187 Search Results for wynne

Angus Reid released its semi-regular Premier thing last week, and I missed it with all the Nazi-fighting.  But, as usual, it tells a story:

The poll may or may not be accurate, 21 times out of 20, plus or minus 101 points.  But it sure is fun to prognosticate about.

Some quick takes:

• At the top, Brad Wall is the Energizer Bunny of Canadian politics – he just keeps on ticking.  It’s amazing, given (a) how long he’s been there and (b) the state of the oil industry.  This guy is becoming a legend in Canadian politics.
• At the bottom, Kathleen Wynne has been at or near the bottom of this regular poll for a long time – it can’t be dismissed anymore as an aberration or something that can be magically fixed.  I know her well enough to know she will do the right thing for herself and her party.
• Near the top, Christy Clark.  Her third place position, here, belies the conventional wisdom in some circles in B.C.  And, this week, we will see why: she has appropriated key elements of the BC NDP and BC Green platforms for her Throne Speech, and she is forcing them this week to vote against same.  She will then use that vote as a club to beat them with in the election that comes shortly thereafter.  Genius, actually.
• Near the bottom, Rachel Notley in my home province is still somewhat competitive – for an Opposition role.  With the PC-Wildrose forces about to commence a civil war for control, I continue to believe that the beneficiary of the Conservative Wars will be my brilliant friend Dave Khan, the Alberta Liberal leader.  Dave is the guy to watch, next time.  (And I will be out there, helping out.)

What do you think, O Smart Reader?  Who’s really up, who’s really down? Opine away!

Comments (12)

Alt-Right wants to fire Kathleen Wynne. Vehicle driven, shockingly, by porcine old white guy. 

Oh, and snap election? Who does that benefit, exactly?

Comments (5)

Let’s recap.

1. The Ontario PCs raised $16 million last year, and the Ontario Liberals – the, you know, government – raised $6 million.  Ten million less.  The government.
2. The most powerful mayor in Canada – a very, very popular guy who has helped the governing Liberals out of many tight spots – has all but declared war on them. And Ontario’s extremely ambitious Transport minister is Number One on John Tory’s hit list, now.  Not good.
3. And, last night in the Sault, the Ontario Liberal Party came third in a crucial by-election – and the PCs, who haven’t held that seat since the 1981 election, crushed them with more than 40 per cent of the vote.

That’s just the past week. Previous weeks have been just as crummy, if not more so.  The budgetary goodies, the Hydro rate cut and youth pharmacare haven’t really done what they were supposed to do.

Radical change is needed.  Three suggestions:

1. Fire the Wizard.  The “chief strategist” is doing to the OLP what the Wizard and his pals did to the LPC ten years ago: killing it.  Get rid of that crew, now, and bring in people who know how to win.
2. New blood, new ideas.  The OLP desperately needs both.  Caucus – and some excellent staff in the Premier’s Office and minister’s offices – say the same thing: the OLP brand is strong, but it needs excitement.  It needs new and better ideas.  It needs new blood, in the form of some impressive candidates and thinkers.
3. Reflect.  I know Kathleen Wynne.  I’ve worked with Kathleen Wynne.  I admire Kathleen Wynne.  And I know that Kathleen Wynne will not let the Ontario Liberal Party go down to third place in 2018.  She will do the right thing.  If she is dragging down the party, she will make the selfless decision.

As of this month, the election is twelve months away.  That leaves enough time – barely – to make some big changes.

Let’s make them, now.

 

Comments (20)

It’s difficult to understate the political importance of the Ontario government’s 25 per cent hydro rate cut: all of the chips are riding on it, pretty much.  Youth pharmacare and free tuition are terrific, but they’re aimed at a demographic who don’t vote.  The hydro rate cut, ipso facto, is the sine qua non.  If it doesn’t fly, the Ontario Libs are in big trouble.

So, check out this Toronto Star Queen’s Park bureau scoop, which apparently emanated from the Ontario PC war room:

The short-term gain of a 25-per-cent hydro rate cut this summer could lead to long-term pain as a leaked cabinet document forecasts prices jumping again in five years.

