Liberals to sell Hydro One?

145 posts / 0 new
Last post
montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Ontario is completely screwed. What is going on in what was Ontario Hydro is ENRONIZATION. This will mean POSSIBLE 50 cents an hour hydro bills and brownouts. Wynne is carrying on the Mike Harris agenda of ENRONIZATION. This is the process of making power into a "market", and leaving the details to the Devil. Bye bye Ontario manufacturing industry, who were lured to that province by cheap and predictable power rates. Free Trade and the high dollar were not the only story. As I recall, Bob Rae started messing with Hydro before Harris got his hands on it.

ALL THREE PARTIES ARE GUILTY.

What happens with ENRONIZATION is that when there are bad assets they are shuffled off into other corporations. ENRON CHECK. What was Ontario Hydro is now 4 corporations. On top of all of these is the "Stranded debt" of $30 billion or so. This is the financial HOT POTATO.

This is classic neoconservative crisis manufacturing so that ENBRIDGE can walk in and save the day. ENBRIDGE, as we know, is connected to the Conservative Party of Canada at the highest level, as we have found from the Duffy Diaries. ENBRIDGE is the favored rescuer from the Ontario ENRONIZATON mess. And Ontario consumers will have nice stable hydro bills of 16 cents a kilowatt hour. Welcome to the future.

josh

Rokossovsky wrote:

Your "position" might be understandable, if you could show that the OFL was anything more than a mouthpiece for the Liberal government they are so proud to have elected.

http://ofl.ca/index.php/ontariobudget2015/

Rokossovsky

That is today, and coincides with the fact that CUPE has announced its intention to heavily finance opposition to the Hydro One sale. Even Sid Ryan can't ignore the facts forever.

I asked my question two days ago. Feel free to look back over everything since the last election, and I defy you to find even a hint that there might be any problem with the privatization scheme that has clearly been in the offing since April last year, sanctified in a report issued in November, and further developed in preparation for this budget.

Not a fucking thing.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

josh

Whether to privatize, and how much, has been in flux for the last year.

http://t.thestar.com/#/article/news/queenspark/2015/04/20/how-hydro-one-...

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Right!

<sarcasm>

vote against the neoliberal Conservatives to prevent the neoliberal Liberals from winning!

</sarcasm>

Rokossovsky

montrealer58 wrote:

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

Yeah. Now they are making some "bad choices". Misdirected but well intentioned Liberals.

Rokossovsky

josh wrote:

Whether to privatize, and how much, has been in flux for the last year.

http://t.thestar.com/#/article/news/queenspark/2015/04/20/how-hydro-one-...

Regg Cohn or Benzie's. Just guessing, which mouth piece it is. I bet it is Benzie's the staff "Queens Park Bureau Chief". Did you know that last guy to hold that position at the Toronto Star is helping Dalton McGuinty write his book?

Let me know.

josh

montrealer58 wrote:

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

Yeah, how dare they put their own survival over what's good for the NDP.

Rokossovsky

josh wrote:
montrealer58 wrote:

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

Yeah, how dare they put their own survival over what's good for the NDP.

You mean how dare they put their own survivial over what is in the interests of their own members, you know... the ones who are going to lose their jobs?

josh

Rokossovsky wrote:

josh wrote:
montrealer58 wrote:

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

Yeah, how dare they put their own survival over what's good for the NDP.

You mean how dare they put their own survivial over what is in the interests of their own members, you know... the ones who are going to lose their jobs?

Their own survival is in the best interest of their members. As is the difference between losing, say, 1000 jobs and 100,000 jobs.

Unionist

josh wrote:
montrealer58 wrote:

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

Yeah, how dare they put their own survival over what's good for the NDP.

I'm curious when the ONDP will ever learn that it should humbly serve the interests of working people. Hard to be humble, when you have cheerleaders cheering every move you make and every word of betrayal that you utter. Good to see that the OFL calls it as it is.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..and here we are again. round and round we go. it’s the capitalist system that we live under that is the enemy. which is both the economic and governing systems. it’s not the 34, the ofl nor lead now that are at fault here. it is undeniable that major parts of the ndp leadership supports and maintains the system that is bringing us perpetual crisis. this needs to be critiqued openly. election time is always the best time because we have the politicians attention.

