quote:

---

Originally posted by janfromthebruce:
Sure hope this thread doesn't end in bullying for want of something better to do.

---

I like Peggy a lot, but she's not in the race. Should she join the race, she'd have my support.

Prue strikes me as being the worst of both worlds - he is also totally uncharismatic in front of audience - plus he doesn't seem to bring anything to the table in terms of ideas or brainpower. He may have been good at fixing potholes as mayor or East York - but where is the vision for the province as a whole.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
The issue is who has the better vision for the party and the province and who is willing to do the grunt work in building coalitions and organizing across the province.

---

The viciously antidemocratic way he rammed through the position on property taxes is just unacceptable for anybody who would be the leader of the party.

It was also beautiful in Toronto. I took a long walk and stopped at all kinds of food shops you can't get in Bruce County.

I'll send you and email to let you know what I was up to.

BA

Actually I can't. My new computer doesn't have your email. I'll PM you.

[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: Bookish Agrarian ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
We're still waiting for some participants in the previous thread to say whom they favour for leader.

They know who they are.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
You jumped all over Bisson right off the bat in another thread for merely making mention of the economy here in Ontario.

---

False. I criticized his statement for insinuating that social policy and economic policy were separate, and trotting out the canard about fiscal responsibility.

quote:

---

Some of us scoff now, but Bisson's emphasis on the economy now will seem prophetic for voters in Ontario come next election.

---

What does it mean to "emphasize the economy"? Stuff gold in the pockets of the rich? Take gold from their pockets and give it to the poor? Subsidize failing industry? Hands off? Nationalize some key enterprises in key sectors?

"Emphasizing the economy" is meaningless pap designed to play to the most brutish consciousness created by the Libs and Cons that they are good managers while the NDP is not. If Bisson (or anyone) wants to compete with them on their chosen field and let them set the agenda, then Ontarians will need a fourth party.

quote:

---

"Emphasizing the economy" is meaningless pap designed to play to the most brutish consciousness created by the Libs and Cons that they are good managers while the NDP is not. If Bisson (or anyone) wants to compete with them on their chosen field and let them set the agenda, then Ontarians will need a fourth party.

---

It means none of these things in a general sense, u, as you know. And I find your denial of "economy is important" - in fact your demonizing it - rather contradictory given your interest in orange shift. Should that become orange "shit" (a favourite metaphor).

Obviously, if one is actually afraid to talk about the economy - which generally means keeping the old wheels of industry turning (and yes, oiling them) - entering into the radical reo-alignment of the productive sector in economic and even structural terms will mean more than a call to the economists. Which is where I believe you left off.

Maybe your thoughts have changed regarding attempts to be pro-active. Or maybe it's just easier slipping into the traditional role of critic of "big business, corporations, bosses" etc.

I believe Peggy Nash IS probably the best for the job.

And, I'm not sure that she hasn't moved on from a simple view of things economic given her Ottawa experience.

I believe the economy is primordial. I just don't like social democrats who try to sound like CEOs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

What does it mean to "emphasize the economy"? Stuff gold in the pockets of the rich? Take gold from their pockets and give it to the poor? Subsidize failing industry? Hands off? Nationalize some key enterprises in key sectors?

"Emphasizing the economy" is meaningless pap designed to play to the most brutish consciousness created by the Libs and Cons that they are good managers while the NDP is not. If Bisson (or anyone) wants to compete with them on their chosen field and let them set the agenda, then Ontarians will need a fourth party.

That's why I support Peggy Nash. As a trade union militant all her life, it will be harder for her to buy in the bullshit that "what's good for business is good for Ontario". If and when she does, of course, it will be time to look elsewhere. But while the Bissons of this world talk about issues they clearly don't understand (like "the economy"), Peggy breathed life into the minimum wage movement. When Bisson says "we need Ontarians to earn higher wages", I'll listen to him. Not until.

---

You're right. It isn't like we can think of any examples of leadership in the CAW who have bought into that mentality

from just this week

quote:

---

“That’s a pretty scary thought, that the minister who’s responsible for the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission (ONTC) and ultimately the ONR is not aware that you’re using your managers to cross the picket line in order to train the management at Xstrata to run the rail system that runs ore from the mine to the metallurgical site,”

---

quote:

---

Wannabe political leaders always talk about the economy. The point, however, is to change it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Left J.A.B.:
I am not likely to support Bisson. But you are being completly unfair to and untruthful about someone who has been on the right side of issues you claim to support for a very, very long time.

---

Let me put this in point form:

1. I have nothing against Gilles Bisson and his record (about which, incidentally, I know nothing).

2. I praise and hail his statement against crossing of the Xstrata strikers' picket line.

3. My comments - all my comments - in the original thread were aimed at Bisson's condescending and pandering campaign launch speech.

You were absent from that discussion, so why not have a look at it - or at least have a look at Bisson's speech - and tell me what (if anything) you like about it. I'm sure Bisson is as wonderful a person in real life as his stand in support of the Xstrata workers would indicate. But his campaign launch speech is pandering obscurantist pap. As I said in that thread:

quote:

---

But Gilles Bisson doesn't say, "I'll take from the rich and give to the poor", or "We'll make sure corporate profit is strictly controlled so that the fruit of production is ploughed back into social needs." He just says he'll pay attention to economic issues.

As if neo-cons don't?

It's all code, telling big business they have nothing to fear from an NDP government. It says nothing to workers.

---

In fact much of it hits the head on the nail in terms of problems of public perception and problems within the party.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Left J.A.B.:
Did read and your claims about Bisson are untruthful and unfair.

