and out, and not opportunistic, non-local politicians. I feel deeply that non-resident candidates of all parties should be barred from running in all provincial - and federal – elections. Candidates should already be living in the riding at the time they seek the nomination.” Reform Ontario’s
two nominees for the Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock nomination say
they will carry on with organizing efforts and seek the party’s
nomination for the 2011 general election, expected in October of 2011. Reform Ontario busy in Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock riding Various Media 4 February 2009 LINDSAY – The Reform Party of Ontario has been busy in the riding of Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock. Most recently, Party Leader Brad Harness attended a planning meeting in Lindsay this past Saturday, 31 January, and met with Reformers to discuss the pending byelection strategy the party and its candidate will follow. The candidate search committee has also been very active and held discussions with several interested local citizens desiring to run for the party. Additional interviews have been conducted by Brad Harness, too. The committee will continue on its planned schedule of holding a nomination meeting in the next 4 weeks or so, as soon as candidates complete the necessary application process. Other
preparations for the byelection are underway, including organizing volunteers,
preparing literature and advertising, signs, canvassing maps, and so
on. The date for the byelection is not known at this time and will be
set by Premier Dalton McGuinty. It’s
all about trust And they’re off. Less than two weeks after former Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock MPP Laurie Scott announced that she would be vacating her seat to allow Ontario PC leader John Tory a chance at carrying the riding, three other parties have announced they will be entering candidates in the byelection. And while the slouching economy and job creation are on the minds and lips of most Haliburtonians, as well as all the candidates, the real defining issue of the upcoming byelelection will not be one of an economic nature. Rather, the defining issue in the upcoming byelection will be trust. It is no secret by now that a great number of constituents were frustrated, dismayed and even hurt by Scott’s decision to leave her post. Letters to this publication and other newspapers in the riding have shown there are a great many people who even felt betrayed and abandoned by Scott’s choice. Some even believe that the move came as the result of backroom dealings and that the voters of this riding are being used as political pawns to further the agenda of the leader of the PC party. It seems a great many people in the area want an MPP who will put the interests of residents here above the partisan interests of any given party. Yes, voters here are on the rebound and are looking for a representative who will put their interests above all others. And this sentiment has not been lost on any of the candidates. In an interview with the Times last week, Tory said he understood that many people in the area were frustrated and disappointed, but said that in upcoming weeks he would be doing everything he can to earn their trust.
Liberal hopeful Rick Johnson, in announcing his candidacy this week, also said he sympathized with those who felt frustrated and disenchanted by Scott’s decision and vowed to represent the people here, while continuing to live in the area and support local business. Green party candidate Mike Schreiner said he would be trying to meet as many people as possible in upcoming weeks and hopes that the small town values he brings with him will translate to constituents. While the Ontario Reform party has yet to announce the name of its candidate, leader Brad Harness said the party would be running a local person and stressed in an interview that any politician’s first duty should be representing the interests of the residents of their constituency. A representative who shares the values of the people here and will guard their best interests seems to be in high demand. And in upcoming weeks, each candidate will be vying to convince voters that he or she is that representative. However, it’s very likely that at the end of the day, the thing voters will trust most is their own instinct. Investment in small business is one of the best ways to deal with difficult economic times, says the Green party’s candidate for the upcoming byelection in Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock. Mike Schreiner, who owns and operates a small local food delivery business in Toronto, announced his candidacy last week. “The Green party approached me and I thought it was a great opportunity to talk about some issues I’m really passionate about,” Schreiner said, adding that these issues include the importance of local food consumption, agricultural issues and issues related to small- and medium-sized businesses. While this will be Schreiner’s first time running for political office, he has been a policy-writer with the Green party for a number of years. “A lot of people within the party have been very enthusiastic about the work I’ve done,” he said. Originally from a small town in Kansas, Schreiner said he feels he possesses a lot of the same values as people in the riding. “Coming from a small town, I think a lot of the small town values are the same here and are the ones engrained in me,” he said. Schreiner said he thinks the riding is a beautiful part of Ontario and will be residing here in upcoming weeks while he campaigns. “I want to meet as many folks as possible,” he said, adding that while he is not from the riding, he thinks people here will come to understand and like him as they get to know him. If successful in the byelection, Schreiner said he would be buying a farm in the area and relocate permanently to the riding. “I’ve already had that conversation with my wife,” he said. Schreiner said he did not wish to comment on former MPP Laurie Scott’s January 9 decision to vacate her seat to give provincial PC leader John Tory a shot at the riding. “I think that’s a conversation to have with Laurie Scott and John Tory,” he said. Schreiner said he had a great deal of respect for what Scott has achieved in the riding. “I hope to follow successfully in her very big footsteps,” he said. On the other side of the political spectrum, the Ontario Reform party also announced last week that it will be running a candidate in the byelection, although that individual has not been chosen at this time. “Our intention was to run a candidate in every byelection that came up,” said party leader Brad Harness, explaining that the party was reestablished in Ontario in 2007. Harness said the party is currently considering three or four people from the riding to run as its candidate and that a candidate will likely be chosen at a nomination meeting in March. “We’ve had a lot of feedback,” he said, adding that he thought having local people run in the byelection was crucial. “The focus of this byelection is going to be proper representation for the riding,” Harness said his party would like to see electoral reform that requires that a candidate running for any political office be required to live in the riding in which they are running for a certain amount of time. Harness said the merging of the federal Progressive Conservative and Alliance (formerly Reform) parties into the Conservative party had left many grassroots, right-wingers alienated and that this was a chance for grassroots Conservatives in the area to have a government that represents their interests. “That is where we certainly stand to make some gains,” he said. Harness said job creation and economic reform would be central to the party’s platform.
