ON PC Leader Patrick Brown ready to be Premier of Ontario!!!

Check out this video when Ontario Progressive Conservative (ONPC) Leader Patrick Brown spoke at the ROMA (Rural Ontario Municipal Association) Conference last month, in February 2017. I listened to the video this morning and was very impressed and encouraged because I realized that once a majority of Ontario voters had a chance to listen to him, really listen to him and what his PC party represents, they would vote for their PC candidate in June 2018.

In fact, I was so impressed, I set about deleting the negative posts I had previously written about him in relation to his wanting to implement a carbon tax. Why? Well, because frankly, a revenue neutral carbon tax, by itself, is not problematic when compared to the corruption and mismanagement we in Ontario are experiencing under the Kathleen Wynne Liberal Government.

Anyway, elected as Ontario Progressive Conservative (PC) leader in 2015, Patrick Brown has definitely grown into a potential premier. Yes, I know, some Ontario Conservatives will complain that Brown has some progressive tendencies. But, so what? The Ontario Liberals not only have some progressive tendencies, they are a complete and total progressive government — and, as such, have made us a have-not province. I mean, we now need equalization payments for heaven’s sake.

My point is that Brown’s having some progressive social views need not be a problem if he also has some strong conservative tendencies. Which, given what he says in this video, he does — in spades. In fact, to borrow from the new President to the south, the PC policies Brown discusses in this video prove the PCs can indeed make Ontario great again.

For those who don’t have time to listen to the video, here are some examples of what Brown discusses:

  1. Brown says the PCs will make hydro affordable again. On this topic, Brown explained that when the Wynne Liberals defended the fire sale of Ontario Hydro to taxpayers, she claimed that a large portion of the money earned would be spent on infrastructure. Brown says not a dollar has been spent so far. Not only that, Ontario taxpayers have already lost over $6 billion dollars selling our hydro to the U.S.
  2. Brown confirmed that the Wynne Ontario Cap and Trade system is nothing more than a revenue tool for the Ontario Liberals, as any money earned will go into general revenue. Whereas, if the PCs implement a carbon tax, as in BC, they will give back every penny to Ontarians.  So, while I may not agree with the concept of a carbon tax, at least it is not more of our money going down a bottomless green hole.
  3. Brown explains that the PC Party really is in favour of natural gas expansion — unlike the Wynne Liberals who just keep making announcements about such an expansion but never follow through.
  4. Brown promised to get rid of the Green Energy Act and put the power of what municipalities do back in their planning jurisdictions. In other words, with a PC Government, no one would be able to force wind farms on municipalities that didn’t want them.

Anyway, if you are a Conservative living in Ontario, or an independent type voter who simply wants to get rid of the Ontario Liberals on June 7th , 2018, I would recommend putting aside 18 minutes to listen to the video. The crux of the matter is that it clearly shows that Patrick Brown is relaxed in his own skin and very positive and committed to what he says he will do if an ONPC Government is elected. And, remember, unlike Liberal governments, Conservative governments of all kinds do what they say they will do.

ON “Health & Physical Ed” curriculum embeds sexual & gender politics

Click for Page 8 of the 2015 ON Health & Phys Ed curriculum.

Click for Page 8 of the 2015 ON Health & Phys Ed curriculum.

I recently decided to read through the Ontario Health and Physical Education document to see what all the fuss was about regarding the presentation of “Human Development and Sexual Health” to Ontario’s Grades 1 to 8 children — children who range from 6 years of age to 13 years of age.

Here are the learning topics, slightly shortened, according to grade level and applicable page numbers. My short analysis is in my Endnotes.

Grade 1 — Section C1.3 — Identity of body parts, including genitalia (P.93)

Grade 2 — Section C1.4 — Outline of the basic stages of human development and related bodily changes. Also, identity factors that are important for healthy growth and living throughout life. (P.108)

Grade 3 — Section C. 3.3 — Describe how visible differences and invisible differences make each person unique, and identify ways of showing respect for differences in others. (P.124)

Grade 4 — Section C1.5 — Describe the physical changes that occur in males and females at puberty and the emotional and social impacts that may result from these changes. (P.141)

Grade 5 — Section C2.4 — Describe emotional and interpersonal stresses related to puberty and identify strategies that they can apply to manage stress, build resilience, and enhance their mental health and emotional well-being. (P.158)