In the briefing materials first revealed by the Star and obtained by the Progressive Conservatives, rates will start rising 6.5 per cent a year in 2022 and top out at 10.5 per cent in 2028, when average monthly bills hit $215.

That would be up from $123 this year once the rate cut — the subject of long-awaited legislation unveiled Thursday by Energy Minister Glenn Thibeault — takes full effect. 

The leaked papers overshadowed Thibeault’s efforts to tout the price break, which will be followed with four years of hydro rate increases at 2 per cent, roughly the rate of inflation.

This is revelation is disastrous, pretty much. It discredits just about every claim that has been made about hydro for the past several months.  And it landed, literally, while I was having expresso with a long-time Ontario Liberal stalwart, a Kathleen Wynne loyalist, who had told me they were going to “sit out the next election.”

If this secret cabinet document is true – and it likely is – all that is left is a hoped-for bump from the budget.  So, where is the polling to show that there was one?  Given how much the wizards are being paid for research, you’d think the Liberal caucus would have been shown it by now.

Over espresso, yesterday, my old friend said we are going to come third in the upcoming Sault by-election.  After yesterday, I don’t doubt it.

 

Comments (12)

So, I opined on Twitter that the neo-Nazi Le Pen cannot win in the next round of the French residential elections. It’s a widely-held view; the odds are decidedly against the Trump-favoured fascists in the next round.

That single tweet elicited this response from an Ottawa actor (who, tellingly, is a New Democrat):

@kinsellawarren “And Trump will never win.” Why do you (and so many others) presume to know political outcomes with such certainty when so much has changed?

— Sean Devine (@DevineSean) April 24, 2017

So, I found that rather irritating, because it fell into one of the categories of Twitter things that are rather irritating to me:

1. People who ask me to do their research, instead of doing their own damn research.  Also, rhetorical tweets.
2. Passive-aggressive tweets.
3. People who tweet hate, naturally.
4. Humourless, pious people who are online hall monitors, perpetually tsk-tsking everyone else, and acting like God made them the arbiter of all that is morally/ethically/politically correct.
5. People who (like Sean, above) who cling to the (now popular) view that nothing is knowable.

In politics, you hear from the Not Knowable People all the time.  They’re like the Pharisees of the modern age.  To wit: you guys all said Kathleen Wynne wouldn’t win in 2014, but she did! You guys all said Donald Trump wouldn’t win in 2016, but he did!  Ha!

[Pithy responses, respectively:  The Ontario Libs didn’t win so much as the Ontario PCs lost.  There’s a difference, idiot.  And: Trump didn’t win.  He cheated in the electoral college, with the help of Russia and thousands of hackers, and Hillary got three million more votes than he did, which should count for something in a sane universe.]

This crew – this “nothing is knowable anymore” crew – drive me bananas.  Like the Pharisees, mediocrity is their medium.  Beige is their colour, and tapioca is their manna. They never take any risks, they never venture a strong opinion, and they are therefore never shown to be wrong about anything.  Like J. Alfred Prufrock, they doubt everything and know nothing.

As you might have gleaned over the past 15 years or so, the author of this web site is not shy about offering an opinion every so often.  He – and I know him quite well, so trust me – likes people who are colourful and creative and who take risks.  He despises Prufrock-like bureaucrats.  Dare I eat a peach?

I do, I do.  I dare. I’m going to keep daring to eat peaches, bushels of ’em, until I am booted off this mortal coil.  As my journalism prof Roger Bird said to me in response to a post a few days ago:  “You were a part of the continuing reward of teaching in the School of Journalism. It took a very short time for me to recognize stars soon after they walked through the door. You were among them of course. Beyond that, you were a shit disturber. My inner rule for such was, don’t get in their way. Clearly I followed the rule and you went on to do much good in the world.”