..what is missing from party politics is solutions. what is missing is a way out of this mess. what is missing is acknowledgment that the ndp, the way it is today, does not represent that direction. acknowledgment that the reforms that they might bring are not enough and haven’t been for a long time. yes they may be better than the libs and cons but that is not enough to deal with issues of austerity or climate. not in today's world. again and again the claim is that this is understood by all yet there is little discussion that goes beyond electing the ndp. we fight each other on babble over party politics and nothing changes. but when we do push change can occur, we see this all the time.

..so more and more people look for other ways than party politics trying to find solutions and this ends up being attacked because it doesn’t fit into the narrative that the ndp is the answer to our problems. meanwhile the real struggle for change continues in our communities. it is necessary that we understand this because we don’t have all the time in the world. you want to stop the hydro sale stop looking for saviours or people to blame..get your asses out into the street. not once has this been suggested in this thread.

Rokossovsky

josh wrote:
Rokossovsky wrote:

josh wrote:
montrealer58 wrote:

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

Yeah, how dare they put their own survival over what's good for the NDP.

You mean how dare they put their own survivial over what is in the interests of their own members, you know... the ones who are going to lose their jobs?

Their own survival is in the best interest of their members. As is the difference between losing, say, 1000 jobs and 100,000 jobs.

Yay! Champion of concession bargaining nets... bigger concessions.

They are losing 100,000 jobs. You failed to read the fine print. Most of Hudak's job losses were calculated through attriction, which is precisely what budget restraint gets you.

100,000 fewer public sector jobs possible under Wynne: Don Drummond

Brachina

 Bingo,.people voted for Wynne and got Tim Hudak.

Rokossovsky

Brachina wrote:

 Bingo,.people voted for Wynne and got Tim Hudak.

No. They got Don Drummond.

Rokossovsky

josh wrote:

Whether to privatize, and how much, has been in flux for the last year.

http://t.thestar.com/#/article/news/queenspark/2015/04/20/how-hydro-one-...

I hope you realize that their is an outright misrepresentation or outright falsehood, in almost every single paragraph of this article. For example, Cohn maks something of Clark talking about the need for asset sales to support infrastruce expenditure:

Quote:
Clark argues that there is more money there for the taking in current market conditions. And that the money is needed more than ever — not for a budget-balancing political stunt, but to bankroll badly needed transit infrastructure that will pay dividends (and mitigate economic costs).

Technically true, because when Clark's report notes that the first order of business will be paying down the debt, not building infrastrucute he makes it clear that it is the government calling for using the funds for deficit reduction, not himself.

Yes, in clear contradiction to the Liberal campaign pledge only to use "asset recycling" of crown assets for "new" transit infrastructure, but now the majority of the money will be used for paying down the debt.

The "political stunt" is to pretend one is making "strategic investment" when one is going on an austerity rampage of deficit reduction by selling off long term revenue streams.Can't imagine how Regg Cohn misses this point in his summary. where he coyly pretends to be arguing against the government, in order to confirm its wisdom in the final analysis.

josh

Rokossovsky wrote:

josh wrote:
Rokossovsky wrote:

josh wrote:
montrealer58 wrote:

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

Yeah, how dare they put their own survival over what's good for the NDP.

You mean how dare they put their own survivial over what is in the interests of their own members, you know... the ones who are going to lose their jobs?

Their own survival is in the best interest of their members. As is the difference between losing, say, 1000 jobs and 100,000 jobs.

Yay! Champion of concession bargaining nets... bigger concessions.

They are losing 100,000 jobs. You failed to read the fine print. Most of Hudak's job losses were calculated through attriction, which is precisely what budget restraint gets you.

100,000 fewer public sector jobs possible under Wynne: Don Drummond

 

A nearly year old article talking about a "possbility."  Yeah, that's sold evidence.

Unionist

epaulo13 wrote:
you want to stop the hydro sale stop looking for saviours or people to blame..get your asses out into the street. not once has this been suggested in this thread.