Grade 6 — Section C3.3 — Assess the effects of stereotypes, including homophobia and assumptions regarding gender roles and expectations, sexual orientation, gender expression, race, ethnicity or culture, mental health, and abilities, on an individual’s self-concept, social inclusion, and relationships with others, and propose appropriate ways of responding to and changing assumptions and stereotypes. (P.177)

Grade 7

  • Section 1.3 — Explain the importance of having a shared understanding with a partner about the following: delaying sexual activity until they are older; the reasons for not engaging in sexual activity; the concept of consent and how consent is communicated; and, in general, the need to communicate clearly with each other when making decisions about sexual activity in the relationship. (P.195)
  • Section C1.4 — Identify common sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and describe their symptoms. (P.196)
  • Section C1.5 — Identify ways of preventing STIs, including HIV, and/or unintended pregnancy, such as delaying first intercourse and other sexual activities until a person is older and using condoms consistently if and when a person becomes sexually active. (P.196)
  • Section C2.4 –Demonstrate an understanding of physical, emotional, social, and psychological factors that need to be considered when making decisions related to sexual health. (P.199)

Grade 8

  • Section C1.4 — Identify and explain factors that can affect an individual’s decisions about sexual activity and identify sources of support regarding sexual health, a community elder, a teacher, a religious leader, a parent or other trusted adult, a reputable website). (P.215)
  • Section C1.5 — Demonstrate an understanding of gender identity (e.g., male, female, two-spirited, transgender, transsexual, intersex), gender expression, and sexual orientation (e.g., heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual), and identify factors that can help individuals of all identities and orientations develop a positive self-concept. (P.216)
  • Section C2.4 — Demonstrate an understanding of aspects of sexual health and safety, including contraception and condom use for pregnancy and STI prevention, the concept of consent, and matters they need to consider and skills they need to use in order to make safe and healthy decisions about sexual activity. (P.218)
  • Section C3.3 — Analyse the attractions and benefits associated with being in a relationship, as well as the benefits, risks, and drawbacks, for themselves and others, of relationships involving different degrees of sexual intimacy. (P.220)

Appendices

For summary tables of the relevant topics, see pages 224 and 225 of the document.

Page separator

Endnotes: For the most part, this curriculum document is thorough and well presented up to Grade 6. In fact, I would give that part of the document an “A.” However, I would give the Grades 7 and 8 section a “B” at most because of the very lack of inclusiveness it claims to cover, as well as being way over the top as far as what topics the government is expecting teachers to teach — as opposed to health care workers and/or parents.

Moreover, I would think having male and female students learning these topics together would sometimes be acutely embarrassing. At least that was my experience when I was teaching this subject in the public system when I first started teaching.

However, regarding the lack of inclusiveness, by basing most of the content regarding gender identity on the notion of gender as always being socially constructed, this curriculum document excludes all people of faith and what they might believe about being male or female, as well as such scientific biological and genetic evidence as XY and XX chromosomes.

Whatever. The crux of the matter is that this document is not going to be changed. In fact, even if the Ontario PCs were to gain power in 2018, they would not be able to change very much because the sexual and gender politics embedded in it are now law within the Ontario Human Rights Code — meaning that train has already left the station.

Stats Can proof that ONPC Leader Tim Hudak’s 1 million jobs plan CAN work!

Macleans published an article by Mike Moffat on Monday, January 13th, 2014 suggesting that ONPC Leader Tim Hudak’s one million jobs plan, while ambitious and not impossible, will need a great deal of luck to become a reality. To prove that point, Moffat uses employment data for Ontario from Statistics Canada for the period 1977 to 2013.

In my opinion, what the Stats Canada tables and data prove is just the opposite to what Moffat is suggesting, that it doesn’t take luck, it takes good government policies — policies that create a climate for investment and spending.  In actual fact, what Moffat writes proves my point, not his. For example, he writes:

“One million jobs over eight years means that the Ontario economy would need to average 125,000 jobs a year over this period (which is represented by the “target” line on our graph). Since 1976 the Ontario economy has averaged only 85,000 net new jobs a year, though there have been many years that have exceeded the 125,000 threshold (1979, 1981, 1983-1988, 1997-2000 and 2003).”

