News   Jul 16, 2024
 322     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
 428     2 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 1.2K     3 

2018 Ontario Provincial Election Discussion

So the Liberals knew Hydro was a concern going back all the way to 2013- but chose not to do anything until they lost a byelection last year. Can this be considered incompetence or just willful ignorance?

Ontario Liberals knew hydro was No. 1 concern long before relief announced

TORONTO – Ontario’s government learned from its own polling that the rising cost of hydro was people’s top concern 10 months before the Liberals publicly acknowledged it and announced an eight-per-cent reduction on electricity bills.

The government-commissioned polling from 2013 to 2016 – examined by The Canadian Press – tells a tale of increasing distress about hydro rates over months, even years before across-the-board relief was introduced.

Monthly tracking shows that in December 2013, the cost of electricity became the worst-ranked issue based on performance, with 70 per cent of respondents saying the government was on the wrong track.

Specific questions on electricity appear in July 2014 and again in March 2015, when polling found most people had done something in the past year to make their homes more energy efficient, and a majority supported the often-maligned time-of-use pricing.

Then in November 2015, electricity – and the privatization of Hydro One – surged to become a top issue of concern in the province, with 13 per cent of respondents saying it should be the government’s top priority, over perennial concerns such as health, jobs, the economy and education.

In just one month, the percentage of respondents who rated the government’s performance on controlling electricity prices as poor jumped from 38 per cent in October to 47 per cent in November.


By January 2016, jobs, the economy and health took over as areas of greater concern for the next few months, but the Gandalf Group polling told the government that controlling electricity prices was among its main perceived weaknesses and communications should focus on it.

Government responses to opposition questions about rising hydro bills over much of the 2013 to 2016 time frame focused on defending the cost of hydro as the result of building a clean and reliable system, while highlighting measures the government had already taken to lower consumer costs, such as a low-income support program and removing the debt retirement charge.

It wasn’t until a Sept. 1 byelection loss that the government’s tune changed.


“We heard at the door that hydro rates are increasingly challenging for people,” Premier Kathleen Wynne said in a statement that night. “I understand, as do my ministers, that the government needs to focus on helping people with their everyday expenses.”


Deputy Progressive Conservative leader Steve Clark said only when the Liberals’ political fortunes were at risk did they take hydro costs seriously.

“Once the Liberal brand lost a seat that they had held for decades, they finally listened to the opposition and started to make some changes,” he said.

The inclusion of the eight-per-cent rebate in the government’s throne speech less than two weeks later suggests the plan was already well developed by Sept. 1. But the premier has acknowledged she should have acted sooner, a spokeswoman said.

In question period Monday, the premier listed measures that were enacted earlier, such as reducing feed-in-tariff prices, renegotiating a green energy deal with Samsung, deferring new nuclear construction and delaying the start of other nuclear refurbishment, all of which save the system billions.

Wynne also mentioned the removal of the debt retirement charge, as well as a low-income support program and one for rural residents introduced in March 2015.

“That was a direct recognition that people were paying too much on their electricity bills and a direct support for people who were paying too much on their electricity bills, particularly low-income families,” Wynne said.

While Wynne’s eight-per-cent rebate was welcomed – almost 90 per cent of respondents in October supported it – it didn’t resonate quite as widely as the government likely hoped. Still only 36 per cent said the government was doing a good job of controlling electricity prices.

“Of utmost importance to Ontarians for government’s attention is electricity costs,” the polling research said.

“And, evaluations of the government’s performance at controlling electricity prices are worsening. Those who report being more familiar with government’s recent eight-per-cent reduction of electricity prices are also more likely to evaluate the government poorly on this issue. Essentially, the solution is not proportionate to the perceived magnitude of the problem.”

Fast-forward to March 2017 and the premier announced a further 17-per-cent average reduction on bills, holding increases to the rate of inflation for four years, cuts to delivery charges for some rural customers, eliminating the delivery charge for on-reserve First Nations customers, expanding a low-income support program and establishing a new home energy efficiency improvement fund.

