05.06.2011 06:50 AM

I call B.S.

He’s a liar.

He was on the record for years – he wanted to gut human rights in Ontario. Now, he says he didn’t mean any of that.

This one reminds of Stockwell Day’s flat tax. Said he favoured one, for ages. Then, as an election loomed – as the consequences of his mistake became evident – Day reversed himself. Didn’t mean it, he said.

It didn’t fool anyone. It allowed us to argue he had a hidden agenda. And it said as much about his character as it did about his policies.

John Tory reversed himself on funding for private religious schools at the eleventh hour, too. It didn’t help the PCs much, as I recall.

Tim Hudak is one of the biggest phonies in Canadian political life. With this, he hasn’t fooled anyone – and he’s alienated the very people who propelled him into the leader’s chair. They’re not happy, now.

You know, at least with Hudak’s predecessors, you knew where you stood.

Not this guy. He’s a liar.

88 Comments

  1. mjh says:

    Defamation charges are pending. Here we go again!!!

  2. Dr.J says:

    I understand your outrage as you help out Dalton but a real issue for me is making a backroom sweetheart deal with province unions on wage hikes not Little Timmy’s flip/flops. On that point, normal voters outside looking in could care less if “People who got him in the leaders chair are not happy”,that is so, so inside the Queens Park bubble. I know you hate Hudak but you heard it here first, the best Dalton will do is a minority government, his majority is toast. People vote with their wallets nowadays(The Ford and federal elections are proof of this)and I for one have never paid more in taxes in my life then under this premier, the wallet never lies!! We will just see how desparate Dalton will become when he throws out the “Tim Hudak is just Mike Harris clone and a boogyman”talking point. If Dalton is the “great one” all he has to do is run on his record and be proud of it, nothing more…..but will he? I doubt it sir.

    • Mikki says:

      It’s all fine and dandy to complain about Dalton McGuinty. But did Tim Hudak ever attempt to stop the things he’s using against McGuinty? No, he didn’t. Just like most politicians he’ld rather let something he disagrees with happen so he can use it against the people responsible. He’s not here for Ontario, he’s here for himself and for the Conservatives. He’s more partisan of a politician then I’ve seen in a very, very long time.
      And lest we forget the hydro rates he’s screaming about started with the Harris/Eaves government. Unfortunately it takes more then a short while to undo damage done by Conservative governments. If people are willing to reelect Stephen Harper and his CPC after taking a 13 billion dollar surplus and turning it into a 55 billion dollar deficit, if they’re willing to forgive them for their backroom deals, and secret law making, if they’re willing to ignore the slap in the face he’s given our democracy, and then turn around and criticize McGuinty for way less then they are hypocrites.

      • myntje says:

        Much of the 55 billion dollar deficit was the result of saving Ontario jobs during a recession. I’m sure Ontario workers are grateful they live in Canada and not the USA.

        Did Dalton McGuinty complain when this infusion of cash was made available? I didn’t think so. It was an extraordinary expense for an extraordinary economic circumstance.

        • Yup, I went there. says:

          Dare I say that any deficit we see in this province will also be due to job creation post recession? Can’t credit one govt for it and then slam another. But I bet come election time it’s all we’ll hear. Deficit, deficit, deficit. And the same people who ignored the Federal deficit will vote against McGuinty because of the Ontario deficit.

        • JStanton says:

          You have apparently been misled.

          In fact, Mr. Harper is directly responsible for the gutting of Ontario’s manufacturing sector – some 300,000 of the best jobs in the country have gone for good, because Mr. Harper not only let them, but he encouraged it.

          For two years prior to the recession, the best economists in the country were shouting from the rooftops that the manufacturing sector was in trouble, and needed urgent policy remediation. Mr. Harper kept his head in the sand, muttering platitudes and denials, and, in fact, encouraged investors to go elsewhere.

          Those Ontario taxes that he gave back to the province for road works and construction projects is not going to bring back real jobs.

          Incompetence? Ineptitude? Or just the abuse of power by a small man with a hate on for a Liberal Ontario?