I will repeat part of the last line of Moffat’s quotation. “…there have been many years that have exceeded the 125,000 threshold.” So, what is his point? That the Ontario economy would need to average 125,000 a year when the job numbers for the years 1997-2000 and 2003 were even higher. And, who was in power then? The Ontario Progressive Conservative Governments of Mike Harris and Ernie Eves.

Now, I may not be an economist like Moffat, but I can read tables. So, let’s verify his Statistics Canada numbers, keeping in mind that the red line is the annual 125,000 job target line he is talking about.  The easiest way to do this analysis is to hold a short ruler sideways above the year. Here is what you will get — recognizing that the numbers are approximate:

  • 1995 – 75,000 jobs were created in Ontario
  • 1996 – 65,000
  • 1997 – 100,000
  • 1998 – 150,000
  • 1999 – 185,000
  • 2000 – 185,000
  • 2001 – 105,000
  • 2002 – 125,000
  • 2003 – 185,000

So, the grand total of jobs created over 8 years from 1995 to 2003 is 1,175,000.

Which means, that without a shadow of a doubt, with the right pro-business and investment policies in place, an ONPC Tim Hudak government can indeed create one million jobs.

How will they do that?  Certainly not by depending “on luck.” According to what Hudak has said, they will lower both personal and corporate taxes. They will also loosen or reduce red tape for businesses because regulation compliance costs employee time and money.

And, anyone who doubts (as some commenters under the Moffat article do) there are rules and regulations on the Ontario Government’s books that impede entrepreneurship, has never been in business for themselves.

Anyway, the result is that when Ontarians have more money in their pockets, they buy products and services. And, when businesses have more money because they are selling more of their products or services, that increase in purchasing power results in a booming economy. And, with more demand, businesses hire more people and new businesses are created.

Of course, when more people are working, more tax revenues flow into the Ontario government’s coffers — which is exactly what happened between 1995 and 2003.

Yet, how often do we hear complaints from the Ontario Liberals and Liberal supporters that Mike Harris somehow “destroyed” Ontario. Well, the proof is in these statistics. What is also obvious in these statistics is, apart from the Liberal Peterson years from 1985 to 1989, how NDP and Liberal governments mean the death of jobs, huge deficits and “have not” status.

I mean, look at that Stats Can table again and note the two Death Valley drops in jobs during both the Bob Rae 1990-1994 NDP years and the Dalton McGuinty 2007 to 2009 years — when between 150,000 to 185,000 jobs were lost a year!

As well, note that job growth was at a peak when the Ontario Liberals took over from the PCs in mid 2003, a peak that disappeared very quickly after Ontarians were hit with the biggest tax grab ever —  the health care premium — followed by the devastating effect of the Ontario Green Energy Act and the resulting FIT Program and its job killing energy costs.

The crux of the matter is, then, that ONPC Leader Tim Hudak’s plan to create a million jobs in Ontario over eight years CAN work. Can he guarantee it will work? Of course not. But, what is the alternative? As Moffat has written about Kathleen Wynne’s job plan, it wouldn’t create a single job!!

[…]

Endnote: I have listened to Mike Moffat (whose day job is as an economics professor at the Ivey School of Business at the University of Western Ontario), several times on various TV news programs, including Sun TV, and he always seems politically balanced and fair. Kudos to him for that!!!

ON PC Leader Hudak asks Premier Wynne to explain Liberal job creation plan

Click for Livestream Video.

Click for Livestream Video.

Ontario PC Leader Tim Hudak is right. During the last several months, since her election as Ontario Liberal leader, all Kathleen Wynne seems to have done is talk. In fact, I have actually heard her say that she needs to have “conversations” about this or that.

Or, in the case of the gas plant cancellation decision, she has repeatedly said, she was not part of “that” conversation.

Well, obviously, her talk is not cheap! Meaning, the time for her endless consulting and talking should be over.

In other words, Premier Wynne’s Liberal government needs to release a comprehensive plan that: (a) is a blueprint on how it plans to get Ontario’s fiscal house in order, and (b) explains in detail what it will do to create a climate for investment and private sector job creation.

Certainly raising hydro and other energy costs are deferring investment and causing existing business to leave the province in droves — and I haven’t even touched on the damage the Green Energy Act is causing, not only to the rural landscape, but to people and businesses!