---

Friendly suggestion: Try disagreeing with people's statements without repeating (twice) that they are "untruthful". Or: Show how they are "untruthful". Please do.

quote:

---

In fact much of it hits the head on the nail in terms of problems of public perception and problems within the party.

---

No, it panders to it. It would be better to analyse that public perception and show how it can be corrected.

quote:

---

By the way, just becuase someone doesn't post in a thread doesn't mean they haven't read it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Left J.A.B.:
You are untruthfully claiming the Bisson is beholden to some neo-can view of economics. You have no basis for this claim yet you keep making it- that my friend is untruthful.

---

I never said any such thing. I said this:

quote:

---

I just don't like social democrats who try to sound like CEOs.

---

I'm sure "your friend" is a wonderful sincere guy. Please tell him - for me - that he doesn't have to sound like a neocon or a neolib or CEO to become leader and win votes. I DIDN'T SAY HE WAS BEHOLDEN TO ANY NEOCON ANYTHING. I'm referring strictly to the condescending, pandering method in which he TALKS. It's insulting and it lowers the level of political discourse to exactly where our enemies would like it to go.

quote:

---

And Bisson is right in saying this is the perception by the mass of the public, including good dues paying union members that the NDP will squander thier tax dollars.

---

Whether he's right or wrong, it will certainly become a self-fulfilling prophecy if Bisson and his ilk keep talking that way. "No, really, I won't squander your tax dollars, honest!!" Great strategy. Brilliant.

quote:

---

So yes your continued claim is - gasp - untruthful.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
That's why I support Peggy Nash. As a trade union militant all her life, it will be harder for her to buy in the bullshit that "what's good for business is good for Ontario".

When Bisson says "we need Ontarians to earn higher wages", I'll listen to him. Not until.

I have nothing against Gilles Bisson and his record (about which, incidentally, I know nothing).

---

quote:

---

NDP Leadership candidate Gilles Bisson (MPP Timmins-James Bay) will be in Thunder Bay Thursday, July 17th for a poverty consultation roundtable.

“Dalton McGuinty refuses to immediately end the clawback of the national child benefit, won’t commit to an immediate minimum wage increase that will lift hard working Ontarians out of poverty, and leaves those waiting for affordable housing languishing on a wait-list.”

Bisson says fighting poverty and giving everyone a chance at living a decent life is a cornerstone policy of the NDP. “We continue to raise these issues for all those who feel they have no voice. That’s why our caucus is holding open, accessible consultations on poverty across the province. We want to hear from people who actually know what it is to be poor as well as their advocates.”

---

Gillis Bisson on an anti-scab bill:

quote:

---

I want to put on the record my support as the member for Timmins-James Bay, but more importantly as a New Democrat and a trade unionist, for this particular bill.

I didn't grow up in a house of labour; I was in the house of labour. I came out of the labour movement. I worked in the mining industry for a number of years; I was with the United Steelworkers of America, Local 4440; I've bargained collective agreements on behalf of unions. My local - I've also been hired and I was employed within the trade labour movement, both for the Steelworkers and for the Ontario Federation of Labour.

In my experience, I have no doubt in my mind that legislation such as this is necessary. Why? It's because of what my colleague the member from Niagara Centre talks about, which is that you have to basically level the playing field when it comes to the power that the employer can exercise over workers when it comes to collective bargaining. There is no incentive to resolve tough negotiations if an employer knows he can bring scabs into the workplace. All this does - not having legislation that bans the use of scab replacement workers - is basically give the power to the employer to prolong a very difficult situation and negotiations, and not work at trying to find a resolution.

The other part that I want to talk about very quickly is the issue - it was raised, I believe, by one of my colleagues - in regard to the need to end the right for employers to lock out. I just want to say very quickly - because I know my good friend Andrea Horwath wants to have a few seconds on the bill - that that is very necessary. We currently have, in the city of Timmins, Grant Waferboard, which has basically locked the workers out in Timmins since September of this year. It has no interest in negotiating a collective agreement with the employees. I think that's wrong, it's reprehensible, and we need to have legislation that bans people like Peter Grant from doing what he's doing to the workers in Timmins. I say, high time that we pass legislation to that effect.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
False. I criticized his statement for insinuating that social policy and economic policy were separate, and trotting out the canard about fiscal responsibility.

---

Here we go again. As it stands today in our mixed market economy, the largest provincial economy in Canada, we have private sector and public sector. Ontario is the only province producing more public sector jobs than private for the last few years running. Ontario has lost hundreds of thousands of good paying manufacturing and forestry jobs, and many of them unionized, on this Liberal government's watch. If we can draw your attention to at least some of these facts for just a moment, we might make some progress toward understanding where Gilles is coming from when he talks about the economy.

quote:

---

What does it mean to "emphasize the economy"? Stuff gold in the pockets of the rich? Take gold from their pockets and give it to the poor? Subsidize failing industry? Hands off? Nationalize some key enterprises in key sectors?

---

No that's what McGuinty's Liberals have done - stuffing the pockets of rich people and appeasing Bay Street interests since 2003. This is not, I repeat, not what any NDP says is good for a mixed market economy the likes of which we have in Ontario.

quote:

---

"Emphasizing the economy" is meaningless pap designed to play to the most brutish consciousness created by the Libs and Cons that they are good managers while the NDP is not. If Bisson (or anyone) wants to compete with them on their chosen field and let them set the agenda, then Ontarians will need a fourth party.