I will keep Roger’s note around until I croak.  It is a wonderful and needed shield against the Know-Nothings on Twitter. Meanwhile, you Twitter people who are lazy – or who hate, or who are too clever by half, or who are pious, or who say nothing is knowable?

You irritate us, but you won’t ever beat us.

 

 

Comments (13)

So, there’s a Toronto Star story this morning about Kathleen Wynne’s political future. By my count, it has five sources in it who are quoted directly, but not named. There are three other people quoted in it: Wynne, her Finance Minister, and a guy who doesn’t want to be quoted.

A snippet:

Sources told the Star that more than a dozen MPPs are looking at not running again in the 2018 election over fears they will lose their seats due to her unpopularity.

No MPPs will yet speak publicly about the potential exodus — more out of their personal regard for Wynne than‎ due to a fear of retribution.

But some are known to be considering an appeal to her en masse‎ to share their worries about the future.

Quite apart from whether this kind of story is fair to Kathleen Wynne or not – she’s in politics, and she has likely authorized many people to speak anonymously on her behalf over the years – this kind of story is possibly unfair to readers. Among other things, these sorts of tales require the reader to trust the paper, trust the reporter, and – most importantly – trust the anonymous source.

Should we? I mean, if these folks feel so passionately about the need for Kathleen Wynne to step down, shouldn’t they say so, publicly?  Shouldn’t they attach their name to their conviction?

I like what the International Journalists’ Network has to say about the issue:

Media professionals everywhere in the world grapple with the thorny issue of anonymity. It can be a double-edged sword.

According to the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), “Anonymous sources are sometimes the only key to unlocking a big story, throwing back the curtain on corruption, fulfilling the journalistic missions of watchdog on the government and informant to citizens. But sometimes, anonymous sources are the road to the ethical swamp.”

The SPJ code of ethics makes two important points on anonymity:

1. Identity sources whenever possible. The public is entitled to as much information as can be provided on sources’ reliability.

2. Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.

The problem surfaced recently in The New York Times’ newsroom. In March, the newspaper’s top management cracked down on anonymity, sparked by readers’ complaints about “persistent” use of unnamed sources. The new guidelines require editors to approve the use of anonymity in stories.

“Direct quotes from anonymous sources should be used rarely, and only when such quotes are pivotal to the story,” according to the July 15 article explaining the crackdown. “At least one editor must know the specific identity of any anonymous source before publication.”

The Toronto Star is one of the best newspapers in the world. It is. The reporter in question has been on the Queen’s Park beat for many years, and is considered to really know his stuff. And, as noted, Kathleen Wynne is a grown-up politician, and she knows how the game is played.

But, if you were to ask the public about important public issues – say, who their Premier is, and is going to be – they would probably indicate a preference for knowing who a source is, and what that person’s agenda is, so they can decide whether he or she is credible or not.

It’s not that reputable reporters or newspapers lie: in my experience, that almost never happens outside of Russia and dictatorships.  It’s that anonymous sources do.

So, at the end of this windy exposition, does anyone have a clear sense of what is happening with Kathleen Wynne?

No, not really.  And that’s the problem with the false god of anonymous sources: you just don’t know, you know?

 

Comments (17)

It’s Forum. It’s early. It’s voodoo seat projection. But:

The poll found not only would the Liberals suffer a crushing defeat in the election, they would also lose official party status.

The poll suggests voters would elect the Progressive Conservatives with a huge majority at 43 per cent support, while the NDP would be the Official Opposition at 28 per cent. The Liberals would be in third place at 19 per cent support.

The Tories would snag 86 seats with the NDP at 29 seats. The Liberals would only manage to snag seven seats. Right now, there are 107 seats at Queen’s Park, but that will rise to 122 seats in the 2018 election. Parties need eight seats to maintain official party status in Ontario.

I’ve got the smartest political commenters around. So, a serious question: if you were Kathleen Wynne, what would you do to fix this? 

Be specific. Be serious. Be strategic. The smartest suggestions will be posted below, soon. 