          .

    • Ron says:

      Warren it’s a little rich calling Tim Hudak a liar…when McGuinty ran on some 200 plus election promises in 2003 and broke how many of those promises?
      Would some not construe that as lying?

      • Yup, I went there. says:

        McGuinty ran on Ernie Eaves word that he had balanced the books only to discover after taking power and performing an audit that we were actually left with a 13 billion dollar deficit. Hard to keep promises when they were made on fraudulent information.

  3. Marc L says:

    “Not this guy. He’s a liar.”
    So is McGuinty. So what do you do..vote NDP?

    • Warren says:

      Ah, it’s Marc! The Quebec Conservative, giving us political lessons in Ontario.

      Funny, that.

      • Marc L says:

        I lived in Toronto for 12 years Warren, including during McGuinty’s whole first term and I voted in the 2003 election (you used to call me chief when I was at TD Bank). So I think that entitles me to comment.
        On my political affilation, I am not a member of any party but yes, I am an economic and fiscal conservative, but I’m also a social Liberal.

        • Robin says:

          An economic and fiscal conservative? They only exist in theory.

          • Marc L says:

            You mean they don’t exist as amy political party now, and with that I would agree.

        • Craig Chamberlain says:

          It would seem to me that Hudak’s supporters are not going to jump ship over something like this. They’re playing for keeps, especially on the heels of the TO and federal elections.

          He will simply back off for now, get elected and institute the changes he’s now championing, “having listened to Ontarians”, get elected, and in three years’ time say, “well, we gave the tribunal an honest shot at being reformed. It’s obvious now that it needs to be scrapped.”

          And…

          His supporters know that.

          • Yup, I went there. says:

            Conservatives way. Cut funding to social programs which makes them less productive, then tell citizens they were always broken which will then undoubtedly lead to the program being cut. Underfund, blame, cut.

  4. Michael S says:

    What does Randy Hillier have to say about it? Somebody quote him. please.

  5. Harvey Mushman says:

    He’s a politician.

  6. bigcitylib says:

    Or he’s telling the truth. Either way he’s screwed.

  7. wassup says:

    I’d vote for a magician with the ability to invoke genies if it brought an end to the Franco Ontarian with the Irish Name & his merry band of nepotistic Liberals.

    WhoDat is probably worse than you describe War-Man. In fact, I’d hazard to guess he is much, much worse. I don’t think you are wrong, I just don’t think you will win.

    After the decision to dump Tory and give McDaddy another poke, I think most of us have come to the conclusion we can live with the Magician… Anything is better than another 4 years of McDaddy. He views the great unwashed (that would be us dear Timmie drinkers) as some sort of herd he can milk for his own personal fantasy agendas.

    I suppose the public servants will vote Liberal, but anyone, and I mean anyone, who has to get up in the morning, fight traffic to get to work, fight with a miserable boss all day, then come home to a house that has to eat KD because McDaddy wants another $1000 a year to pay his chosen Bilingual Public Servants a bonus, is voting Conservative this time… you can bank on WhoDat!

    • Dave Wells says:

      Careful there old boy. Her name is Andrea Horwath and you may be hearing a lot about her in the coming months. Mr Kinsella is right about one thing- Ontarians do NOT like the same party running Toronto and Ottawa at the same time. The problem for team Red is that the voters may NOT choose them to be the non-Blue party in Toronto.

      • Warren says:

        I take her very seriously as an opponent. She’s a very capable politician.

        The problem is, she leads a party that has quite a few skeletons in its proverbial closet.

        It’s going to be interesting!

    • Derek Pearce says:

      You’re forced to eat KD to fund bilingual services eh? How can you even afford a computer from which to post here?

  8. Ottawacon says:

    Far worse than Day’s reversal on flat tax. Tax rates and design are a matter of policy, human rights are a matter of principle. One can simply learn enough of the costs and benefits of a given tax design to change your opinion, principles require a little more than that.