---

Tory and Liberal policies are not very competitive wrt the economy. They've pretty much promised the same neoliberal policies for deregulation and hands-off approach, and have since backed off some of their own policies since the NDP advised them against the second-hand ideology in the 1990's. McGuinty is somewhat of a Keynesian today, but it's too little too late. He still refuses to raise taxes on those most able to afford them, and he still maintains bad policies for highest in the country commercial power rates and refuses to implement a manufacturing tax credit which has been shown to work in other provinces, including Manitoba and Quebec.

quote:

---

But while the Bissons of this world talk about issues they clearly don't understand (like "the economy"), Peggy breathed life into the minimum wage movement. When Bisson says "we need Ontarians to earn higher wages", I'll listen to him. Not until.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
When Bisson says "we need Ontarians to earn higher wages", I'll listen to him. Not until.

---

quote:

---

It seems that every year when we gather together with our families over the holidays our outlook becomes brighter, our lives take on new meaning and we prepare ourselves to move on to a new year with optimism and hope.

Many Ontarians don’t have that luxury. . .

There are numerous families in our cities, those who have work and others who don’t, who live month to month. There are families who struggle to pay their rent, to make sure that there is enough food on the table, for whom rising hydro, rent and food costs might make the difference between whether they make it that month or whether they have to go to a food bank. . .

On a political level we can continue to champion change that will make life better and more affordable for every Ontarians. We can advocate for a $10 an hour minimum wage, a minimum wage that would allow for working Ontarians to escape from a cycle of poverty and insecurity. We can advocate for a Job Protection Commissioner to sustain good-paying jobs. We can advocate affordable energy, so that our factories and mills stay open and good-paying manufacturing jobs stay in Ontario.

Former CCF leader J. S. Woodsworth once said that we have to “resist the sin of indifference.” That’s what we need to do this holiday season. We need to work hard to ensure that Ontario is a place where the holidays are a happy time for everyone, not just for those who can afford it.

---

Hey Unionist, before you pontificate about Gilles it might help to find out a bit about him first. You might find that Gilles is a rough and tumble unionist who has the kind of record most of us could only dream of. Hearing him speak on First Nations issues for instance is the kind of thing that can open hearts and minds of people who have never given the issues much thought. Gilles is one of the hidden jewels of the Ontario NDP.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
Holy Bejeebus. What alternate universe have I stumbled into where a guy like Gilles is made to sound like some sort of third wayer.

---

I'm talking about his launch speech. Not about him. As I've made it clear before.

quote:

---

Hey Unionist, before you pontificate about Gilles it might help to find out a bit about him first.

---

Then why does his launch speech read so differently from his record? Wilf Day, same question for you and your quotes. Does Bisson feel he needs to change his tune to become leader?

quote:

---

And for the record it was Cheri DiNovo who breathed life into the push for raising the minimum wage in Ontario, not Peggy Nash.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

In my area we have seen huge manufacturing job losses. These are good paying union jobs that will not be replaced in rural Ontario any time soon. So to me we simply have to focus on economics because in large parts of Ontario we are getting to the edge of the cliff.

---

That's why I said this about Bisson's launch speech:

quote:

---

What does it mean to "emphasize the economy"? Stuff gold in the pockets of the rich? Take gold from their pockets and give it to the poor? Subsidize failing industry? Hands off? Nationalize some key enterprises in key sectors?

---

Here's what concerns me in his speech:

quote:

---

However electoral success for the NDP in Ontario has been modest.

I believe one the reason for this is, is that voters want to be assured that we will place as much emphasis on economic and fiscal policy as we do on social policy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
I am just guessing, but that an NDP government should prioritize economic and fiscal policy as much as social policy?

---

And can you explain whether maintaining and expanding (for example) single-payer universal health care is an economic and fiscal issue, or a social one?

Same with minimum wage and anti-scab legislation?

Likewise with affordable publicy-subsidized child care?

ETA: Maybe this will help me understand.

Did the last NDP government put the same, more, or less emphasis on economic policy than on social policy?

How about the current McGuinty government - same, more, or less?

I'm trying to understand Bisson's method of measure.

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]

The simple truth is the private sector is in real trouble in Ontario. While no one is disputing that health care and affordable housing are key issues the perception in Ontario of the NDP is that the NDP would IGNORE private sector job loss in favour of concentrating solely on issues like that. Bisson is signaling that he believes that the NDP must emphasis a mixed approach on issues so that the average person can see that the NDP would take action on economic concerns as well.

The thing you have to remember is that Ontario media hardly ever covers Ontario politics. It is totally different than any other province in that regard. Here it is almost all Ottawa all the time. The only time we get Ontario political news as a focus is when someone does something weird, someone dies, or someone is caught with their hand in the til.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Did the last NDP government put the same, more, or less emphasis on economic policy than on social policy?

How about the current McGuinty government - same, more, or less?

I'm trying to understand Bisson's method of measure.

---

We've been over the NDP's four year record in Ontario of 13 years ago. Apparently you still have nothing more to add.

So, in this particilar decade of recent Ontario history, what would you like to know about McGuinty's record on the economy in Canada's largest province? Several of us have posted update after update on the floundering Ontario economy as well as the ONDP's input every step of the way in several threads. If you could just be more specific

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by V. Jara:
Just a thought but...If as much energy as is being spent here going after good NDP MPPs was spent going after crummy Conservative and lousy Liberals then maybe there'd be a chance of achieving more progressive things in Ontario.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
And sounding the Fraser Institute isn't going to do it.

---

That is funniest damn thing I have heard in a long time. Good heavens did you read anything from the posts people made in good faith for you?

You know that is so funny it deserves pulling out a line from the master of one liners.

quote:

---

Originally posted by aka Mycroft:
Did anyone else go to the leadership debate today?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:

No, how was it?