Reform
Party steps up to challenge UXBRIDGE -- At least two parties so far are throwing their hats into the ring for an upcoming provincial by-election in Brock riding. Following the announcement of Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock MPP Laurie Scott stepping down to allow Conservative leader John Tory to take a shot at winning a seat in legislature, a second party has made its intentions known that it plans to challenge Mr. Tory in that contest, which could happen as early as March. Brad Harness, leader of the Reform Party of Ontario, said the party plans to field a candidate in the by-election. Although there is not yet a nomination meeting date set, "we have three potential candidates, all in the (Brock) riding," he said. He noted there are two hopefuls outside riding boundaries. "We really want to have someone local." The motivation for the Reform Party to run, according to Mr. Harness, is "we feel it's an opportunity to make Ontario aware there is a new party... and for those sick and tired of old politicking." Parties
field bids for MPP KAWARTHA LAKES -The provincial byelection in Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock has not been officially called yet, but the Reform Party of Ontario and the Green Party of Ontario have announced they will field candidates in the race to replace former MPP Laurie Scott. The Reform party's executive "did some soul searching" about running a candidate, leader Brad Harness told The Lindsay Post yesterday. He noted that it's a "gentlemanly" practice not to run against the leader of a party, but in the case of challenging Progressive Conservative leader John Tory, "democracy and grassroots trump that." "The bone of contention is that he has parachuted into a riding he doesn't live in yet again." The Ontario Liberal Party has not yet announced a candidate for the byelection, or if it will field one. Rick Johnson, the candidate who ran against Scott in 2007, told The Post yesterday that he is continuing to mull entering the race. Tory won in the byelection of 2005 in Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey after Conservative leader Ernie Eves retired and vacated his seat. Tory did not move to the area. Tory represented the riding until 2007, when he switched to his home turf of the Toronto riding Don Valley West in the general election. He lost to incumbent Liberal Education Minister Kathleen Wynne. As reported in an exclusive story in The Poston Monday, Tory said that he returned to Toronto to keep his word that as party leader, he would run in the city to improve the party's fortunes there. The leader of the Opposition stepped into the Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes- Brock riding after trying for 15 months to find someone from his caucus willing to vacate their seat. Scott announced on Friday that she would resign. He has said that he will spend time here, but has not indicated he plans to move here if he wins the byelection. Harness said that Reform will run a local candidate. Two people are being considered so far and he is expecting more to step forward before a choice is made. The Green party announced yesterday that its candidate will be Mike Schreiner, a Toronto-based small businessman. "It's my first time running for office," Schreiner toldThe Post.He was raised on a cattle farm in Kansas and moved to Toronto in the 1990s with his wife. "I don't have any personal connections there (in the riding)," he acknowledged, but he said if he is elected he will move here. "If elected, I would move to the riding. I've been trying to convince my wife to buy a farm. This will help with those negotiations." About three years ago, Schreiner founded Local Food Plus, a non-profit organization that promotes using local food at institutions and restaurants. He said LFP has worked with the University of Toronto and Markham and has had talks with the regions of Peel and Halton. Schreiner is vice president of LFP, but has taken a leave to focus on the byelection, which has yet to be called by Premier Dalton McGuinty. He said Ontario needs a differentiated, resilient economy, particularly during these tougher economic times, adding that as a small business person he has the experience and knowledge to strengthen small businesses. Noting the adage not to put all your eggs in one basket, Schreiner said the province would be better off supporting a variety of smaller industries to produce jobs, rather than putting so much emphasis on one sector, such as the auto industry. He emphasized his strong bonds with farmers through the work of LFP. "I absolutely agree that farmers feed cities." Schreiner sees being a member of a relatively smaller party as a bonus. If elected, he would be the only MPP from the Green Party. He said he would focus on passing private member's bills on local issues and would have greater freedom to act, rather than being bound by a large caucus. In 2007, the Greens fielded a candidate in all 207 ridings. The party received over 8 per cent, almost 350,000 votes, of the total votes cast in the province. In polling in June of last year, the Greens held 13 per cent of support, tied with the provincial New Democratic Party. The Reform Party of Ontario was formed in 2007. Reform was better known as a federal party and it tended not to run provincially so it would not split votes from the Conservatives. Federally, it became the Canadian Alliance Party, then merged into the Conservative Party. In 2007, the Ontario Reform party ran two candidates in the general election. Combined, they received 354 votes. They were part-time "test" candidates, Harness said. They were fielded "to test the validity of the Reform brand, that it's about fiscal conservatism." Harness, who is publisher, editor and owner of the independent newspaper The Middlesex Banner, said the party plans to run candidates in half the provincial ridings in the 2011 election.
Reform
to test 'urbanite' Tory in rural riding 14 January 2009 The fledgling
Reform Party of Ontario will run a candidate against Progressive Conservative
Leader John Tory in the upcoming Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock by-election.
Party leader Brad Harness said conservative voters are seeking a viable
alternative to Tory, whom he called "an urbanite" and a member
of "the Canadian establishment, the moneyed establishment." MPP stepping
aside gets $100,000 in severance pay The Reform Party of Ontario will field a candidate in the byelection, party leader Brad Harness stated in an e-mail to The Examiner last night. The party ran two candidates in the 2007 provincial election, in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound and Lambton-Kent-Middlesex. ONTARIO REFORM LEADER SPEAKS OUT ON THE FUTURE OF CONSERVATISM IN ONTARIO by Brad Harness Various Media 9 January 2009 With a new year comes many old problems for Ontario, the heartland of Canada. What had been a "Have" province is now a "Have Not" one. Oh, how times have changed! THE
ECONOMY: ENERGY
REFORMS: SOCIAL
REFORM: DEMOCRATIC
REFORM: CONCLUSION: HARNESS SPEAKS ON THE ONTARIO AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT by Brad Harness Various Media 15 December 2008 It would be rare indeed to have an Auditor General's annual report which did not contain areas of concern. That is, after all, his job. This year's report is no different, and in fact, we hope that the Auditor General continues to uncover areas for improvement. That having been said, it is hard to ignore the fact that half a billion in tobacco taxes have gone uncollected by the McGuinty government while they are forecasting a half-billion deficit. It makes one wonder just where the government's attention is focused. A typical business approach is to concern one's self with revenues first, especially in the case of taxes that are already approved by the Legislature. How did Finance Minister Dwight Duncan overlook this pool of desperately needed income for the government? For too long the government appears to have been under the guidance of the bureaucracy, agreeing to ministry budgets before having a solid grasp on revenues. At the start of 2008 the Economic Statement by the government used what we felt were far too rosy a set of economic forecasts upon which to base its revenue and spending projections. Sadly, the unsoundness of the Liberal approach to government finance has come home to roost. That half-billion dollar deficit for the current fiscal year will be substantially bigger - my forecast is that it will balloon to 10 times as much - for the following year, and that without any stimulus measures such as bailing out the auto sector and spending heavily on infrastructure. Jobs in Ontario depend upon both the domestic market and interprovincial and international trade. The provincial government needs to launch a Buy Ontario campaign and turn advertising dollars into this worthy goal. Business needs to climb aboard with discounts for Ontario-made products to ensure price competitiveness for consumers in tight economic times. Local tourism is also worthwhile pushing at this time. These worthy initiatives will stimulate local demand as much as it can be stimulated. Overseas demand also needs heavy emphasis. The Canadian dollar has settled down to levels conducive to export success. Again, pricing is an issue which can be addressed in the next couple of years to secure new trade deals, before resuming their upwards growth over the medium term. Government spending needs to be purposeful: Yes, infrastructure is always a good target. The auto sector? We can't let it collapse and yet the majority of taxpayers are not supportive of a bailout. Extraordinary times call for a creative approach: An auto sector plan should be part of a broader manufacturing stimulus package. This needs to include tax breaks for business provided they are redirected into both new product development and job creation. In addition, for the auto sector alone, a temporary equity injection would be appropriate, with government providing working capital in exchange for voting shares, all under the agreement that as soon as the auto companies begin making profits again, they buy back the shares at current market prices. This provides control of tax dollars rather than just handing them a bag of money to do with what they will. It also ensures both the return of the money at a future date and the withdrawal of public ownership in the marketplace (an exit strategy). How do we pay for such a stimulus package? By trimming back all government
spending to 2006 levels, and redirecting the money into the economy.