  9. Al in Cranbrook says:

    How does getting rid of human rights tribunals “gut” human rights in Ontario??? Did they do away with their justice/legal system??? Did someone in Ontario invoke the not withstanding clause over the Charter of Rights??? And I missed it???

    Frankly, and IMHO, I think these tribunals are abominations upon rights and freedoms, and the sooner all of them are shut down, the better!

    • Warren says:

      I’d very much like your hero Tim Hudak to say that out loud, Al.

      • Jon says:

        Charter rights and human rights are very different things. Charter rights only protect the individual’s relationship with the state. Human rights protect discrimination in relationships between individuals. The HRT exists to make it easier for those who are the subject of discrimination to seek retribution. It needs to be easier because going to civil courts is prohibitively expensive and often not financially worth it in discrimination cases. The HRT is a recognition that we have a collective interest in seeing that these cases are heard so that we can weed out discriminatory acts. Really nothing to be upset with unless you’re of a libertarian bent.

        So, get your facts straight before you criticize.

      • Al in Cranbrook says:

        Considering the litany of asinine decisions coming out of these tribunals across the country, I wouldn’t be so ready to bet against a political party that makes elimination of these kangaroo courts official policy. One only would have to read off half a dozen or so of these “judgements” to most audiences, and I’d think it’d be pretty much case closed. Nevertheless, the optics of shutting down anything that includes “human rights” in its official title remains a challenge, no doubt.

        Don’t know much about Hudak or Ontario provincial politics; this is just kind of an overarching topic that interests me.

        • Jon says:

          Could you refer us to these “asinine decisions”?

          • Al in Cranbrook says:

            Sure. The latest one here in BC is a comedian being ordered to pay $15,000, as well as the owner of the business being ordered to pay out $7500, to a couple of gay women who, within the context of a XXX rated and essentially gay nightclub, got obnoxiously rude during his standup routine, even throwing a glass of water at him, because he eventually lost his temper and referred to them as “dykes”. Not cool, to be clear. But worthy of having to defend himself, at considerable personal expense but no expense to the claimants, in front of a tribunal for what amounts to hurting someone’s feelings??? The tribunal actually produced a 100 + page document in its decision over this, if you can believe that! This case is apparently now destined to, if need be, work through the system all the way to the Supreme Court.

            This is the censorship of political correctness run absolutely amok! Forget about the waste of valuable time and taxpayers’ jake, freedom of speech in this country is on the ropes! These tribunals are open to abuse by individuals/groups for no more good cause than looking to stifle opponents and/or criticism. And they get to do so at no personal expense to themselves, while inflicting horrendous legal costs upon defendants.

            Very scary stuff, with real negative consequences to real rights and freedoms.

          • Yup, I went there. says:

            I’m curious as well. As it appears to be misinformation that’s spreading across this country.
            I love the rich white men who feel judged by Human Rights Tribunals trying to eradicate them because it’s bad for their business. Times have changed, rich white men are not the only people who make decisions, they are not the only ones who contribute to the economy, and they absolutely aren’t the only ones who deserve to be represented and defended.

          • Robin says:

            Opponents usually refer to the one or two ‘odd’ decisions as reasons to support the abolition of HRT’s. They seem to believe that they are representative of all HR cases.

            The logic to their argument is, well, asinine. How about we abolish the Supreme Court when they make a decision we don’t like? Asinine, you say? Yes, Al, it is.

          • Jon says:

            Freedom of speech is dying in this country because of one non-binding decision? I don’t disagree that we need should have an ongoing conversation about how to best balance freedom of speech with the equally valuable notion that we have a collective interest in seeing that discriminatory acts are not left unpunished. However, saying that we need to get rid of the HRT altogether is simply reactionary and lacking in perspective. And it seems as if your complaints are mainly to do with process (legal aid to complainants while the defendant has to bear the costs of his defence) than with the underlying policy idea.

          • The Fish WAS Foul says:

            That’s a VERY misleading and selective account of that case, Al.