---

I'm thinking of writing an article on it so I don't want to say too much just yet but, short, Prue was a much better speaker than I'd expected and I think he really won a lot of people in the crowd with both his views on unifying the public school system and on party democracy. Overall, I think Tabuns and Prue were the strongest performers - Prue might have done slightly better, I'll have to listen to the tape before saying anything definitive. I was surprised to find afterwards that a number of people I had expected to view Prue as too right wing were thinking of supporting him because of the schools issue (and because he wasn't noticeably to the right of any other candidate)

On the actual issues, all four candidates pretty much agreed on everything with the aforementioned exception of separate school funding. On that issue, Prue called for the party to allow a resolution on the question to be debated at convention and for the outcome of that debate to become party policy. Tabuns said he thought running with school funding as part of the platform would end up wiping all the other issues off the table as per the last provincial election campaign and that it was more important to talk about economics, the environment (and I think he mentioned something else). Bisson actually said he was in favour of Catholic School funding and that amalgamating the systems would be a disaster. Howarth said that her son has been in both the Catholic and Public systems and that she thought the status quo worked.

If today is any indication then school funding will be a major issue in the leadership campaign both because it's the only significant issue on which there is any differentiation between the candidates and because there are a number of NDP members who are strong advocates of amalgamation (four different people asked questions - the moderator finally ruled that the candidates had already addressed the issue and moved on to other questions)

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
Gilles Bisson = the Fraser Institute

---

I just stuck that provocative jibe in to see if you would then ignore the substance of what I have been saying. I'm ashamed to say it worked both on you and on Fidel.

quote:

---

Originally posted by aka Mycroft:
Bisson actually said he was in favour of Catholic School funding and that amalgamating the systems would be a disaster.

---

Please, no.

I'm with the woman from the Hammer on this issue. Ignore it, and do not make it an issue in this campaign. If government is ever formed that's you get rid of the separate schools. Campaigning on it now or during the general would be silly and divisive.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

Now, how about commenting on the relationship between "economic policy" and "social policy"; the failure of the Rae government; the origin of what you claim is the perception of voters that the NDP doesn't care about job loss in the private sector; and the lessons of this for the future.

---

We're not talking about Rae or McGuinty here. We're talking about what kind of future progressive forces are sketching for Ontarians. I'm just commenting from across the border. If Bisson said these things here (and Québec is suffering from the exact same manufacturing crisis as Ontario), he would not be allowed near any progressive electoral podium. If Ontario is different, then excuse my mistake as that of a foreigner.

ETA: Edited to reflect comments by Cueball and aka Mycroft.

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]

On the other hand, Bisson did call himself a "socialist" at one point (as did Tabuns - Prue talked about what the NDP and socialists stood for so it wasn't clear to me whether he was calling himself a socialist or not while Horwath didn't give an answer in her answer)

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

However, all private schools (religious or not) still receive hefty subsidies to the tune of more than half the cost per student. That's a problem that needs to be addressed and resolved. But contrary to Ontario, there is no discrimination based on religion or secularism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
I was thinking of Catholic civil servants, and Catholics on welfare, and so on and so forth.

---

Ah, ok, I guess my original post was imprecise, I should have said removing Catholic schools from the public trough.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Fidel, Mr. Bisson spoke of economic and fiscal responsibility in contradistinction to social programs, and now he says removing the Catholics from the public trough would be a "disaster".

---

What do you think about Canada's overall federal tax take ranking 27th of 30 OECD economies? And how does that affect provincial governments' ability to fund social programs - maintain and build new infrastructure, PSE and skills training for workers - all essentials of competitive and modernizing economies around the world?

What's your opinion on several hundred thousand manufacturing job losses, and many of them unionized, here in Ontario since 2002-2003?

quote:

---

We're not talking about Rae or McGuinty here.

---

Okay, but one of them is a premier of Ontario at the moment and whose government does have an economic record with which to use as a reference point, if, in fact, we are talking about Bisson's opening comments on economy and how it might affect whether the social safety net is stretched to limits during what looks like a looming economic slowdown across North America.

quote:

---

We're talking about what kind of future progressive forces are sketching for Ontarians. I'm just commenting from across the border. If Bisson said these things here (and Québec is suffering from the exact same manufacturing crisis as Ontario), he would not be allowed near any progressive electoral podium. If Ontario is different, then excuse my mistake as that of a foreigner.

---

But Quebec has a surplus of hydroelectric power and much of it going to Northern U.S. states to ensure their economic prosperity, whereas Southern Ontario has a short supply of power to electrify new industrial and urban expansion. So the two provinces are not really facing the same problems and opportunties. Ontario won't see any new power from nuclear for another ten years or more. The ONDP provided a blueprint for a regional commercial power pricing scheme - conservation, efficiency, and renewable energy sources which could have produced results in the here and now. Ontario has a unique set of economic problems, and we have more than 1.2 million adult workers not earning $10 dollars an hour. I'm not dumping all of the blame for this on McGuinty, his Liberal government does operate within the same constraints and now running a budget deficit. Good for them, and good for the significant public sector job creation under these Liberals but somewhat late in the game, however. These issues are sure to change between now and next election, and I think the ONDP should be prepared to accept handoff of another ailing provincial economy. How to pay for social programs will be of paramount importance to a future ONDP government. And like the Darlington nuclear megafiasco was dropped in Rae's lap at start of the 1990's, the next Ontario governments will be faced with paying what are sure to be enormous bills from nuclear contractors rolling in whenever contractors demand payment.