Dollars for growth and for taxpayers, as opposed to dollars for bureaucrats
and their favourite programmes, as it were! Where does Reform Ontario stand in regards to federal politics? by Brad Harness Various Media 3 December 2008 While Reformers in Ontario were involved with the forerunners of the federal Conservative Party, there is no affiliation between that party and Reform Ontario. Given the very confused state of affairs in Ottawa in December 2008, it is certainly a time to wait and see how matters resolve themselves. Reform Ontario supports constitutional law and parliamentary rules. While the current attempt to replace the Harper Conservatives with a Liberal-NDP-Bloc Quebecois coalition government led by Stephane Dion is legal, it does fly in the face of gentlemanly conduct and honour. We believe the prorogation of Parliament with a resumption of a new throne speech and budget, in late January 2009 is the best solution, followed by a confidence vote. As a result of that vote, it would be expected that new elections be called. The entire affair speaks to the need for a major overhaul of our federal political system, one that includes the abolition of all political parties. Under this new system, all MPs would be Independents, charged solely with representing the majority opinion of their constituents and have no party to be involved with. This model of government, known as Consensual Government, is and has been successfully in practice in our northern territories for decades. It is our view that this ultimate reform of the federal system will finally resolve the matter of inadequate representation and the ongoing childish and unproductive behaviour of partisan politics. To that end we believe a new movement, NewCanada.ca, is needed, one that will champion the cause of Consensual Government at the federal level. Ultimately, this same model is required at the provincial level in Ontario, and Reform Ontario would strive to reach that worthy goal over time. HARNESS
RESPONDS TO McGUINTY'S FALL ECONOMIC STATEMENT & ONTARIO'S NEW HAVE-NOT
STATUS Various Media 6 November 2008 Autumn’s falling temperatures and falling leaves are accompanied by falling prospects for Ontarians and their provincial economy. This has translated into falling prospects for Ontario’s government, now forecasting a $500-million deficit, in place of surplus’ for the past three years. Worse, we are now a have-not province, in the soup line for a $350-million federal equalization payment. Way back in the spring, after the McGuinty government’s 2008 budget was released to the public, I commented in the media that the economic projections were far too rosey. Consequently, the Liberal spending plan was far too generous, I said. From the spring and through the summer money was being spent on top of even those planned expenditures. This was bad news I pointed out, given that our economic cycle is about 7 years and we find ourselves in year 10 of that 7 year cycle. The downturn should have been expected and prepared for by the Liberals. Why didn’t Finance Minster Dwight Duncan reign in spending? Two thoughts on that. First, he was simply unaware that the good ship Ontario was steaming towards a waterfall. Or second, he did know, and the Premier and cabinet decided to spend now on programmes they had not yet gotten around to, before the financial downturn. I said in the spring that Liberal spending increases were two to three times inflation, in most ministries. How could that be justified? With our manufacturing sector already hurting, trade with the US off, demand for our commodities lower than in many years, why spend more money – and do it through increased debt? Instead, I called for a determined effort to priorize and trim back spending to what is essential. Let us not cry over spilled milk. The damage has been done, the crisis is here. It is time now to take immediate steps to turn Ontario away from the precipice, away from imminent danger. Government is not intended to be a mechanism to redistribute wealth. Rather, it’s role is to do for us collectively what we cannot effectively do for ourselves individually. That means delivering essential services: Health and long-term care, highways, energy, welfare and labour programmes, schools and post-secondary education, agriculture, and so on. The thing that always gets in the way of doing this effectively is wages: Public sector payrolls are simply too expensive, most of the time. When times are good, public sector unions lobby for more pay and better benefits. Yet there is only so much money going around, so either jobs are cut as pay goes up, or pay remains constant and so, too, do jobs. Now, it would be responsible for all ministries to find at least 3% savings in their operations. Much of that could be taken from the unspent budgets in the remaining 30 days of the government’s fiscal year (so, this coming February). Targetted tax breaks are needed for business to ensure that jobs are created and workers are trained for future needs. The same is true to encourage businesses to start now on new and innovative products and services, especially in industries most hurt by the recession. Trade needs to be developed, with partners other than the US, to whom we are already too closely tied economically. That financial proximity and reliance is the cause of much of our current economic woes. Trade initiatives need to be undertaken by the federal government, and I believe that an Ontario Trade Mission is a capital idea. Mr. Duncan needs to start NOW, planning for the next three years’ budgets and beyond. My advice to him is this: Expect lower tax revenues. Do not borrow to finance spending. Find savings in each and every ministry: On top of that, annually, require each ministry to find 1% savings in their budgets. Start at the top, cutting back Ministers and MPPs salaries. Next, apply the same rollback to senior civil servants. This will show the public that the government is taking this matter seriously. Finally, borrow only to fund capital projects that are going to pay a return in the future. Clearly, a more business-like approach is required. Ontario is in a delicate situation and we don’t know how long it will last. Government must act quickly and decisively to batten down the hatches for the rough waters ahead, and must take all steps necessary to ensure we do not go over Niagara Falls!
- 30 - Explaining
the global financial crisis in layman’s terms Various Media 5 October 2008
Federal
election a time to underline federal-provincial-municipal relations 2 September 2008 With a federal election campaign now underway, it is an ideal time to draw attention to what each of our three levels of government is supposed to be responsible for, so as not to discuss with voters those things that are not federal areas of jurisdiction. Health care is not a federal responsibility, and it would be grossly misleading for Canada's federal politicians to campaign around the nation promising all sorts of money for, and improvements to, each province's health care system. With the dozen recent deaths linked directly to the listeriosis crisis, the federal government ought to be focusing its Health Canada resources on areas it is responsible for, such as improving the inspection of Canada's meat industry in the interests of public safety. Medical wait-times are something the provincial governments must tackle. Federal parties should only be promising the transfer of taxes collected on behalf of the provinces, with no strings attached, and nothing more. Provincial health minsters must be given the room to maneouvre they require in order to ensure the availability of adequate levels of health care services for their residents. Inner city safe needle injection sites, highway and other infrastructure projects, industrial and labour policies, energy, educational scholarships: These are all provincial jurisdictions. The federal parties have a bad habit of stepping on the toes of the provinces - especially at election time - in order to grab the attention of voters. Well this time there is no shortage of purely federal issues to discuss: The war in Afghanistan, international trade agreements, the federal debt and taxation levels, the Canadian dollar and its impact on Canada's - and in particular Ontario's - economy, criminal justice, the successor to the Kyoto Accord and Canada's poor environmental record, global warming and sovereignty issues in the Arctic. So Mr. Harper, Mr. Dion, Mr. Layton, and Mrs. May, let us please confine ourselves to federal political issues. There is plenty of meat on that bone for you all to chew on!
Now
is the time to tighten Ontario's belt! The Conference
Board of Canada released its revised forecasts of economic performance
for 2008 for Canada and her provinces.