Angus Reid polling conducted after that announcement found that Wynne’s popularity continued to plummet to record lows, but 62 per cent of respondents said the reduction in hydro bills would be an important factor in deciding how they’ll vote in next year’s election.

The polling was conducted until October 2015 by Pollara, and from then on by the Gandalf Group.

http://globalnews.ca/news/3336335/o...as-no-1-concern-long-before-relief-announced/
 
I condone corruption and scandal because they are progressive is a very pathetic answer guys...

I have news for you:
The provincial PC and NDP are cut from the same cloth of corruption and incompetence as the provincial Liberals.


So by your logic Jasmine, unless you stay home on election day, you "condone corruption and scandal". Have a good day.
 
A vote for the NDP is a vote for Patrick Brown as Premier. Take one look at an electoral map.

If you're a progressive, vote for the Liberals so that we can actually have a government that invests in transit, education, and healthcare, is serious about fighting climate change, understands what the Greenbelt actually is and does and is willing to protect it, knows how to manage an economy, doesn't condone homophobia, etc., etc., etc.

Time to try a different party in a minority-setting. The Liberals need to lose the next election so they could regroup in the corner.
 
Time to try a different party in a minority-setting. The Liberals need to lose the next election so they could regroup in the corner.

What good would that achieve? This isn't timeouts from kindergarten; this is large-scale policymaking that dramatically affects people's lives.

I'd really rather not have the Tories dismantle the progress we've seen in the GTA on transit and halt further investment, scrap the greenbelt, cut funding to schools and hospitals, etc.

I think people are either ignoring or forgetting how much progress a party can undo in a period of just a few years.
 
What good would that achieve? This isn't timeouts from kindergarten; this is large-scale policymaking that dramatically affects people's lives.

I'd really rather not have the Tories dismantle the progress we've seen in the GTA on transit and halt further investment, scrap the greenbelt, cut funding to schools and hospitals, etc.

I think people are either ignoring or forgetting how much progress a party can undo in a period of just a few years.

I think the Liberals are heading to third party status next year. The best scenario is a PC minority with a NDP + Liberal coalition holding the balance of power.
 
What good would that achieve? This isn't timeouts from kindergarten; this is large-scale policymaking that dramatically affects people's lives.

I'd really rather not have the Tories dismantle the progress we've seen in the GTA on transit and halt further investment, scrap the greenbelt, cut funding to schools and hospitals, etc.

I think people are either ignoring or forgetting how much progress a party can undo in a period of just a few years.


You need to stop with the 'Remember what Mike Harris did?' 'Remember what Bob Rae did?' You have to look past that and give someone else an opportunity to do things. PC or NDP as a minority government for 1-2 years would be okay. The Liberals really have to regroup on the sidelines and come back stronger.
 
What good would that achieve? This isn't timeouts from kindergarten; this is large-scale policymaking that dramatically affects people's lives.

I'd really rather not have the Tories dismantle the progress we've seen in the GTA on transit and halt further investment, scrap the greenbelt, cut funding to schools and hospitals, etc.

I think people are either ignoring or forgetting how much progress a party can undo in a period of just a few years.

Hence the reason for a minority government of any political stripe- which can be held accountable for their actions & will need to compromise to get their motions passed rather than ramming them through without oversight.
 
I think the Liberals are heading to third party status next year. The best scenario is a PC minority with a NDP + Liberal coalition holding the balance of power.

That's definitely a possibility, though I still think a Liberal-NDP majority coalition is in the cards. I think people forget just how many seats the Liberals have and where they are. The PCs only have 9 more seats than the NDP right now.
 
You need to stop with the 'Remember what Mike Harris did?' 'Remember what Bob Rae did?' You have to look past that and give someone else an opportunity to do things. PC or NDP as a minority government for 1-2 years would be okay. The Liberals really have to regroup on the sidelines and come back stronger.