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
What do you think about Canada's overall federal tax take ranking 27th of 30 OECD economies?

---

I've given a preliminary view in my Orange Shift proposal, as you know. I do know this: that if all a provincial government can possibly do is complain that it's not getting enough money from the feds, then that's not much of an argument to vote for one party over another. The ONDP can do better than that.

quote:

---

What's your opinion on several hundred thousand manufacturing job losses, and many of them unionized, here in Ontario since 2002-2003?

---

I think this crisis, which has also hit Québec hard, is one of the most serious issue facing workers in Central Canada and it must be addressed. One way is to make foreign investment more attractive. Another is to start buying or building or expropriating infrastructure to create environmentally sustainable economic activity whose existence is not dependent on the whim of foreign investors and owners. I favour the latter course. I have a distinct problem, however, with politicians who don't state clearly what solution they propose.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
I've given a preliminary view in my Orange Shift proposal, as you know. I do know this: that if all a provincial government can possibly do is complain that it's not getting enough money from the feds, then that's not much of an argument to vote for one party over another. The ONDP can do better than that.

---

McGuinty began complaining pretty loudly, and it was a little over a year after he stated that federal funding for Ontario was a fair deal for this province. Something happened to change his mind.

And I think this is the core of the problem - the paring down and whittling away of billions of dollars in federal funding from Ottawa to the provinces since 1995. We need strong federal commitments to social spending not U.S.-style policies for "starve the beast" conservatism with ridiculously generous tax cuts to profitable corporations and banks.

quote:

---

What's your answer to the question you posed, and how do the ONDP leadership candidates measure up?

---

New world economy! Green infrastructure and aggressive policies to attract investment in modern high-tech eco-friendly industries producing useful energy-saving products - and laser-guided tax incentives to reward green industry development, modern equipment and R&D - expanding public transit - spending on education and new jobs skills, raise minimum wage and index to inflation - raise welfare rates - invest in thousands of new affordable housing units every year. I'm not sure what Bisson or the other candidates have up their sleeves, but I'd bet that they will recognize at least some of the above platform joists from the Hampton years.

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aka Mycroft:
On the actual issues, all four candidates pretty much agreed on everything with the aforementioned exception of separate school funding. On that issue, Prue called for the party to allow a resolution on the question to be debated at convention and for the outcome of that debate to become party policy. Tabuns said he thought running with school funding as part of the platform would end up wiping all the other issues off the table as per the last provincial election campaign and that it was more important to talk about economics, the environment (and I think he mentioned something else). Bisson actually said he was in favour of Catholic School funding and that amalgamating the systems would be a disaster. Howarth said that her son has been in both the Catholic and Public systems and that she thought the status quo worked.

If today is any indication then school funding will be a major issue in the leadership campaign both because it's the only significant issue on which there is any differentiation between the candidates and because there are a number of NDP members who are strong advocates of amalgamation (four different people asked questions - the moderator finally ruled that the candidates had already addressed the issue and moved on to other questions)

---

Well it's good to hear it's now at least being discussed by the leadership candidates. I don't think we should take this argument (that Tabuns makes and I've certainly heard NDPers say) that since John Tory's attempt to change the status quo was an electoral disaster, Catholic school funding can't be touched ever again as a foregone conclusion. It was Tory's specific proposal that was unpopular. The NDP is practically invisible in Ontario politics - certainly taking such a progressive, principled stand and rocking the boat is worth the "risk."

I'll say it here: if the NDP is still defending Catholic school funding in the next election, I won't be voting for them. I don't care if some people think it's a "diversion from the real issues."

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Does Bisson feel he needs to change his tune to become leader?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
In my area we have seen huge manufacturing job losses. These are good paying union jobs that will not be replaced in rural Ontario any time soon. So to me we simply have to focus on economics because in large parts of Ontario we are getting to the edge of the cliff. If we do not address them from a left perspective then we will leave the floor open to the right and they will tell people the answer is slashing social spending. Addressing these issues is not a choice.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe Strummer:
Is the Catholic School funding issue EVER going to be discussed in a general campaign again?

Please, no.

I'm with the woman from the Hammer on this issue. Ignore it, and do not make it an issue in this campaign. If government is ever formed that's you get rid of the separate schools. Campaigning on it now or during the general would be silly and divisive.

Go Andrea!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:

Well it's good to hear it's now at least being discussed by the leadership candidates. I don't think we should take this argument (that Tabuns makes and I've certainly heard NDPers say) that since John Tory's attempt to change the status quo was an electoral disaster, Catholic school funding can't be touched ever again as a foregone conclusion. It was Tory's specific proposal that was unpopular. The NDP is practically invisible in Ontario politics - certainly taking such a progressive, principled stand and rocking the boat is worth the "risk."

I'll say it here: if the NDP is still defending Catholic school funding in the next election, I won't be voting for them. I don't care if some people think it's a "diversion from the real issues."

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
Be even bigger than the Catholic School board, Lord.

---

If the NDP are stupid enough to fight an election on Liberal Turf. So be it. The results will be the same. A complete and dominant Liberal Majority. Liberals are drooling over another election fought on education.

PCs won't be so stupid. But leave it to the NDP to fall from 12 seats to 2 fighting an election on whether or not to fund the catholic school system.

I can see the local papers having a field day with the topic, even in an NDP Leadership debate, ignoring everything that the NDP and Leadership need to be fighting for and against, and focusing again on the School Funding.

If the public is really, really, really, interested in addressing this... why do we hear.... nothing. Absolute Silence.

But the Liberals would love to hit the NDP over the head with Education, just like they did with John Tory and the PCs. I can see the glee.