NORTH NEEDS A SERIOUS GAME PLAN by Brad Harness SUDBURY
- It’s big, very big: Ontario’s north land makes up the
bulk of Ontario. Yet precious few Ontarians call it home. Sure there
are cities and towns, but they are few, and far between. Ontario Reformers held productive policy workshop Various Media Outlets 26 June 2008 LONDON – Reformers from across Ontario took part in a policy workshop this past weekend in London on Saturday, 21 June. The goal of the workshop was to launch the Reform Party of Ontario’s policy development process, geared towards readiness for expected by-elections in the coming year, as well as crafting the party’s election platform for 2011. Party leader Brad Harness chaired the meeting, along with Party President Joshua Eriksen and the party’s Director of Strategic Planning Phil Miller. Coming out of the meeting, Harness summed up the party’s desire to gather as much input as possible in the policy development process. “There are issues of concern to voters in the north, the east, the southwest, as well as in our urban centres. There are also concerns for seniors, workers, children, immigrants, and business leaders. We will be working diligently to take the pulse of Ontario over the next 8 months. Our draft policy “Purple Book” will be ready by the spring of 2009, and our by-election platform will be ready by September of this year.” He said that leading
issues include the challenges facing Ontario manufacturing, fuel pricing
which is affecting us all, Ontario’s energy planning, trade links
with the US, the growing provincial debt and a provincial budgetary
deficit that will hit Ontario later this year, as well as family issues
such as child care, our low birth rate, the shortage of medical professionals,
and developing a more cohesive Ontario society. Oshawa
job cuts are a sign that a new approach needs to be taken regarding
Ontario's manufacturing sector Various media outlets 3 June 2008
The Oshawa plant is not the only Ontario manufacturing facility facing hard times. The "engine of Canada" (Ontario's manufacturers) are hurting, and the pain is real. Sadly it stems from several uncontrollable factors: A Canadian dollar at record high values hurting our export businesses; record-high gasoline prices making gas guzzlers almost too expensive to operate; a high level of "green" concern among consumers that impacts on purchasing decisions; as well as high wages and lower productivity faced by Ontario manufacturers compared to other places where they could set up shop. Business must make a profit, and a reasonable one at that. It is the only way to satisfy shareholders and to bank money for any hard days ahead. It is also the only way to make money to invest in new products as well as new technologies and production processes to maintain profitability. Ford of Canada's flex-line factory in Oakville goes some distance to protecting the future of that facility, allowing it to produced multiple car models and shift production in step with changing consumer trends. Their new flexfuel SUV is a fine example of changing trends. From a provincial government perspective, we must ensure that we are not being suckered by large, profitable corporations into footing a sizeable portion of the bill for them to operate or invest in this province. Government's job should be one of providing the most attractive investment environment for business. To that end we must keep taxes as low as possible while providing a highly-skilled labour force along with top-notch communications and transportation infrastructure. After that, it's up to business to finance, build, and operate in a profitable manner. I realize business creates jobs - and by extension, creates taxpayers - so the government must focus it's limited resources on creating the best climate to do business in North America. We can't compete on price with offshore manufacturers, but we can compete on higher end, value-added, products. However, unions must realize that there comes a time when they price themselves out of the market. Unions have a vital role to play in representing workers' rights in terms of unjust or unsafe treatment in the workplace. They should not be focused on wringing every last dime out of employers, because ultimately that will drive costs beyond the point of no return. Contracts should be negotiated in good faith on both parts with employers and if needed, through arbitration. In the
GM case, however, we have clearly witnessed dishonest dealings by the
employer. Oshawa families have laboured for decades generating profit
for themselves and GM, and they deserve better than to be misled like
this. GM should instead take a huge leapfrog step over their competition
and turn the Oshawa facility into one that produces fuel cell and electric
vehicles, be they trucks or cars.
Fledgling party targets John Tory detractors Reform Party of Ontario calls itself 'the new home' for those who supported former premier Harris Robert Benzie The fledgling Reform Party of Ontario is appealing to Progressive Conservatives disillusioned with party leader John Tory to join their right-wing ranks. In an email appeal apparently sent to thousands of Tories in recent days, the new party claims Reform is "the new home" for people who support the policies of former premier Mike Harris. "Mike Harris brought sanity to Ontario with two majority governments. Sadly, since Iron Mike retired, we've seen Ontario slide badly," says the missive, which invites people to a June 21 meeting in London. "The Liberals, bolstered by the ineffectual opposition of John Tory and (NDP Leader) Howard Hampton, will continue to bring Ontario more of the same," it continues. "There is an alternative. The Common Sense Revolution didn't die. It just has a new home ... the Reform Party of Ontario." A source close to Harris emphasized the former premier has nothing to do with the group and did not give permission for his name to be used. "During the early 1990s, when Reform was growing federally, Mike Harris was successful in keeping Reform out of provincial politics," noted the Harris confidant. Reform takes its name from the defunct Western-based party that splintered from the federal Progressive Conservatives and enabled the Liberals to govern for 13 years until Prime Minister Stephen Harper's reunited Conservatives took power in 2006. Andrew Long, the party's chief financial officer, said he is not worried about the same thing happening in Ontario. Long said the party is home to former federal Reformers as well as provincial Tories and Liberals, and members of the radical rural group, the Ontario Landowners Association. "I am not happy with John Tory whatsoever," he said, noting Tory "single-handedly lost the election" last Oct. 10 with the controversial pledge to expand funding of faith-based schools. While Reform ran two candidates in that election, the party hopes to field a larger slate in the 2011 vote. Party leader Brad Harness, a former federal Reform member, said yesterday word of the burgeoning movement has spread through the Internet. "We're really
pleased by the response," said Harness.
Brad Harness speaks out on Michael Coren Show 16 May 2008 BURLINGTON - Reform
Party of Ontario Leader Brad Harness had an opportunity to be a panelist
on the Michael Coren Show, a popular current affairs and political show
on Crossroads Television.
Have Not status is not what Ontario should be aiming for by Brad Harness, Leader, Reform Party of Ontario Various media outlets 8 May 2008 Imagine: Under the watchful eyes of Premier Dalton McGuinty, Ontario is slipping rapidly towards Have Not status. How embarrassing! Ontario, the father of Confederation and the one who until recently was garnering sympathy here and there for a claimed net loss of $23-billion in tax revenues sent annually to prop up Canada’s poorer Have Not provinces, is soon to be one itself! But perhaps that is part of Dalton’s master plan. Drive the province’s finances into the red and then force Ottawa to leave it with more of the tax dollars Ontarians generate, for use right here at home. It is a risky strategy if this is in fact what is happening. If this is not purposeful, then his Liberal Government’s financial skills need serious upgrading. This spring, both before and after the government released its latest budget, I spoke to media around the province, pointing out several worrying aspects of Liberal financial management. These included overly optimistic projections for Ontario’s economic performance in 2008, a 7% increase in programme spending when inflation is running at only 1.3%, and paying for this largesse by way of borrowing and increasing Ontario’s large debt (reaching $141-billion this year, provided the economy meets budget forecasts, which it already is not doing). Ontarians like placid waters, and they often vote for parties that promise good times ahead. “Don’t worry: We have it all under control... and your taxes won‘t go up and everything will be improved, hospitals, schools,. highways, electrical generation, more jobs, a chicken in every pot...” With no real alternative to the Liberals, nearly half didn’t even bother to vote. Of the 53% who did, enough voted Liberal to give them another four year majority government. God help us all! In four years, things will be worse than they are
now. Now is the time for all reasonable, sensible Ontarians to get involved
in crafting a real alternative to the Liberals of Dalton McGuinty. The
Reform Party of Ontario is the door, and that door is wide open to each
one of you. Welcome home! New Windsor bridge is not the right solution:
Think Walpole Chatham & Sarnia radio plus various local and daily newspapers 7 May 2008 At the
end of April, federal and provincial governments unveiled the new project
that will alleviate congestion at the world’s busiest international
border crossing, the Michigan-Ontario border at Windsor.
A Better Idea? 7 May 2008 99.9FM Sarnia The leader of the Reform Party of Ontario thinks he has a better idea. Brad Harness, who ran unsuccessfully in Lambton-Kent-Middlesex Riding in last year's provincial election calls for a new International Border crossing in the Walpole-Wallaceburg area, not Windsor. Besides the obvious economic stimulus, the party leader envisions even greater things. The new crossing, he believes, could be built atop a dam on the lower St Clair River, thus allowing control of water levels and corralling any spills from the Chemical Valley. He even thinks the flow of water could be aimed through turbines, generating electrical power. The leader, in a letter to the news media, calls for the expansion of Highway 40 into a 400 series highway as an access thoroughfare. The Reformer contends private investors know how much money they can make from the new crossing and would be eager to get involved.