            Here’s a redacted v. of just part of what ELSE that abusive AND physically threatening comedian — whom Jason Kenney participated in a fundraiser for, BTW — said and did, in the Tribunal’s factual findings:

            “Among the comments attributed to Earle in the Tribunal’s finding of facts:

            “Put a **** in her mouth and shut her up;”

            “You’re a fat ugly ****. No man will **** you;”

            “Do you have a ****? You can take your girlfriend home and **** her in the ****;”

            “Are you on the rag? Is that why you’re being a **** ****?”

            The tribunal’s decision also states Earle confronted Pardy after their verbal confrontation “and continued to physically intimidate and abuse her by the bar as she returned from the washroom.” The Tribunal’s decision says Earle removed Pardy’s sunglasses and broke them.”

            http://www.nowtoronto.com/daily/news/story.cfm?content=180323

        • Craig Chamberlain says:

          Warren, there is power in this sort of angry policy.

      • Ron says:

        Just put him on with Ezra (am I allowed to put his name on your blo..I mean website) they can discuss it at length

    • M says:

      “Did someone in Ontario invoke the not withstanding clause over the Charter of Rights??? And I missed it???”

      Actually, one can make a convincing argument that Dalton Mcguinty did just that in substance during the G20. I still haven’t heard an explanation I care for from either him or Jim Bradley. As a Liberal who takes his civil rights seriously, you can count on me not to support the Ontario Liberals this election for that issue alone.

      And whether or not you believe Hudak, his new stance on the OHRT is still preferable to McGuinty’s passive defence of the status quo. If all Ontario Liberals can be confident in is the historical checkerboard pattern of federal/provincial governments, then I’m afraid more history is going to be made this year.

    • Joey Rapaport says:

      Tim Hudak is my hero, that is all…

  10. Tim says:

    As I have said before Hudak reminds me of Day a lot. The problem is Hudak has “other” skeletons too like by being one of only six MPP’s in the entire legislature to vote against an anti tobacco bill that being opposed by some convience store interests Hudak was aligned with. Hudak was also supported strongly by Jason Kenney in the leadership when other Federal Conservatives for the most part were behind Christine Elliott. I also note with interest that some tories such as Chris Blizzard seem to be already thinking past the election in saying that Dalton will face a “Paul Martin” style leadership challenge within two years or Bob Rae will decide to seek political redemption by running for leader of provincial liberals and becoming premier again.

  11. Matt says:

    I’m very concerned. With three kids in daycare and a school not slated to get full day kindergarten until 2012, Hudak getting elected would literally cost me tens of thousands of dollars. I think McGuinty has been pretty good, and the same principles that compelled many to vote for Harper (i.e. we’ve weathered the recession fairly well) should also apply to the provincial Liberals. However, the press has not been good for McGuinty and the anti-incumbent thing is worrying. I really hope you are able to pull off his re-election.
    SVBH

    • RN200 says:

      I’ve got two kids and my wife stays home to take care of them. We made choices to afford that. I will also make a choice to NOT pay for the day care of your kids, if that’s OK with you.

      • Chris says:

        Can you describe some of the choices that you made to afford this? I am soon to be in this position and could use all the help I can get.

        • RN200 says:

          Well, for starters we chose to have 2 kids instead of 3. And you do know you can buy cheaper no name potato chips rather than Lay’s? Geez…baiting or what.

          • Mother says:

            I personally enjoy the presumption that your reality is everyone’s reality. Count yourself lucky that you can survive on one income, don’t discriminate because other’s can’t.

      • Matt says:

        Obviously, you are free to make any choices you like. Unfortunately, neither my wife or I make enough money to support ourselves if one of us stayed home. So, the choice that you have made is NOT available to my family (not to mention all the single parents out there; but that’s probably their “choice” too, right?).

        I guess I’d ultimately be more sympathetic to your argument if Hudak’s plan was to cut all full day kindergartens. Instead, he plans to leave in place those schools that already have it while screwing those who haven’t yet made the list. So, while you may not be paying for my “daycare”, you’re paying for the “daycare” of thousands of others. Does your local school have full day kindergarten at this time? Regardless of any answer you may give in an anonymous comment on a website, I think we all know the answer.