Comments (45)

Greg Sorbara was on Steve Paikin’s The Agenda last night on TVO.  I was at Strombo’s place watching Against Me! play in Strombo’s living room, so I missed Steve’s show.  But I certainly heard about it afterwards.

On Paikin’s much-watched program, Greg Sorbara did to Kathleen Wynne in 2017 what he did to Jean Chretien in 2002: he went out onto the public airwaves and called for the resignation of a sitting, elected, majority party leader.  One he had previously supported.

Federally, we all know how that genius strategy turned out, don’t we?  In the case of my former boss, Martinet thuggery persuaded him to stay way longer than he’d planned.  His unctuous successor blew the Liberal Party of Canada to bits, and was thereafter relegated to a historical footnote.  Take that, mutineers.  Put that in your pipe, Greg.

So, anyway: Greg is at it again, 15 years later.  You will perhaps understand why I’ve never been a fan.

Oh, and this, too. It’s an anecdote: way back in 2009 or so, I got a call one day.  It was from a friend who worked, at a quite senior level, for Ontario Finance Minister Greg Sorbara.

“Um, the Minister would like you to stop being critical of his friend Bob Rae on your web site,” she said.

“I beg your pardon?” I said.

She was very, very uncomfortable, and said so.  “I didn’t want to make this call,” she said.  “I said it was a bad idea.”

“It was,” I said to my friend. “Nobody tells me what to write, ever. You tell the Minister to go to Hell, okay?”

I let the Premier and a few others know what had happened, and it didn’t happen again.   Greg Sorbara kept away from me, and eventually left provincial politics.

On The Agenda last night, Greg was back to his old tricks.  He supported Jean Chretien, then cheerfully played the role of Brutus.  He supported Kathleen Wynne, and is reprising the Brutus role.

I don’t know for sure who Greg Sorbara is trying to help out with all this crap.  But I’ll tell you one thing.

It isn’t helping that Minister, or the Ontario Liberal Party, at all.

 

 

 

Comments (7)

Dear Mutineers:

My experience is that this sort of thing doesn’t ever work.  If leaders are going to take a walk in the snow, you gotta let ’em do it on their own, boys and girls.

My Boss would’ve left a lot sooner if the Martinite minions hadn’t tried to force him out.  And then, when Team Juggernaut finally got in, all they’d succeeded in doing was blowing to bits the most successful political party in Western democracy.  Prime Minister Blip, bon soir.

(And, is it deeply ironic that the Martinite campaign folks who tanked the party in Ottawa are the selfsame Martinite campaign folks who are now tanking the party in Toronto? Why, yes.  Yes, it is indeed ironic.)

Anyway. Will Kathleen Wynne go?  Beats me.  But it’s up to her.  My hunch: if the 25 per cent Hydro cut – and the balanced budget, and various other budgetary goodies – don’t move the needle in the right direction, she won’t want to go down with the ship.  Who would?

That said, Crawley is below, and the link to this (clumsy) web site is here.

Here is the message from unnamed Liberals calling on Premier @Kathleen_Wynne to resign for the good of the party https://t.co/m1mptEXyL2

— Mike Crawley (@CBCQueensPark) March 8, 2017

Comments (12)

Huge scoop from the Star:

Premier Kathleen Wynne will slash electricity rates by 25 per cent this year, the Star has learned.

In a dramatic move to be finalized at cabinet Wednesday, Wynne’s government is poised to unveil sweeping measures to rein in the soaring hydro bills that currently have the Liberals’ popularity plummeting.

Sources say the massive reduction in rates will come mostly by “smoothing out” the financing costs of electricity generation contracts over longer periods.

It’s the equivalent of refinancing a mortgage to enjoy lower payments over a longer time on nuclear reactors, natural gas-fired power plants, and wind turbines.

Wynne’s office refused to confirm details of the 25 per cent solution Tuesday night.

What thinkest thou, O wk.com readers? That’s a big cut. Will it help their political fortunes? Make ’em worse? Make no difference?

Comment away!

Comments (36)