...And instead assume that Mike Harris is the only proponent of a conservative ideology? We know where these parties generally stand on things completely independent of Patrick Brown, Kathleen Wynne, and Andrea Horwath.
 
That's definitely a possibility, though I still think a Liberal-NDP majority coalition is in the cards. I think people forget just how many seats the Liberals have and where they are. The PCs only have 9 more seats than the NDP right now.

I think it's unlikely, but possible. The NDP would need to steamroll the PCs in the SW Ontario rust belt - where the Dippers are currently edging them - and the Liberals would have to remain competitive in Toronto and Peel, where they are currently out-polled by the PCs. This would lead to a scenario - with the expanded 124 seat legislature - where PCs would be in the 55-60 range (62 for a majority), NDP 40-45 and Liberals 25-30.

Recent seat projections have the Liberals in the low to mid teens, which would be an even bigger collapse than the Rae government in 1995.
 
I think it's unlikely, but possible. The NDP would need to outpoll the PCs in SW Ontario - which it currently is - and the Liberals would have to remain competitive in Toronto and Peel, where they are currently outpolled by the PCs. This would lead to a scenario - with the expanded 124 seat legislature - where PCs would be in the 55-60 range (62 for a majority), NDP 40-45 and Liberals 25-30.

Recent seat projections have the Liberals in the teens, which would be an even bigger collapse than the Rae government in 1995.

Yeah, broadly fair, but the thing with the polling as it stands right now is that we don't even know who the candidates will be in the majority of ridings. Many graduate theses have been written trying to determine the impact of party leadership on voting behaviour in parliamentary systems, but there's of course no consensus (and perhaps never will be).

Long way of saying it's much too early to tell (though still fun to prognosticate, as always). I just think it's too declarative and reductionist to say "look at the Premier's approval ratings, the Liberals are doomed to third party status" because there's just so much time left before the election.
 
Yeah, broadly fair, but the thing with the polling as it stands right now is that we don't even know who the candidates will be in the majority of ridings. Many graduate theses have been written trying to determine the impact of party leadership on voting behaviour in parliamentary systems, but there's of course no consensus (and perhaps never will be).

Long way of saying it's much too early to tell (though still fun to prognosticate, as always). I just think it's too declarative and reductionist to say "look at the Premier's approval ratings, the Liberals are doomed to third party status" because there's just so much time left before the election.

That's fair... and people thought the Liberals were toast in 2007 and 2011, and particularly in 2014, yet the PCs lost all three times in what was supposed to be a walk to victory. I think 2018 is much different. Wynne's disapproval ratings re unprecedented in modern Ontario politics. There is a level of angst in the province that is palpable, even among typical Liberal voting blocs like the urban chattering class.

Even with inevitable PC campaign missteps - like some of the Evangelical Christian base getting vocal - I think the Liberal sinkhole is so big that even the PCs can't mess it up.
 
Even if it were later in the game, recent events have demonstrated that advance polling is not particularly accurate. The people who respond to polls =/= the people who actually vote. (See: Ontario 2014, Brexit, USA 2016)

The people who respond disproportionately to pollsters (if the 2014 election is any indication) are the same ones who read the Sun and listen to wingnut radio stations. The people who decide elections in Ontario- moderate suburbanites- are too busy with their jobs, kids, and lawns.

Don't count the Liberals out just yet.
 
I think people are either ignoring or forgetting how much progress a party can undo in a period of just a few years.
I think it is quite clear, especially with the federal example.

Canada raised the debt under Harper by about 26% (the smallest amount in the G7) and then returned finally returned to balanced. In 16 months, the Liberals have thrown up $50B in debt and have nothing to show for it. It is amazing how fast things can be ruined by a reckless government.
 
I think it is quite clear, especially with the federal example.

Canada raised the debt under Harper by about 26% (the smallest amount in the G7) and then returned finally returned to balanced. In 16 months, the Liberals have thrown up $50B in debt and have nothing to show for it. It is amazing how fast things can be ruined by a reckless government.

...Except for all the things we have to show for it.
 

Back
Top