Allandale25
Senior Member
^ I think it's the same article as I posted here: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/hurontario-lrt-metrolinx.3299/post-1394943
Who idea to cancel this project? Construction already started in some part of Hurontario. If they choice that project is become waste of money for the taxpayers and we work so hard for the money.
Why did the current government decide to reopen this topic again when the money already funded by the previous government. Transit on Hurontario aren't going well because there are too much traffic congestion and more car are on the roads, so don't cancel this project at all to keep people moving.
While I do not believe it should be cancelled at this point....I don't think a ton has been done....in fact, I think all that has happened is some utilities relocations which is neither here nor there really.Who idea to cancel this project? Construction already started in some part of Hurontario. If they choice that project is become waste of money for the taxpayers and we work so hard for the money.
The current government hasn't reopen or closed anything. This media article was spurred by a question from the NDP Transportation Critic to the Minister.
Surely their logic would be that now that they have cancelled cap and trade, they have to look at whether they can go ahead with the projects that those cap and trade revenues were going to fund.....transit expansion being the biggest ticket item of those, I believe.But clearly the PC's are comfortable throwing doubt about supporting previous Liberal transit commitments. Cancelling Cap and Trade shows they will use absolutely no fiscal logic to reverse course.
Jo: Just about to post this in another string on the 'cap and trade' imbroglio, which is going to eat them whole (or is it 'hole' in this case?):But clearly the PC's are comfortable throwing doubt about supporting previous Liberal transit commitments. Cancelling Cap and Trade shows they will use absolutely no fiscal logic to reverse course.
https://www.thestar.com/politics/pr...-out-at-progressive-conservative-enemies.html[...]In the book, Brown is at his most pointed when calling out his former colleagues for their policy U-turns.
He notes when he led the party, PC MPPs “voted for carbon pricing.” The Tories now oppose that and are spending $30 million on a constitutional challenge against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s carbon-pricing plan that Brown endorsed.
“I have kept emails in which Vic Fedeli reiterated this was a great idea,” he writes, referring to Ford’s finance minister, now an ardent opponent of putting a price on carbon.
Similarly, Brown recalls Mulroney, now the attorney general, “had been a big believer in climate change and carbon pricing.”
Surely their logic would be that now that they have cancelled cap and trade, they have to look at whether they can go ahead with the projects that those cap and trade revenues were going to fund.....transit expansion being the biggest ticket item of those, I believe.
I don't think there is any doubt that the $15B is inflated.......it includes the cost of things the Liberals promised (but never actually spent) but not the revenue that the PCs have already cut (ie cap and trade).....you and I may not agree with the concept but the next logical thing in their exercise is to then cancel the things that the cap and trade was going to pay for ....thus slaying a big part of the $15B deficit they are saying is there.....and then they just have to deal with the regular old deficit that we all knew we had (assuming they are using the auditor general's accounting methodology rather than Charles Sousa's )'Logic' is a strong word with the PC government. I would more argue that their inflated deficit numbers (which many experts would says is several billion more than the actual deficit, but that's another story) is a much stronger motivator for cutting funding commitments.
I don't think there is any doubt that the $15B is inflated.......it includes the cost of things the Liberals promised (but never actually spent) but not the revenue that the PCs have already cut (ie cap and trade).....you and I may not agree with the concept but the next logical thing in their exercise is to then cancel the things that the cap and trade was going to pay for ....thus slaying a big part of the $15B deficit they are saying is there.....and then they just have to deal with the regular old deficit that we all knew we had (assuming they are using the auditor general's accounting methodology rather than Charles Sousa's )