Reform leader meets with organizers Various newspapers 1 April 2008 MISSISSAUGA/BROCKVILLE - Reform Leader Brad Harness was busy this past
week, meeting with organizers in two interesting and quite different
ridings in Ontario. A meeting was held on the weekend with organizers
interested in setting up a riding association in Mississauga. A few
days prior to that, it was the Leeds-Grenville riding (Brockville is
in this riding) that was the focus of attention. Organizers there are
just beginning work to identify possible candidates for an expected
by-election later this year, as well as to start setting up a riding
association for the Reform Party of Ontario.
ONTARIO REFORM LEADER SAYS ONTARIO BUDGET FAILS IN KEY AREAS Various newspapers - 26 March 2008 LONDON - Reform Party of Ontario Leader Brad Harness was disappointed with the foundation of the Liberal government's latest budget. "This week’s 2008 provincial budget announced by the McGuinty Liberals fails on several counts, including underestimating the province’s economic slowdown, discouraging businesses of all types to locate here, providing adequate job skills retraining funds, funding a spending increase for this year and the next two at double the inflation rate, and finally, not reducing the net provincial debt, but rather, increasing it." Harness added that "On the plus side, economic forecasts used in this budget are below the average of the forecasts made by the country’s financial industry, so in this regard, it is displaying some caution in making projections." Harness went on to explain his concerns. "Real growth in the Ontario GDP will depend very heavily on the price of oil, the value of the Canadian dollar and interest rates, and US economic growth (upon which 84% of Ontario exports rely). All of these major economic factors are outside the control of the Ontario government. If this shows one thing, it is that our economy is too closely tied to one international trading partner. This is something we must tackle in the years to come. Simply waiting out a US recession is not a strategy for future economic security. The budget fails in key areas. This budget projects oil prices of $85 a barrel. They are already close to $100, and summer costs are expected to increase by 30%-50%, according to industry experts. It does appear this economic factor has been low-balled, and its effect minimized. Then there are the dollar, trade, and interest rates to consider." The value of the Canadian dollar does cause problems for manufacturers, tourism, forestry, and agriculture. This budget says this, but points out that the upside is that Ontario business can now purchase imported goods and services more cheaply. Ontario’s manufacturing sector has lost by some counts as many as 200,000 jobs due to the high dollar. In fact, this budget’s $1.5-billion (over five years) for job retraining underlines this reality, and will only provide funds to retrain 10% of those in need. Trade issues such as shifting to higher value-added products, boosting trade within Canada itself, and entering new international export markets are solutions for Ontario businesses hurt by the US downturn. This budget says that this pain will be short-lived. It points out trade with the US fell from 94% to 85% of GDP from 2002 to 2007, with the 10% change shifting in favour of new export markets. But it fails to note that any quick fix over the next couple of years is unlikely, as the dollar is expected to remain strong due to a weak US dollar. There is not likely any relief on the interest rate front, either, as short-term rates will fall slightly and then rise again. Long-term rates are on the rise. So there is no economic stimulus for Ontario from interest rates, and it is out of our control s a province anyway. Mr. Harness pointed out that "some things just don't make sense in this budget's founding assumptions. Take inflation: This budget says it will drop. It also says it has been very stable, 1.8% for 2006 and 2007. But it is forecasting a drop to 1.4% for 2008, before rising again to 2% thereafter. If inflation is to fall to 1.4% (with rising gas prices, this seems unlikely) why is the provincial budget hiking spending by 3.8% for 2008 compared to 2007? Surely, a rise of 1.5% would be far more reasonable?" Corporate profits are projected in this budget to maintain an annual growth rate of 4.5%. But this is half of 2007’s growth in profits. "Corporate tax relief? There’s none in this budget. Ontario’s 14% corporate tax rate - one of Canada’s highest provincial rates - needs to come down to attract new investment. Industrial and commercial construction is expected to fall in 2008, too. This budget brings in tax write-offs for capital spending on new equipment, which is good, but not sufficient." It also calls for continued job growth of about 1.5%, with unemployment rising slightly to 6.6% from 6.4%. As many businesses know, workers are scarce. This budget forecasts labour wage gains of close to 4% annually for the next few years. But the budget calls for a 40% drop in job creation for 2008 compared to 2007. Housing demand will remain strong. Population growth will mean nearly 65,000 new housing units are built in 2008, about the same as 2007, and just behind the 2009 and 2010 projections. Yet we have a growing trades shortage and immigration issue in this province. REVENUE OUTLOOK FOR THE PROVINCE: Provincial government revenues from all sources are expected to hold steady at 2007’s total of just under $97-billion, rising just 0.3%. from the previous year. After that, projections see this rise to $100-billion in 2009 and $104-billion in 2010. But personal income tax revenues will grow by 2% in 2008, due to a growing labour force and a rise in wage rates in 2008. Revenues from the retail sales tax (PST) are to grow by 5.9%. Income
from government enterprises (LCBO, lottery and gaming, etc.) is expected
to be flat. The total received from corporate taxes and federal government
transfers will fall slightly in 2008, also. Worse, corporate tax revenues
are expected to remain flat for the next few years, and the dreaded
Health Care Premium (tax) remains in place. According to the Ministry of Finance, for every 1-cent rise in the value of the Canadian dollar, provincial revenues fall by $100-million. A 6-cent rise in the value of the dollar would clearly wipe out this razor-thin $600-million surplus. Interest rate increases of 1% would eliminate up to half of the surplus. For every fall in US economic growth of 0.1%, $100-million is lost in tax revenues to the province. Again, a 0.5% drop would wipe out the surplus. A 0.1% drop in Ontario’s real GDP growth would take out $75-million from tax revenues. And a 0.4% drop would eat up half of the surplus. Conclusions: The 2008 budget is based on detailed information from its own financial experts. The likelihood that any single event - interest rate hike, faltering US economic growth, declining growth in the Ontario economy, a rise in the Loonie - will occur in large enough magnitude to cause the Ontario government to fall into deficit is unlikely. However, there is the very real likelihood that all four factors can occur in combination and push the province back into the red ink of deficit financing. It is very easy to see most, if not all, of the surplus gone in 2008. SPENDING: Where are Ontario's tax dollars being spent? Well, health care for sure remains the largest portion of the budget, and one that is growing at 6% per year, three times the inflation rate. Health care will use 39.5% of the budget in 2008, rising to 41.7% the following year, 42% in 2009 and 43.5% in 2010. Education consumes about one dollar in five (20%), while social programmes account for another 12%. The provinces justice and correctional system eats up about 4% of the money. All other programmes account for 15.5%, and that will be trimmed back to 12% over the next three years (with the extra going into health care). One area that is not changing much is Interest on the debt. It stood at 8.8% last year, is 9.3% this year, and will remain about 9% of all government spending. That represents $9-billion that could be spend on health care and education if it were not being used for debt interest repayment. THE BOTTOM LINE: The Liberals have a new bill proposed, the Investing In Ontario Act, which looks at how to provide long-term direction to the spending of any surplus the government might realize from year to year. Rather than letting MPPs debate what to do with such surpluses as they arise, this act would tie the hands of future governments and ignore the wishes of Ontarians by mandating the following: If the surplus were under $800-million for the year, all of it would go towards debt repayment. If the surplus were above $800-million and below $2.6-billion, the $600-million would go towards debt repayment, and the remainder to municipalities as extra revenues. Were the surplus to exceed $2.7-billion in a given year, the first $2-billion would go to municipalities, and the remainder to debt repayment. "Adoption of this proposed law is guaranteed, as the Liberals hold a commanding majority in the Ontario Legislature. It is only a matter of time until it is approved. It is also a sure fire way to secure their urban seats in Ontario’s large urban centres, their core support base," said Reform Leader Harness. FINAL THOUGHTS: Ontario