If you have to lose someones vote on a non election issue, then lose it. There are too many votes to be gained that are sitting in nowheresville because neither the PCs or the NDP have managed to connect with voters. (And this won't improve with a debate over catholic school funding)

People I chatter with say the last provincial election, they didn't vote because non of the issues they felt needed to be addressed were, and the politicians where wasting their time talking about Religious school funding. So they tuned out. = LIBERAL VICTORY.

The ONDP Leadership should it continue to use its valuable media time talking about school funding could well bury the party for good. I have always thought that political parties should fight on their strengths.

There are Temp agencies, Hospitals, lack thereof, few doctors, a single walkin clinic for 120,000 people, there are Job Losses, low pay, growth in poverty and working poor, Social justics issues and Liberal Arrogance, to name just a few.

People have given up on the political process provincially and the Liberals will have a cakewalk, regardless of lower voter turnout.

To not recognise that School funding is a negative issue is to ignore the media coverage of Leadership Contender Micheal Prue.

This is a headline nobody should want, when launching a campaign. Expect no different in an election.

quote:

---

Prue opens NDP leadership bid with school funding controversy
Last Updated: Friday, July 18, 2008 | 2:34 PM ET Comments8Recommend5The Canadian Press
New Democrat backbencher Michael Prue learned a hard lesson about the perils of the media spotlight Friday as the official launch of his bid to lead Ontario's NDP was overshadowed by his comments on public funding for Catholic schools.

---

That hard lesson is something I would not expect from an experienced Politician.

John Tory, was not an experienced politician. He is a triple failure as a politician. He has experience in losing.

The ONDP leadership contenders needs to get wise and use an opportunity to build the party, not get bogged down in negative press acoss the Province.

There are massive problems with the funding of our schools; from little funding for school upkeep, duplication between Boards, shortfalls for small and rural schools, bussing costs not being adequately covered, the effect of the Liberals primary hard cap on higher elementary grades class sizes, to poor funding for music and tech programs the Liberals have gotten it wrong and it is our students that are suffering.

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
The NDP can take anything to convention. This should be where School funding needs to be addressed.

If the NDP are stupid enough to fight an election on Liberal Turf. So be it. The results will be the same. A complete and dominant Liberal Majority. Liberals are drooling over another election fought on education.

PCs won't be so stupid. But leave it to the NDP to fall from 12 seats to 2 fighting an election on whether or not to fund the catholic school system.

I can see the local papers having a field day with the topic, even in an NDP Leadership debate, ignoring everything that the NDP and Leadership need to be fighting for and against, and focusing again on the School Funding.

If the public is really, really, really, interested in addressing this... why do we hear.... nothing. Absolute Silence.

But the Liberals would love to hit the NDP over the head with Education, just like they did with John Tory and the PCs. I can see the glee.

If you have to lose someones vote on a non election issue, then lose it. There are too many votes to be gained that are sitting in nowheresville because neither the PCs or the NDP have managed to connect with voters. (And this won't improve with a debate over catholic school funding)

People I chatter with say the last provincial election, they didn't vote because non of the issues they felt needed to be addressed were, and the politicians where wasting their time talking about Religious school funding. So they tuned out. = LIBERAL VICTORY.

The ONDP Leadership should it continue to use its valuable media time talking about school funding could well bury the party for good. I have always thought that political parties should fight on their strengths.

There are Temp agencies, Hospitals, lack thereof, few doctors, a single walkin clinic for 120,000 people, there are Job Losses, low pay, growth in poverty and working poor, Social justics issues and Liberal Arrogance, to name just a few.

People have given up on the political process provincially and the Liberals will have a cakewalk, regardless of lower voter turnout.

To not recognise that School funding is a negative issue is to ignore the media coverage of Leadership Contender Micheal Prue.

This is a headline nobody should want, when launching a campaign. Expect no different in an election.

That hard lesson is something I would not expect from an experienced Politician.

John Tory, was not an experienced politician. He is a triple failure as a politician. He has experience in losing.

The ONDP leadership contenders needs to get wise and use an opportunity to build the party, not get bogged down in negative press acoss the Province.

imho

---

The issue is not that the NDP would fight a campaign on school funding, it is that we have a position. And we should have this conversation as a party. I'll will remind folks the reason why the Greens did so well provincially is because in their platform they supported "one school system". It wasn't that it was a major blank in their platform but the Greens happen to be on the majorities side of the issue. When the last poll was taken near the end of the election, almost 70% responded that they preferred no private or Religious school funding, including roman catholic. The Greens did not do well based on their environmental policy but the one school system issue.

And just to give you some insight on why I think we should have this policy, or at least have this debate is this reason:
A better plan for public schoolsis a torstar editorial, dated September 29, 2007:

quote:

---

But as Ontario becomes increasingly diverse, the day is coming when the status quo will no longer be workable. At that time, Ontarians should be ready with a single secular public education system that will welcome all students, whatever their beliefs, and will play its critical role in helping Ontario become a province known for understanding, cohesiveness, inclusiveness – and true fairness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
An election fought on separate school funding would be hugely divisive and potentially very ugly. Not only that -it misses the point on a lot of the funding issues. Here is the plank I would like to see:

There are massive problems with the funding of our schools; from little funding for school upkeep, duplication between Boards, shortfalls for small and rural schools, bussing costs not being adequately covered, the effect of the Liberals primary hard cap on higher elementary grades class sizes, to poor funding for music and tech programs the Liberals have gotten it wrong and it is our students that are suffering.