        • RN200 says:

          Could you choose to move to an area that has the legacy daycare in place?

        • dcardno says:

          “So, the choice that you have made is NOT available to my family…”

          But the choice to not have kids unless you could afford to raise them was open to you, wasn’t it?

          • Matt says:

            I guess it was. But if we all made that decision the rest of us would be pretty f__ked. Unless we’re willing to let in millions more immigrants a year than we do now, someone has to have kids to keep this pyramid scheme going.

      • Yup, I went there. says:

        You have got to be kidding me. After subsidy was taken away Day care became so expensive that it actual costs some people to work. That’s right, they have to pay more per hour of day care then they make. Doesn’t make economic sense. Some people don’t have cushy jobs where they can feel secure on one income. Some of us need two incomes in order to pay our bills and to not become burdens of the state.
        So your choice, have a teeny tiny percentage of tax go to provide subsidized spots in day care so that people can support themselves or have a bigger percentage go to welfare because they can’t.

        • RN200 says:

          That’s what Liberals never seem to get – we’ve run out of “teeny tiny percentages of tax” to allocate to this. So you need to take more and more teeny tiny percentages….you think it grows on trees.

          And whether you segment the analytics by religion or ethnicity, I wonder how Muslims, East Asians, etc. in Ontario are managing the much higher birthrates they have relative to the WASPy/Catholic types — do they have all the “cushy jobs where they can feel secure on one income”? Or do they live in all the neighbourhoods that have the existing all day kindergarten? Or maybe there an example of choices that can be made that you can’t seem to figure out because I must be “kidding you”.

          • Mother says:

            Actually they live with 8 people sharing a 1 bedroom apartment.
            And what about the families with children who aren’t old enough to go to full day kindergarten? Or the people who can’t afford to move to the neighbourhoods that have full day kindergarten?
            Lots of trained, educated people working McJobs because the job market is so limited right now. McJobs don’t provide enough income to pay for daycare, much less provide day care and live.
            Welfare costs more then subsidized daycare. So as the poster stated, which would you rather; People being provided subsidized day care spots, or a larger percentage of people dependent on welfare because they can’t afford to work. 
            You Conservatives are all alike. It’s your way, or no way. Trickle down economics doesn’t work, look at the US. Cutting social programs doesn’t save money, it costs money in the long run. The best way for a country to bounce back from a recession is investing in its people.

        • Herta says:

          As someone involved in a non-profit employing many female staff members – daycare is a HUGE issue. In Ontario, we already expect the lowest paid to hold together their families on the thinnest of economic threads. Individuals employed at the supervisory level are no better off – they cannot find affordable daycare especially if there is more than one child. Most of them laugh bitterly at the cash doled out by the Feds which isn’t enough to even cover one week’s worth of daycare.

          This is a very BIG issue that Conservatives both at the federal and provincial levels have failed to adequately address.

      • Robin says:

        Most of the conditions which allowed you to make such choices were not by your own design, but a social effort. A modern, industrialized society isn’t just a contingency of history … it actually took coordinated investment and contribution. So don’t hog all the credit as though you and you only have contrived the privileged course of your life. If you don’t want to make the contribution to society to ensure the current conditions prevail, you can always go to, I don’t know, Sudan … I hear they won’t make you pay for the day care of others. And that, RN200, is OK with me.

  12. CQ says:

    He’s a Liar?
    Public-sector wage freeze. Instead we get a secret extra post-election 1% for the OPSEU union.

    • Cynical says:

      Wow! 1%, when COL increase is probably 3%. The end of the world. Gimme a break!

      • Ron says:

        It’s not the one percent…it’s being secretive about it
        like our host says…it’s not the break in, it’s the cover up

      • CQ says:

        The 1% is in addition to the negotiated pay hike (2% for OPSEU) despite all the wage freeze budgeting proclamations reported upon. Just read Christina Blizzard’s latest column at the Toronto Sun.