The reason it hasn't been suggested is because there are zero conditions for any such mobilization in Ontario right now, as you must know. Furthermore, outside the trade union movement, no one there seems to care much about privatization, except as a talking point. I have been asking, since last year, why the NDP doesn't simply declare that any privatization carried out by the Liberals will be reversed once the NDP gains power. The reason is, very simply, that they won't - and there is no pressure from their base to take such a stand. Even Smokey Thomas tried to hedge his bets by privately asking Wynne to sell the LCBO to OPSEU's pension fund, if she was going to proceed with privatization. He had zero confidence that an NDP government would protect it.

Taking to the streets is a great means, but you need to figure out what the end is. You could rally a movement in Québec if anyone threatened to privatize Hydro. In Ontario? Without leadership from the political parties, it'll go the way of Manitoba Telephone System and Potash Corp. Prove me wrong, I'll be happy.

Rokossovsky

josh wrote:

Rokossovsky wrote:

josh wrote:
Rokossovsky wrote:

josh wrote:
montrealer58 wrote:

When will those Ontario unions ever learn about the Liberals?

Answer? Never.

Yeah, how dare they put their own survival over what's good for the NDP.

You mean how dare they put their own survivial over what is in the interests of their own members, you know... the ones who are going to lose their jobs?

Their own survival is in the best interest of their members. As is the difference between losing, say, 1000 jobs and 100,000 jobs.

Yay! Champion of concession bargaining nets... bigger concessions.

They are losing 100,000 jobs. You failed to read the fine print. Most of Hudak's job losses were calculated through attriction, which is precisely what budget restraint gets you.

100,000 fewer public sector jobs possible under Wynne: Don Drummond

 

A nearly year old article talking about a "possbility."  Yeah, that's sold evidence.

Yeah, from the guy who wrote the report upon which the Liberal's openly admited 90% of their economic platform was derived. As he noted in the article, which you probably did not read, the Liberal plan, like that of Tim Hudak, depends not on actually firing people for the most part but allowing attrition to eliminate jobs. and sloughing off service on the private sector through P3s.

From yesterday:

Quote:
Fred Hahn, president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees Ontario, said jobs in everything from early childhood education to childrens’ aid are on the block. In other instances, developmental services workers have seen their hours cut back, he said. And he pointed to childrens’ aid societies, including one in Hamilton, that have given employees unpaid days off.

“You can cut 100,000 jobs in a bunch of different ways. You can do it as a blunt instrument and campaign on it, like Tim Hudak, or you can starve services of funding while saying you’re progressive,” he said.

Ontario Liberals look to make big cuts to climb out of deficit

But, in addition to sloughing off the work force, they are acting more agressively to guy social service by firing people, and cutting programs:

This is just the beginning:

Nurses:

Hospital RN Cuts Hit the GTA: Southlake Regional cuts more than 32,000 hours of RN care

Grand River Hospital Cuts Registered Nurses to Balance Budget

CHEO Cuts More than 50 Registered Nursing Positions: Patients pay the price for underfunding

RN Cuts at Cambridge Memorial Hospital Will Harm Patient Care: Loss of 22 RN positions means more death and disease for patients

Brockville Registered Nurses Say Looming Job Cuts will Impact Patient Care

Teachers:

TDSB votes to eliminate more than 250 teaching positions

Special ed cuts to hit most Ontario boards

Toronto Catholic board cuts include teacher-librarians

But guys like you will never admit you are wrong.

josh

It's a matter of what the unions thought was right or wrong.  After seeing what had happened in nearby Wisconsin and Michigan, the unions had a valid concern that Hudak, and his "right to work" nonsense, was a mortal threat to their continued viability.

Rokossovsky

Rokossovsky wrote:
Unionist wrote:

7. Everyone knew the Liberals had privatization on the agenda - but Andrea refused to state: "Sell off whatever you like - but BUYERS BEWARE - within 100 days of being elected, an NDP government will either buy it back at a price that is acceptable to Ontarians, or re-nationalize it with fair compensation."