Anyway, or those who want to know why not having a comprehensive jobs plan is a problem for Ontario’s unemployed or underemployed, (or for what the Hudak PCs would do differently), check out this link for the Livestream press conference this morning.

The crux of the matter is this: Ontario is currently spending $9 billion dollars more every year than it receives in revenue and there is no end to that deficit in sight! So, all Ontarians need to wake up, including NDP leader Andrea Horwath.  She needs to stop being an enabler to this nightmare.

As well,  as Joanne says at Blue Like You, Ontarians need to grow a backbone in preparation for the provincial election that will surely come within the next few months!

At least that is my hope!

Latest allegation against Sentor Mike Duffy absolutely stunning!

Courtesy Microsoft Clip Art

Courtesy Microsoft Clip Art

Whether he wants to or not, Senator Mike Duffy is likely going to go down in the history of the Canadian Senate as the guy who broke the camels back. I mean, who in their right mind could defend reforming the Red Chamber now? It needs to be abolished!

Pigs at the trough, if not all of them, most of them, regardless of their political affiliation or which prime minister appointed them.

In reality, it is our Governor General who appoints Senators, on the advice of the Prime Minister. However, the prime minister is not their boss! In fact, according to this Wikipedia description, Senators are above MPs in the House of Commons in order of precedence — which is actually a scary thought given they are not elected.

Anyway, I have no intention of making excuses for Senator Mike Duffy if the latest allegations against him turn out to be all true or even only partially true.

So, what is the latest RCMP allegation?

According to this Globe and Mail piece, the allegation against Duffy is that he paid a “consultant” approximately $64,000 out of his Senate budget over a four-year period of time for speech writing and web development services — services that the alleged consultant is saying he only did in part for income he is denying having received.

Anyway, who or what to believe. “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. (Link)”

But, make no mistake about it, if this allegation is found to be true, Duffy is going to be spending a considerable amount of time in jail. And, frankly, if the allegations are true, he will deserve to be there.

Why do I say that? Because what is good for the goose (Liberals) is good for the gander (Conservatives).

Take a look at what happened to ex-Liberal Senator Raymond Lavigne and why it happened:

“[Judge Robert] Smith found [Raymond] Lavigne guilty of defrauding the federal government of $10,120.50 related to false and inflated mileage claims for car trips between Ottawa and Montreal. In some cases, reimbursement claims were made when his assistant drove his own car and Lavigne wasn’t a passenger.

Now, look at what happened recently when Lavigne tried to get early parole. Not only was that denied but his behaviour was referred to by the Parole Board as criminal.

Let me repeat. Lavigne is serving six months in jail and six months on probation for misusing a little over $10,000! Wrong, yes, but pretty small change when compared to what we are hearing out of Ottawa and all the huge Senate expense repayments.

Entitlement gone amuck!

[…]

Updates Wednesday, October 9th:

(1) It occurred to me that some readers might think I am criticizing Prime Minister Harper and his Conservative caucus in this post. I am not. See my latest post.

(2)  What has also occurred to me is that the consultant in question could simply have been on retainer. $64,000 over four years would work out to about $16,000 a year which is average for a contract for that kind of status — be available if I need you kind of thing. In fact, I have had those kinds of contracts. Usually, however, I do plenty of work but being on retainer is not unusual, particularly for lawyers, for IT professionals and/or communications consultants. Was that the case? Only time will tell but having someone on retainer would not represent illegal activity.

 

Media bias: Forum poll says ONPCs ahead, Radwanski says ill-equipped

Now we know the Toronto and national media’s game. Pick the poll results that are unfavourable to any conservative party in Canada ( federal or provincial), in this case, the Ontario PCs, and splash those results across the land. Conservatives are bad. Liberals and NDP are good.  

End of story? Not quite. Canadian conservatives are fighting back as we are witnessing in Alberta. I mean, read the latest spin that the Alberta race is allegedly tightening, from CTV. Predictable to say the least. 

Anyway, back to Ontario. With the vote on the Liberal Budget 2012 due this coming Tuesday, things are heating up. Will the Liberal government fall causing another Ontario election after only seven months? Or, will it live for another day, to continue wreching havoc on Ontario taxpayers? Well, it seems that the national media has decided that it should continue ruining Ontario.