It took Mike Harris, Ernie Eves and Dalton McGuinty close to 15 years to get us into this mess; it is going to take strategic planning to move us forward. An NDP government will create an immediate taskforce that will examine all aspects of school funding, including what types of schools should be funded in Ontario, by consulting, parents, teachers, school boards officials and others to ensure we have the best plan to move us forward in a nonpartisan way. Our children deserve a government that puts politics aside and looks to their interests first and foremost.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
An NDP government will create an immediate taskforce that will examine all aspects of school funding, including what types of schools should be funded in Ontario, by consulting, parents, teachers, school boards officials and others to ensure we have the best plan to move us forward in a nonpartisan way. Our children deserve a government that puts politics aside and looks to their interests first and foremost.

---

All of us should be aware of the Federal NDP position on this issue. The following resolution was adopted at the 2001 Federal Convention in Winnipeg.

quote:

---

Whereas tax credits for private school parents represents a serious threat to public education; and

Whereas the United Nations Human Rights Commission condemned as discriminatory the current practice of funding only Roman Catholic schools; and

Whereas the termination of public funding for all religious schools by the governments of Newfoundland and Quebec, with the cooperation of the federal government, has negated the constitutional rationale for funding Catholic schools,

Therefore Be It Resolved that the NDP actively campaign for an end to public funding of any kind for any religion-based and private schools in Canada, while maintaining that, where appropriate, religious instruction in any faith be permitted after school hours.
[ 2001 Federal Convention ]

---

There are presently from different riding organizations in Ontario with some various resolutions concerning this being put forward: Here's one:

quote:

---

DRAFT

SINGLE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM


Whereas public funding for faith-based schools was rejected by the public in the 2007 provincial election; and

Whereas there is overwhelming public support for merging the public and separate school systems into a single, secular public school system; and

Whereas the United Nations Human Rights Committee has condemned [ twice ] as discriminatory the current practice of funding Roman Catholic schools in Ontario; and

Whereas there is no constitutional guarantee requiring the Ontario Government to fund or to continue to fund Catholic schools.

Therefore Be It Resolved That the Ontario NDP advocate and support the establishment of a single, secular publicly funded school system made up of English and French language public school boards in Ontario while maintaining where appropriate, voluntary religious instruction in any faith be permitted outside of regular classroom hours.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
An NDP government will create an immediate taskforce that will examine all aspects of school funding, including what types of schools should be funded in Ontario, by consulting, parents, teachers, school boards officials and others to ensure we have the best plan to move us forward in a nonpartisan way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:
It produced an excellent report, never implemented. Almost as good as new, only needs updating.

---

That's what they said about the Old Testament.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:

Oddly enough, the Rae government already did that: the Fair Tax Commission. It produced an excellent report, never implemented. Almost as good as new, only needs updating.

If the NDP dares restore some of the powers of locally-elected school boards.

---

Well yes and no Wilf. Since that time, we moved to a kind of one-size fits all funding formula (which is really isn't but that is another story, based on the fact that the kid in the desk generates vastly different sums on money based on from most to least generated):
1. French public school student
2. French catholic school student
3. English Catholic school student
4. English public school student

Is there any mechanism whereby a resolution on school board funding could be sent to each riding association and they could then have their own debate and vote on the topic (perhaps supervised/chaired by an NDP official)? This would allow for far more participation of the membership, more thorough debate than is ever possible at a convention and perhaps even a way to draw in new members to riding associations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
We need to appeal to young people and jaded voters alike ...

---

Don't forget the workers and jaded voters who don't like their collective bargaining rights trampled and who don't like election promises broken and who don't like issues of human rights left to free votes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

Don't forget the workers and jaded voters who don't like their collective bargaining rights trampled and who don't like election promises broken and who don't like issues of human rights left to free votes.

If the NDP could credibly guarantee that they would never do that again, it would be huge. Of course, there's always a chance people have forgotten, so maybe just let it go and move on...

---

And if voters did have long memories and tendencies for punishing every instance of Tory and Liberal scandal, kick-back, graft, influence peddling, and act of gross incompetence in government, our two old line parties should never be re-elected or win opposition status based on their dubious and lacklustre records in power. Who was it said voters have short memories?

Ontarians are like British voters - they look for reasons to vote Tory, and they vote Liberal out of tradition and for the well-funded political campaigns. The old line party support base is now fading along with memories of prosperous cold war era economies distinguished by strong policies for public ownership in conservative parties, a previous time of high corporate tax rates, and industrial and urban expansion as far as the propagandists' eyes could see at the time. Those days are gone and voter support clearly waning for the second-hand neoliberal agenda.

NDP needs to appeal to a new generation of voters, and describe what a future economy and social democracy might look like here in the second-largest country in the world in where resources and energy have been mismanaged and squandered for decades.

eta: It was long-held wisdom to vote Tory provincially and Liberal federally. The idea was that we received more by playing two old line party governments against one one another to duke it out for voter support. Those were the good old days. Poles have shifted, and everything is completely different now with 22 percenters in Ottawa and Toronto and the second-hand ideology on the wane. But a large minority of Ontarians were typically quick to forgive in favour of tradition. Bill Davis could do no wrong until he decided to reverse his 1971 decision not to support full funding of Catholic schools. That was unforgivable

[ 02 November 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Don't forget the workers and jaded voters who don't like their collective bargaining rights trampled . . . If the NDP could credibly guarantee that they would never do that again, it would be huge.