  13. Craig says:

    Seriously? People are complaining that the public sector got a 1% raise? Haven’t you heard of cost-of-living increases?

  14. Ron in Ottawa says:

    Whether Hudak is a liar or not, I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure he will be Premier Hudak shortly. It pains me to write this because I have voted Liberal since the Harris clowns took over the PC’s, but even as Liberal voter, I think McGuinty has been a disaster.

    • Ron says:

      To achieve the big chair the Conservatives will have to define themselves…they have a lot to work with based on what the Liberals have done (scandal wise). However until people know exactly what the policies are and where they stand the Liberals will soon begin defining them (we’ve already seen the ads on tv…hmm attack ads, defining someone…where or where have I seen that before)

  15. Paul says:

    Reining in quasi-judicial star chambers is hardly “gutting human rights in Ontario.”

    There are human rights which no-one (including Tim Hudak) is arguing are a bad thing, but then there is the whole Human Rights(tm) industry that has lead us to ridiculous, politically correct crap like songs being banned from the radio, a stand-up comic being heavily fined for cutting up a drunken heckler and a guy being charged with a CRIME in Britain for singing “Kung-Fu Fighting”…

  16. RN200 says:

    That’s ripe. I seem to remember a red book somewhere saying something about eliminating the GST.

    You liberals…a laugh a minute.

  17. Yup, I went there. says:

    Tim Hudak is an absolute joke. He wants to spend millions building a mid-peninsula highway that is completely unnecessary, just to win favour in the Niagara Region (although people here have overwhelmingly stated that we don’t want or need one). He is a terribly partisan politician and will be far worse then Harris ever was. The fact that he has seemingly forgot that the Harris government is the reason for the hydro debt retirement fee is amazing.
    I will be very annoyed if people in this province vote Liberals out after voting CPC in. The CPC is way more secretive, have broken numerous Parliamentary laws, have lied and manipulated over and over and over.
    Yes the g20 sucked, the “secret” law was terrible, however Stephen Harper made the decision to put the G20 in an extremely populated urban centre, Stephen Harper made no comments about the biggest mass arrest in Canadian History. Stephen Harper spent 1.2 billion dollars to show off to his friends, not Dalton McGuinty. Stephen Harper and the CPC voted FOR HST, and they got re-elected.
    My point is don’t punish the Ontario Liberals for something you’ve been willing to forgive the CPC.

    • Ron says:

      we had the vote already…it was a federal majority
      the verdict on “the secret” is coming in October…it will be interesting to see the narrative on that from both sides

  18. Mike London says:

    I’ve read Tim Hudak’s bio, and he’s a well educated guy. That’s why I don’t understand why he comes across as really dumb. Maybe immature is a better word, or like a frat boy.

  19. Steven says:

    Here’s the bottom line: in April, 54,800 new jobs were created in Ontario. That means that 114% of the jobs lost in the province during the great recession have now been recovered. Our econonic recovery is encouraging but fragile. We need continued stable leadership and not reckless rookies (be they blue or orange).

    • Yup, I went there. says:

      Agreed, I just hope that this election is based on economy, not on ideologies. Also that the PC’s and Hudak don’t waste their money lying about the actual state of the economy, Cdn’s seem very easily manipulated on this topic.

  20. Craig Chamberlain says:

    I don’t McGuinty will have any traction talking about Hudak lying. To talk about it is to antagonize voters, reminded of broken Liberal promises.

  21. Patrick Hamilton says:

    Didnt you Ontarians suffer enough under Mike Harris “common sense revolution”?…..why would you want an even meaner version of same?…..

    • Yup, I went there. says:

      Good question.

      • RN200 says:

        Because McGuinty’s love has been killing me financially….I’ll take a bit of meanness this time ’round.

        • Mother says:

          so wait, McGuinty’s love is killing you financially yet you can still afford to have your wife stay home and not work? You are a contradiction my friend.