Reform leader and OLA president join forces Rumblings
from the Valley A small but influential faction of Ontario's Conservative party will meet with the leader of an upstart right-wing party this weekend to discuss a possible shift of allegiances -- an encounter that could have troubling consequences for John Tory. The leadership of the Ontario Landowners Association, a rural libertarian group that opposes excessive government interference, organized the sit-down with Brad Harness, leader of the provincial Reform party. The two sides will converge on the second floor of a Belleville tractor dealership tomorrow afternoon. The meeting was organized following a failed bid to unseat Conservative leader John Tory at a party convention in late February. An estimated 130 landowners association delegates attended that showdown -- about 10 per cent of eligible voters -- and opposed Mr. Tory's continued leadership. Less than one year ago, Mr. Tory struck a deal with the group and accepted its controversial leader, Randy Hillier, as a candidate. The Ottawa-born electrician gained attention through a series of high-profile confrontations with authorities in Eastern Ontario. Despite what some saw as impolitic tactics, Mr. Hillier gained significant support in rural Eastern Ontario, eventually winning his riding of Lanark-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington. Insiders say the meeting with Mr. Harness is a sign that the landowners group wants to end its short-lived association with the Conservatives -- that, in a sense, it is shopping for a new home for Mr. Hillier. It is a possibility acknowledged by Mr. Harness. "I think, in general, they wouldn't be meeting with us if they really felt they could go somewhere with the PC party," he said in a telephone interview. One former associate says Mr. Hillier, who still wields considerable influence with the landowners group, is dissatisfied with a secondary role as a Conservative MPP. John Vanderspank, a co-founder of the Lanark Landowners' Association -- which later became the Ontario Landowners Association -- says he believes Mr. Hillier is ready "to jump ship." "Randy's not going to be second to anybody," says Mr. Vanderspank, a cash crop farmer who left the organization after wrangling with Mr. Hillier. "He wants to be top dog. He doesn't like sharing the limelight. So it didn't surprise me that he went after Tory's job -- (except) maybe that he did it so quick." Mr. Hillier was intentionally left off the list of 22 senior landowners association members invited to the meeting, say friends, so as not to be accused of double-crossing his current leader. He was unavailable to comment, an aide said. Mr. Harness says he hasn't raised the issue of landing the populist rural politician as a Reform MPP, but acknowledges it would be a big political score. "I think this would be on par with Reform getting Deb Grey in the Commons back in '89," said Mr. Harness, a community newspaper publisher from southwestern Ontario. "I mean, that gave the party a lot more visibility, the opportunity to ask questions in the house." It is unclear how the defection of the landowners group -- and possibly Mr. Hillier -- would hurt Mr. Tory. In the short term, however, it would have implications for his bid to gain a seat at Queen's Park. The bulk of the landowners' organizational strength is in Eastern Ontario and that would complicate his bid to win a seat in this part of the province. (Insiders say Bob Runciman, who is standing in for Mr. Tory as leader in the House, has offered to step down to make way for his re-entry.). Some in the party privately scoff at the impact of the potential defection. Veteran Conservative MPP Norm Sterling last week called the landowners group's influence "limited" and gloatingly pointed to his own comprehensive victory in Carleton-Mississippi Mills despite the landowners' endorsement of Green candidate John Ogilvie. More importantly, the Reform party has virtually no organization to speak of. Its two candidates in the fall election, including Mr. Harness, garnered a mere 354 votes -- so statistically insignificant, they registered 0.0 per cent of the popular vote. The Green party garnered a historic eight per cent of the popular vote. "I'm not saying there's not a concern," said one senior Conservative. "There's always a concern about everybody in the party. But a bunch of guys who throw a party together in a basement? Good luck to you." University of Toronto political science professor Nelson Wiseman says Mr. Tory, if he manages to hold on to the leadership, would likely absorb the group's departure in the next election. "I have a
feeling they will take some Conservative votes away," he said.
"But more likely, and you just can't tell, if there's an appetite
for change in 2011, they'll overcome the fact that some of their vote
was chipped away." Ontario’s budget woes won’t be
helped by McGuinty budgeting To the Editor: Brad Harness
Recall procedures and immigration reform needed in Ontario (Letter to the Editor by Brad Harness to Peterborough Examiner, Pt. Hope Evening Guide, Pt. Perry Star, 7 March 2008) As leader of the Reform Party of Ontario, I do follow what is happening in communities around the province. It was hard to miss the public debate over the letter to the editor of Kawartha-Pine Ridge school board trustee Mr. Gilchrist. While I fully support everyone's right to free speech, his should have been done so from the perspective of a private citizen, lest he taints his public office with his racist views. Some have expressed shock that a person habouring such extreme views is making decisions affecting their children's education with the public school board. This dilemma can be addressed only by something called Recall legislation, allowing for electors to recall a poorly performing elected representative and force him or her to stand for re-election. Clearly, this is a measure the Reform Party of Ontario is very much in favour of, for elected individuals at all levels. As an anthropologist by training, I feel the necessity to comment on Mr. Gilchrist's concerns over the various peoples and cultures now calling Ontario home. I am sure he would agree that Canada is a nation built by immigrants, his family among those who proudly call Canada home. Canada has, in the past, taken a mosaic approach to cultural policy, and in Ontario, which receives the large majority of new arrivals, we see how that unfolds in our communities. It is not always positive, as it can build walls and cultural ghettos. While the benefits of new immigrants settling in areas where others of their culture live is understandable, it is this reality of large pockets where people can live and work in their own language and culture, that probably explains why people like Mr. Gilchrist are so uncomfortable with immigrants. True, we have seen a few nasty people with bad intentions arrested in the name of public security, but that has happened in most Western countries, too. My vision of Ontario is a land of friendly and welcoming Ontarians helping new arrivals adapt to life here. Ideally a mentoring effort, pairing existing Canadians with new arrivals, would go a long way to teaching new arrivals our values. As it stands, most Ontarians barely know their neighbours. Another issue with immigration is the way immigrants are selected to come here. Quebec has a lot of leverage choosing immigrants who already speak their language. And language is important: If existing Ontarians and newly-arrived immigrants cannot communicate, very little is possible. Leadership matters in public policy issues such as this, to temper heated arguments and underline the fundamental issues. Ironically, Mr. Gilchrist's public school position is responsible for the one cultural "leveller" in our society, our public schools. Demographically, Ontario faces a big challenge in the years ahead. Unless existing residents start having more children, immigration is the only way to ensure jobs are filled and taxes to support our burgeoning seniors population and its voracious demand on our health care system. New party