---

How many voters still hold that grudge? In my experience, quite a few rank and file members. As for local union leadership people, very few. So perhaps they find the guarantee credible. Or perhaps they simply know that if an NDP government ever tried that again it would be the end of the party.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Don't forget the workers and jaded voters who don't like election promises broken . . .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Don't forget the workers and jaded voters who don't like issues of human rights left to free votes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:
Howard Hampton said many times that the NDP would never do that again [break collective agreements]... if an NDP government ever tried that again it would be the end of the party.

---

Trouble is, the NDP did that repeatedly in SK (Blakeney, Romanow) - paid the price, then did it again. They only see it as the temporary end of the party. I'm not sure what Hampton said, but I'd like to see the exact words.

quote:

---

The topic of government public auto insurance is one Howard Hampton has pretty much stayed away from, I think, but maybe I missed it.

---

In 2003, he called for a public "basic" insurance to compete with private insurers, predicting it would grab 30 to 35% of the market. I didn't hear him repeat it during the last campaign. I don't think voters listen to this stuff any more - but they do remember being betrayed for a long time.

quote:

---

[Re same-sex benefits] This one I think we're safe on, after Bev Desjarlais.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
I don't think voters listen to this stuff any more - but they do remember being betrayed for a long time.

---

Another component is that people think it's a problem, but not a big problem. Kids can attend either, so it's not hitting most people that hard. It's whacking the teachers, since they are constrained from teaching there.

Another issue from Harris is the reduction in the number of school boards, leading to vast areas to cover in some places. The example I am aware of (my sister just retired as a teacher) is that the offices for the school board in Muskoka are in Lindsey. Thats a trek.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
And by 1995, support for the ONDP was about what it was in 1985 when Rae first led the party...

---

And post-1995, it has been much lower as working class Ontarians have for the most given up on the ONDP, thanks to the disastrous Rae govt. and Hampton's uninspiring leadership.

[ 02 November 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aka Mycroft:
I have an audio recording (WMA file) of the leadership debate that I'd like to upload to a blog or elsewhere. a) Does anyone know how I can place audio on blogger b) how to convert WMA to MP3 (if this is necessary) c) or where I can upload an audio file so it's publicly available? The file is too big to send by email.

---

Try http://boomp3.com. It's free, easy, and it gives you youtube-style links to embed in Blogger. I think it takes WMA directly as well as MP3. If not, there are many WMA to MP3 converters - Google is your friend.

ETA: Slightly edited for more generality.

[ 02 November 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:

And post-1995, it has been much lower as working class Ontarians have for the most given up on the ONDP, thanks to the disastrous Rae govt. and Hampton's uninspiring leadership.

[ 02 November 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
... Ontario with its history of electing one big blue machine after another ...

---

Finally, you've hit the nail on the head.

quote:

---

Originally posted by aka Mycroft:
I have an audio recording (WMA file) of the leadership debate that I'd like to upload to a blog or elsewhere. a) Does anyone know how I can place audio on blogger b) how to convert WMA to MP3 (if this is necessary) c) or where I can upload an audio file so it's publicly available? The file is too big to send by email.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by janfromthebruce:

I will work on how to do that tomorrow night.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jrootham:
The real problem in the NDP around the school board issue is that a lot of NDP politicians were separate school board trustees. None of them are willing to cut off their roots.

Another component is that people think it's a problem, but not a big problem. Kids can attend either, so it's not hitting most people that hard. It's whacking the teachers, since they are constrained from teaching there.

Another issue from Harris is the reduction in the number of school boards, leading to vast areas to cover in some places. The example I am aware of (my sister just retired as a teacher) is that the offices for the school board in Muskoka are in Lindsey. Thats a trek.

I still think we need to do a two birds with one stone move here. Make the separate boards absolutely non discriminatory, historically but not currently Catholic. Then rationalize the schools, moving board offices closer to the schools being administered. This can take as long as we want in various parts of the province, so local circumstances can be accommodated.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

Or you can try what I suggested tonight.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

Finally, you've hit the nail on the head.

---

It doesn't make sense to me that Rae's NDP betrayed workers any worse than they were betrayed under Harris, and now McGuinty. Those last two governments didn't just legislate a few days off for public sector workers, they've since handed out tens of thousands of pink slips to public sector workers and stood idly by while good paying jobs disappear.

And yes we do need change. Our Liberals in Toronto are pretty quiet today with their 22 percent mandate. They'll dish out the billion dollar contracts and slide outa Dodge next election after the dirty work's done. The next two governments will be stuck with the bills. Yes we do need change top to bottom in Ottawa and Queen's Park.

[ 02 November 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

It doesn't make sense to me that Rae's NDP betrayed workers any worse than they were betrayed under Harris, and now McGuinty. Those last two governments didn't just legislate a few days off for public sector workers, they've since handed out tens of thousands of pink slips to public sector workers and stood idly by while good paying jobs disappear.

---

Yeah by using adminstrative tools developed by the Rae government. And no one said they were "betrayed any worse than they were betrayed under Harris, and now McGuinty" they said it was just the same. And if anything actually made the betrayal worse it was that the NDP promised change and didn't deliver it.

[ 02 November 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Yeah by using adminstrative tools developed by the Rae government.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
So Rae, the Liberal, was good in comparison ot McGunity, the Liberal, then?

---

The NDP left Ontario with:

• the highest minimum wage in Canada in 1995
• safe drinking water projects and new social housing construction underway across Ontario
• a decent effort to raise welfare rates
• Algoma Steel in the Soo and northern lumber mills saved
• subway expansion started in Toronto
• anti-scab legislation in place
• and Laughren having put the province on track for balanced budgets by end of the decade

[ 03 November 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

The snide remarks are original to you are they not? At least this time I was not attacked for being in league with the Shah of Iran and General Zia.

[ 03 November 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]