    • Paul says:

      I for one did just fine: I moved out of my parent’s house, got my own apartment in Toronto and went from making $8 an hour at a t-shirt printing shop to being self-employed in the Internet business within two years during Harris’ tenure.

      …and I’m a dope-smoking, college dropout slacker. If I can succeed, nobody else has any excuse to blame Harris for anything.

      • Robin says:

        The dope-smoking, college dropout slacker part certainly explains your ignorance, but to think that you alone are responsible for your fortunes fails to consider the serendipitous contingency that you were born into such a position of privilege. Do you also take credit for the fact that you weren’t born in a 3rd world country and stranded there in poverty for life?

      • Patrick Hamilton says:

        Save for maybe the seven dead and hundreds ill at Walkerton?….

        • Patrick Hamilton says:

          Health effects still linger for many residents of Ontario town…

          http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/story/2010/05/16/walkerton-sunday.html

          • Patrick Hamilton says:

            This post from the above article summed it up beautifully……”Yes, the legacy of Mike Harris will live on. So many citizens and taxpayers on dialysis and medication and disability payment for life because of the Common Sense Revolution.

            Another example of poor environmental and health policy, financial illiteracy and general thuggishness of the Conservative Party.

            Vote for that fatcat Hudak if you want life to become a diarrhea agony again”..

          • Patrick Hamilton says:

            @bruce from etobicoke: I believe both parties were culpable as this article explains

            http://saskatoon.ctv.ca/servlet/an/plocal/CTVNews/20020121/ctvnews839240/20020121/?hub=TorontoNewHome

          • Bruce from Etobicoke says:

            Patrick – thanks, but I already knew all that.

            That’s why I responded with my questions in the first place – why is it that whenever Walkerton comes up no one ever mentions the guys who caused it and they only talk about the Government’s role – as if the Kobels and the Town weren’t even involved?

            When people casually throw out Walkerton as an example of Government failure it’s almost as if they want us to believe Mike Harris dumped manure down the wells in person.

            There are plenty of examples of government failure in this country to cite without resorting to a flawed one like Walkerton.

        • Bruce from Etobicoke says:

          How come people always want to talk about the Government that cut back funding for inspections, but no one ever talks about the good ol’ public service employees that didn’t treat the water and covered up the fact they didn’t? The best inspection protocol in the world can’t beat falsified records unless the inspectors are living at the plant because they already know there’s a problem there. Ask any Health Inspector how many meat slicers he dismantles in a day – before a Listeria outbreak.

          Why aren’t people asking (still) why the guys who committed the crime weren’t charged and convicted for murder instead of worrying about why the cover up wasn’t exposed sooner?

          If I have a dead relative or lingering effects as a result of the Walkerton public utility employees failing to prevent poisoning my water supply by carrying out their duties, why isn’t it a Kobel Legacy?

          Just asking.

          • Bruce from Etobicoke says:

            Oh, and don’t get me wrong. I consider Hudak an empty suit that has yet to enunciate a single policy besides “Look at me, I’m no Dalton McGuinty”, so I’m not defending that empty head. I’m genuinely asking how you think a crime and a cover up that killed people would make you blame a Government program that had a zero chance of beating the cheaters. Zero.

  22. Patrick says:

    I doubt Hudak’s reversal will cost him anything at election time. Most people in Ontario don’t even know who he is.
    He didn’t have a very high profile in the Harris years. I can’t see people a couple of months from now being very interested in his past opinions. People are going tobe focussed on what type of person he seems like and what his platform is.

  23. He used about half of the Progressive Conservative membership by pretending he would scrap HRCs (which, incidentally, were HRTs, by that time…but why let law and the facts of reality get in the way when one is merely trying to win a party leadership by capitalizing on the Levant and Mcleans stories?).

    Apparently he also used them with respect to the Health Premium.

    Let’s see how much use the very same conservatives have for Mr. Hudak come October 6, 2011.

    P

  24. Blackhawskfan says:

    Last comment was on wrong page.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*