looking for members who support right-wing views Regional – There's a new party in Ontario and everyone is invited. The Reform Party of Ontario is currently seeking members and candidates throughout the province. "We are hoping to offer voters something different," party leader Brad Harness said. The party registered in September 2007 and ran two candidates, in the ridings of Lambton-Kent-Middlesex and Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, in the last provincial election. Candidates in six other ridings planned to run, but were unable to get on the ballot in time. "We had very minor results, but only had three weeks to do anything," Harness said. He now hopes to run candidates in at least half of Ontario's ridings in 2011. "Most of our membership will come from the traditional right-side of the political spectrum," Harness said. "But there is a good helping of Liberals, NDP, Greens and Libertarians as well." Tories, however, need not fear, Harness said. The Reform Party isn't looking to be a second right-wing party. "We don't think we are going to split the right," Harness said who worked with the federal Reform Party when it came to Ontario. "We're not trying to take over the same turf. Our philosophy is different." Harness said his party doesn't take the 'top-down' approach and will be a inclusive party that will span the political spectrum. "We appeal to people in agriculture and suburbanites, but not so much the downtown person," he said. "We're trying to formulate our policies on what average people feel the laws of the land should be." He added there has been interest from certain members of the Progressive Conservative party who might turn to Reform. "If certain (PC) members don't get their way with a leadership change, they are coming over to the Reform Party," Harness said. "If our policies appeal to them, they are more than welcome." The Reform Party is currently looking to put together its policies. it is now working on its stance on post-secondary education and agriculture. "Those are the two that seem to come up first among the people we have spoken with," Harness said. The Reform Party is not disclosing membership numbers, but Harness said it has under 1,000 people signed up. To gather support and input on policy development, Harness will tour Ontario starting with Kingston in late March. "We're doing a grassroots policy development process," Harness said. "and it doesn't work when you have 500 people show up and 60 people at the microphone." Caledonia standoff a sign of 'how not to govern Ontario' PRESS RELEASE 21 February 2008 CALEDONIA - Reform Party of Ontario leader Brad Harness waded into the debate over the province's handling of the emotionally-charged native occupation at Caledonia. Harness said that the land dispute - and its associated law and order issues - demonstrate what he says is a confusing way to govern Ontario. "There are hundreds of aboriginal land claims in Ontario, some of them long-standing (such as Ipperwash), and it is easy to see why First Nation members become impatient and even lose hope that these claims will ever be settled in their lifetime". He expanded upon this theme of confusion in government. "Reform has said all along that one of the most pressing needas in Ontario and Canada today is for all three levels of government to sit down and hammer out precisely Who Does What in terms of jurisdictions. Ask anyone on the street and they will say that it is up to the federal government to fix our health care system. This - of course - is incorrect, as health care is a provincial responsibility." Harness compared confusion over who should be resolving the Caledonia situation to these overlapping areas of action between governments. "In this instance, the federal government is the lead on Indian affairs, as reserves, money transferred to reserves and aboriginals, and status indians themselves fall under what is admiteddly and outdated Indian Act." Mr. Harness stressed that Reform is all about resolving long-standing problems in Ontario, and aboriginal land claims are one of those problems. Caledonia is merely one example in the headlines at the moment. "We need to see a much accelerated resolution of the hundreds of native land claims currently before the lands claims commissions in this province. If you or I had a dispute with a neighbour over real estate, we'd expect to resolve that through the courts in a year or two. Plenty of these land claims remain unresolved after decades in the legal process. One can see how the First Nations become frustrated." Reform's policy towards First Nations is to see them develop into self-governing super-municipalities, a mix between municipalities and provinces. "They do have a legally defined territory on the map of Ontario, and as legal entities, have the right to buy and sell real property, just like non-natives and their businesses and organizations do", he added. Harness thinks that the sole proviso for reserve's buying or selling land is to notify the public so that it is aware that the lands in question will be going through a change in their legal status. "The Caledonia land dispute should be handled through a much-speeded up lands claims commission", he said, "and those people trespassing on disputed lands should obey the laws of both their First Nation and the province of Ontario. I am sure their own laws do not encourage lawlessness. The province has a responsibility to maintain law and order, and this must be followed in this and every other case of lawlessness." He concluded by remarking that the province should work with individual First Nations to develop their capacity to govern themselves, including developing viable economic development goals. Such goals may well include - as a corporation - buying, developing, and selling real estate projects (like the Caledonia subdivision), providing natives with jobs and with profits coming back to benefit those on the reserve.
Reform Ontario Policy Workshop Date Change PRESS RELEASE 13 February 2008 LONDON, ONTARIO - The Reform Party of Ontario's planned 23 February policy workshop in London has been rescheduled to the spring. So says the party's leader as the announced date for the event approached. It happened to be in the same town (London) and on the same weekend as the Ontario PC Party convention, at which a leadership review vote is being held. A number of those involved in the Dump John Tory movement have expressed interest in jumping ship and joining Reform if the vote does not go the way they want on 23 February. "We were getting a bit concerned as the demand for tickets was causing us to worry about having to change venues for our meeting. However, nothing else was available, and so moving the date to accommodate those who wanted to participate made sense. Additionally, this winter's fierce weather was a big question mark for the 23 February event. We didn't want people to try to get here and then get stuck enroute, or not come at the last minute. Finally, we were also concerned that new members might come to the policy workshop for the wrong reason: We want new members because they are attracted to our party and policies, and not because they are upset with their existing party's leadership. We feel this is the best way to provide Reform with a solid footing," explained party leader Brad Harness. Reform is a populist movement based on respect for human rights, balanced budgets, lower taxes, a sustainable economy, and smaller government. The party's memberships includes former PC members, along with Liberals, New Democrats, Libertarians, Greens, and Family Coalition members. Therefore, the New Ontario Policy Workshop has been rebooked for London on 21 June 2008, 10am-4pm. More details will be available closer to the date. Harness added that "In the interim, we will pursue our communications and fundraising strategies, and continue to organize at all levels."
New
political party emerges Ontarians will have another political party to choose from the next time they go to the polls. The Reform Party of Ontario is inspired by Preston Manning's original Reform Party's principles of grassroots democracy, says Northern Ontario co-ordinator David Chirko. That includes referendums, free votes for elected members as well as their recall, and citizens' initiatives, he said. "I wouldn't call it a conservative party. I would call it a populist, grassroots party," Chirko said from Sudbury. "Some politicians, regardless of their party, once they get into power become arrogant and abuse their power." The party was formed last year by a group of former Reformers who felt disgruntled after their party married into the new federal Conservative party. Two members ran in last year's provincial election, including leader Brad Harness, a Strathroy weekly newspaper publisher. The Reform Party of Ontario also advocates more fiscal responsibility and tax reform. The party will hold a workshop Feb. 23 in the London area to shape a policy statement. Tickets are $40. Call 519-293-1019. Harness is also
doing a series of town hall meeting across the province this year, although
the closest he is coming to Northern Ontario is Orillia, in August.