On the one hand, you have the Hamilton Spectator reporting that the latest Forum Research Poll (H/T Jon) puts the ONPCs at 41% compared to the Liberals at 33% and the NDP at 20% — a solid 8 point lead. On the other, Adam Radwanski writes in the Globe and Mail about a Nanos poll that proves the ON PCs are ill-equipped to govern.

I mean, the Globe actually expects Ontarians to believe that 73.3% of us think Premier Dalton McGuinty is doing a good job. 

Which begs the question: Where on earth did Nanos get its sample? People living in the heart of Toronto or Ottawa?  Because the reality is, there is absolutely no way any pollster could get those results outside of the main urban centres (where there are no wind turbines). I mean, in the rural areas of Ontario, PCs dominated last October, dumping many former Liberal Cabinet Ministers. 

Why were they dumped? Primarily because of the Green Energy Act and McGuinty’s obsession with wind energy projects that are approved over the rights of property owners and those who have concerns about health (e.g., how the constant whirling noise can adversely affect children and adults with an autism spectrum disorder).    

However, the real issues here are the faulty assumptions that somehow Dalton McGuinty and his caucus are better equipped to govern than Tim Hudak and the PCs and that Hudak was wrong to say he was voting against the budget. How can the PCs vote for a budget that is guaranteed to increase the current deficit from $16 billion to $30 billion and counting by 2017? And, remember, that is not the Ontario PCs projection, that was what Don Drummond said.  

So, Forum Research says the Ontario PCs are ahead. Nanos and Radwanski ignore that poll and try to convince Ontarians that Hudak and his PCs are ill-equipped to govern. Well, they would be wrong, very wrong.

Hudak already has experience governing Ontario when he was a Parliamentary Secretary during Mike Harris’ first mandate between 1995 and 1999 and Minister of Northern Affairs and Mines and Culture, Tourism and Recreation during Ernie Eves’ term from 1999 to 2003 — during the same time period I should point out that McGuinty was the Liberal opposition leader.   

The reality is, then, that it’s all about spin and, for some unexplained reason, whether in Ontario or Alberta, and no matter how bad they govern, the consensus media prefer progressives, whether they are NDP or Liberal. And, that reality is not only sad but potentially ruinous!

Toronto Sun editorial info on Hudak & ON PCs is “6 mos out of date”

Update Thursday, April 19th: Here are a few very important reasons the Ontario PC will be voting against the McGuinty Liberal Budget 2012, received via e-mail this morning:

(1) The McGuinty Budget does nothing to take us off the path toward a looming $30 billion deficit and $411 billion debt;

(2) The McGuinty Budget contains no jobs plan;

(3) The McGuinty Budget does not reduce spending, only slows its growth and calls that a “cut”; and

(4) The McGuinty Budget contains no detail for achieving a balanced budget by 2017-18.

Plus, here is the full extent of Tim Hudak’s complaints about Budget 2012 as stated in his own words in the Ontario Legislature on March 28th, 2012 (contrary to many in the media who are constantly harping that Hudak has said nothing about Budget 2012).

[…]

Original article starts here: Doesn’t anyone at the Toronto Sun pay any attention whatsoever to what is going on in the here and now regarding PC Leader Tim Hudak and the Ontario PC Party?

I mean, not long ago, I wrote an e-mail to Lorrie Goldstein about one of his columns in which he quoted something Hudak had said during last fall’s Ontario election campaign.

I was annoyed because I had just interviewed Hudak and, in my interview, he explained that he had learned from his mistakes in the 2011 election and was now being clear that he comes out of the Mike Harris conservative, low tax, balanced budgets, job creation tradition.

He was also very clear that if the government fell as a result of the Liberals’ spring budget and his party was elected with a majority government, he would:

  1. Put an immediate freeze on public sector wages and growth,
  2. Shut down the Feed-In-Tariff boondoggle; and
  3. Put an immediate moratorium on full-day kindergarten and wind energy projects.

And, given the gentleman Goldstein is, he replied to me that he was glad that Hudak had come out stronger than he did when he was interviewed by the Sun Editorial Board before the October 2011 election — when Hudak was apparently iffy on the public sector wage freeze.