For more information,
log on to www.newcanada.ca Ontario’s
budget woes won’t be helped by McGuinty budgeting Various Newspapers in Ontario ran this story 8 February 2008 Readers would not normally sift through the details of the provincial government budget. That’s a shame, because if they did, they’d discover why our province remains headed down a path of financial imprudence. Our taxes are too high. They discourage investment at a time we need all the investment we can get. Sadly this tax-and-spend habit was never debated much in the 2007 election, and the media gave it little attention.During his first four-year term in office, Premier Dalton McGuinty had a couple of finance ministers, but the thrust was the same. Use tax dollars for all sorts of programmes, be they genuine needs or goofy whims. The sum total is that he ran a deficit budget in each of his first three years, and - what a surprise - a balanced budget with a good surplus for election year (2007). The government’s recent economic statement for Ontario shows that the government’s budget is now set to have the smallest of surpluses (just barely in the black ink), despite healthy projected increases for it’s own revenues. And on top of that sad state of affairs, the provincial debt is projected to increase each year by $2-billion, even though 10 cents of every Ontario revenue dollar already goes towards paying the interest on that debt. The debt now stands at $142-billion, and by the time of the next election in 2011, will be about $150-billion, by Liberal projections.Imagine if those $9-billion could be pumped into health care and education each year, eh? Our debt could be retired in a disciplined way for the benefit of all Ontarians and all future governments. But that is not something that wins votes now, is it? So instead, McGuinty has committed $94.25-billion in new spending for the 2007/08 budget year, a substantial jump over the $88.12-billion of the year before (when he ran a $2.1-billion surplus). This 7% spending jump is not financially healthy.The following year, an economic slowdown is forecast by Queen’s Park, and the year after that, even more spending as things improve. Already, Ontario’s manufacturers are hurting, with 100,000 job losses over the past 12 months alone. The point being, government can’t afford to do everything for everyone. They must get used to doing things in a regular fashion (barring catastrophes, of course). Regular annual budget increases should be kept to the rate of inflation. Ministries will always be able to spend every penny they are given. Government must constrain spending to what is essential, plus a few promising initiatives which might improve and economize the way services are delivered. Only in this fashion can we reform our tax environment to generate jobs for Ontarians. Reform’s draft budget for 2007/08 called for increases in line with inflation. Our 2.5% increase is not only more reasonable, it is sustainable in the long-term, and allows ministries to plan for the future. We call for the bulk of the surplus (about $4-billion) to start paying off the province’s net debt. This two-pronged approach to budgeting will allow us to continue to deliver services without cutting out essential programmes. And it will allow us to grab the debt Tiger by the tail and wrestle it to the ground, lopping off $4-billion or so annually and then redirecting each year’s interest payment savings directly into health care, our biggest financial challenge.
SooToday.com received the following letter this morning from Brad Harness, leader of the Reform Party of Ontario ~ Regarding Sault Ste. Marie's emergency room crisis 12 February 2008 To the editor: I have just read the story of the pending closure (April 1) at SAH of the emergency room. I have seen this occur elsewhere around the province, due to a lack of doctors, and let's face it, it's not going away. Having admitted that the supply of doctors is widespread, our provincial government ought to have grabbed the bull by the horns and developed a real long-term solution. Part of the problem is an insufficient number of medical students training to be doctors, coupled with the fact that many want to shy away from the family practices and emergency rooms and instead aim themselves at the less stressful and more lucrative specialist positions. The Reform Party of Ontario is calling for a completely new way to train doctors and nurses, a way that ensures we have sufficient supply, that these graduates are not mired in debt, and that the rural, family, and ER positions are filled. We advocate that doctor and nursing (including nurse practitioner) students be placed on the salary of the Ministry of Health, be given free tuition, and be required to serve at the community level for their first 'posting' upon graduation. Those postings need to be mandatory, and fill vacancies around the province, and last for an equal number of years as the students were funded for their medical training. Upon completion of this period of time, they then become 'free agents' as it were, are no longer salaried, and can relocated and specialize as they see fit. As to a short term solution to SAH's situation, it must be noted that there are provisions to oblige medical school graduates to serve where required (in exchange for partial subsidies of their medical school costs), and these need to be used more often in the short term at least until long-term solutions, as I have outlined, have had time to work. Sincerely, Brad Harness
Revived
Reform seeks to profit from discontent with John Tory MURRAY CAMPBELL, Globe & Mail 5 February 2008 TORONTO -- It may be snowy and cold outside but Brad Harness looks around and sees nothing but low-hanging fruit in John Tory's backyard. Mr. Harness is the Leader of the Reform Party of Ontario, a newly reconstituted party whose members felt abandoned when federal Reformers threw their lot in with Conservatives a few years ago. They licked their wounds for a while but revived the party in Ontario in time to run two candidates in last fall's provincial campaign. The party has nowhere to go but up - it got just 354 votes in October. But Mr. Harness believes there are lots of people who would be attracted to the message of fiscal prudence that Preston Manning used to deliver.
That's why Reform members will be on the sidewalks in front of the London convention centre handing out party literature, including membership application forms. Moreover, some Reform members who still hold Conservative credentials will be working the room inside. "Whatever fruit the tree bears, we'll go with that," said Mr. Harness, a weekly newspaper publisher in Strathroy. The Reform overture is a complicating wrinkle in the scenario about the future of Mr. Tory and his party. It indicates that he could be successful in retaining his job but could also watch as the party begins to crumble. He has to win the support of just 50 per cent plus one of the delegates at the Feb. 23 leadership review vote. His critics are saying that he needs at least 80 per cent to retain the confidence of the party and that anything significantly less will cripple his leadership by creating factions within the party. At least, that's what people are saying in the blogosphere where unattributed opinions are commonplace. "Even if Tory wins the review vote, there will be a large number of defections from the party, probably to the Reform Party of Ontario, who will be eagerly awaiting their arrival," writes "Ontario Blue," a blogger who identifies himself as "just your average grassroots political junky with conservative principles and an attitude." No one knows whether this will happen. The meetings to select delegates to the London convention ended on Friday but even party president Blair McCreadie won't know for a few days whether all 107 ridings took the opportunity to send 21 delegates to London. No one knows whether they will all have the money to pay for travel and hotel expenses. The foot soldiers in the Dump Tory army believe the Conservative Party is making it difficult for ordinary people to get to the convention. For example, a delay in posting the convention itinerary is seen to be an attempt to befuddle delegates who couldn't afford a hotel room for all three days of the convention. Perception is reality in the increasingly bitter battle over the party's future. Publicly, Mr. Tory is sticking with his view that he will abide by the party's constitution and accept 50 plus one as a victory. But those who know the leader say the number of delegates supporting him is less important than the quality of the support. For example, all 26 Conservative MPPs are standing behind their leader but there is a widespread belief in the party that some of this support is lukewarm and would evaporate when the warm winds of personal ambition began to blow. Mr. Tory, who has lots of other things he could do with his life, might also be swayed if he heard enough voices like blogger "Christian Conservative" who pleaded: "Do us all a favour, please step down." He could win but still lose.
Reform leader says nothing new in throne speech by Brad Harness, Leader, Reform Party of Ontario Date: Dec 17, 2007 Meaford Express
So it is hard to
see how the Number One concern of Ontarians - financial management of
government expenditures - can be assessed by merely looking at a few
highlighted spending initiatives. The only real mechanism
for picking winners is the free market. This same criticism can be made
to any safety net programmes aimed at
Reform leader does well in campaign debate by Jeff Wesley, federal Liberal candidate, Lambton-Kent-Middlesex September 26, 2007 I attended the Mt. Brydges debate and only Maria Van Bommel(Lib) and Brad Harness (Reform)provided informed responses in an articulate way. However, of the two only Maria represents the views of rural LKM and myself - our family vote goes to Maria! The other candidates either had extreme views or were not very well prepared. Home • Policy • Purple Book • Ontario Public Sector Salaries • The New Ontario Vision |