Well, people change. Hudak is definitely not iffy now. So, did Goldstein not share with anyone about my interview? If not, it just shows that, while Sun journalists are willing to assume Dalton McGuinty or NDP Leader Andrea Horwath can change, for some reason, Hudak cannot.

For example, here are the final few paragraphs of today’s editorial (with my comments immediately below):

“(1) As for Conservative Leader Tim Hudak, he needs to do more than keep repeating the mantra that he won’t support the Liberal budget because it doesn’t address job creation or government spending.”

Tim Hudak met with Premier McGuinty last November, asking that there be an immediate wage freeze. So, what does the McGuinty Government do? They release their budget saying they are going to “negotiate” wage concessions –which will turn out to be meaningless. We are talking a billion dollars here.  Then, just this week Hudak released a statement about how, without major changes to the budget, the current deficit will balloon to $30 billion dollars by 2017 — exactly what Don Drummond said.

And, if the interest rates go up, that will mean millions of additional dollars will have to come out of existing programs like health care and education. So, excuse me, Toronto Sun?  How on earth can the PC Party support a budget that won’t get Ontario out of the current fiscal quagmire? I mean, how is that a mantra? How is it that Hudak’s latest ideas do not address government spending and job creation? What complete and utter journalist incompetence — because Hudak and the party do deal with those issues!

“(2) In the last election, the Tory platform was virtually indistinguishable from the Liberal one in its support of all-day kindergarten and its absurd mimicking of the Liberals’ promise it would be relatively easy to balance the budget by 2017-18.”

That was then and this is now. Why is the Toronto Sun still in the middle of the 2011 election campaign? People and plans change as I said in point #1. In fact, at the very start of my recent interview with Hudak, he admitted that the fiscal situation is so bad, that it would be impossible for any political party to eliminate the current Ontario deficit before 2017.  Would the Sun Editorial Board rather he had lied to Ontarians like Dalton McGuinty has done on several occasions (like promising not to raise taxes and then doing just that)?

The other problem is that the current Liberal budget does not deal with the deficit at all. Which means, that if the Liberals pass this budget and the Sun agrees with it, they are part of the problem, because the current deficit is going to double by 2017, not be balanced by that date. Remember, that is not Hudak or me who is making that claim. That was Don Drummond’s conclusion (see link above under point # 1). So, clearly, when all the Sun does is complain about what Hudak did or said six months ago, the McGuinty government is getting a pass and for the life of me, I can’t figure out why.

“(3) What the Conservatives should be doing is developing and sharing a credible plan with voters about how they’ll balance the budget when the real election comes.”

Actually the plan the Ontario PCs gave during the last election WAS a credible plan. The problem was they said they could balance the budget by 2017 and that was not fast enough for the Toronto Sun. Well, it was the truth. And, it is a truth they continue to declare.  Where the problem comes in, is that the Liberals are the ones without a real plan.

However, speaking of a plan, did the Sun Editorial Board even look at the Ontario PC website?  I mean, since we are not in an election campaign at the moment, there is no formal platform but, and this is a big but, the PCs have made it very clear what their seven priorities are — priorities the Sun Editorial Board SHOULD have included in their editorial.

  • An immediate reduction of government spending by over 10%, outside of health and education.
  • A mandatory wage freeze for the public sector that would save $2 billion instead of failed Liberal promises of a wage freeze.
  • Competition for government contracts and private delivery of government services.
  • Ending the $2.5 billion in corporate welfare.
  • A real plan to fix our broken arbitration system – including ensuring arbitrators take into account the ability to pay.
  • A top-to-bottom program review of government spending to ensure every dollar is being spent wisely.
  • A review of all 630 government agencies, boards and commissions.

So, please, could the Toronto Sun editorial board please do up-to-date research when they write about the current Ontario situation? Could they also stop assuming an election would be bad for Ontario? It would NOT be bad for Ontario because we desperately need the PCs in charge if ever the province is going to get out of the current Liberal fiscal mess and be the “have” province it used to be.

Get real? Seriously?  Absolutely! There is no amount of tinkering the NDP or the PCs can negotiate that would make the current Liberal budget acceptable.

[…]

Endnotes: Other related information about Tim Hudak and the Ontario PCs — here, here, here, and here.