Perhaps you would care to offer some support for this historical rewrite. Please evidence;

  • that you either knew or cared if there was mass privatization of Ontario government assets and that privatzation of Hydro One was the financial basis of the Liberal economic plan -- you can do so by offering any single post on this web site between April 2014 and the end of the election that says this;
  • that Judy Rebick either knew or cared if there was mass privatization of Ontario government assets and that privatzation of Hydro One was the financial basis of the Liberal economic plan -- you can do so by offering any single statement from Rebick between April 2014 and the end of the election that says this;
  • that Sid Ryan either knew or cared if there was mass privatization of Ontario government assets and that privatization of Hydro One was the financial basis of the Liberal economic plan -- you can do so by offering any single statement from Ryan or the OFL between April 2014 and the end of the election that says this;
  • that Jerry Dias either knew or cared if there was mass privatization of Ontario government assets and that privatization of Hydro One was the financial basis of the Liberal economic plan -- you can do so by offering any single statement from Dias or Unifor between April 2014 and the end of the election that says this;

In fact if it is true that "everyone knew that the Liberals had privatization on the agenda", then it should be plainly obvious that the above mentioned union leaders colluded with the Liberal Party of Ontario, to misinform their members and the general public because they failed to mention the plain facts of the privatization agenda as proposed by Kathleen Wynne and Charles Sousa.

Still waiting for a response on this question raised over here.

Rokossovsky

josh wrote:

It's a matter of what the unions thought was right or wrong.  After seeing what had happened in nearby Wisconsin and Michigan, the unions had a valid concern that Hudak, and his "right to work" nonsense, was a mortal threat to their continued viability.

Changing the subject again? But you are right. It is nonsense. Tim Hudak agrees with you.

He didn't campaign on "right to work". Wow. He campaigned on the Drummond report, just like the Liberals. His big mistake was being open about what was in it -- the Liberals by contrast relied on panic mongering.

Tim Hudak backs off PC 'right to work' plan: Tim Hudak says controversial policy was an idea that 'didn't make the cut'

Quote:
"Only 15 per cent of the private sector is unionized in Ontario [so] this right-to- work issue just doesn't have the scope of power to fix the issues for the 100 per cent of manufacturing jobs threatened in Ontario," Hudak said in a speech to the Toronto Region Board of Trade.

"If we're elected, we're not going to do it. We won't touch the Rand formula."

You really have problems distinguishing fact from spin.

Moreover, there is little evidence that the Liberals have more respect for bargaining rights given their preemptive imposition of Bill 115 on Ontario teachers, and listing the TTC as an "essential service", so they can not strike.

The continued viability of Ontario unions and their ability to represent their membership is just as threatened by acting like Chinese toady unions for the Liberal Party.

josh

And Walker in Wisconsin and Snyder in Michigan each said they had no intention of doing it.  And then turned around and did it.  And they didn't say at any time prior to election, or re-election, that they wanted to do it.  Good thing the unions, unlike you, weren't so blase about it.

And then, from your article:

 

"Only 15 per cent of the private sector is unionized in Ontario [so] this right-to- work issue just doesn't have the scope of power to fix the issues for the 100 per cent of manufacturing jobs threatened in Ontario," Hudak said in a speech to the Toronto Region Board of Trade.

Notice he referred only to the private sector.

 

The right-to-work ideas still have merit, but aren't widely supported, admitted Hudak.

The arguments make sense. Why should anybody be forced to join a union that they don't support?" he asked the business audience.

Right, they had no reason to fear Hudak.

Rokossovsky

No. Of course they had just as much reason to fear Tim Hudak, as they did to fear Kathleen Wynne, because they campaigned on the same godamned platform.

The problem is Josh, that half of the Ontario union leadership, especially those in Unifor have their heads stuck so far stuck up the Liberal Premier's ass that they can't see night from day.

And that is the plain truth of it.

There are pleny of ways that unions can "intervene" in the democratic process beyond trying to swing elections so that they can have a "seat at the table". They can, for example, campaign on the issues raised, not the personalities of the leaders or the political parties, and so shift the agenda, or use their negotiating muscle between elections, which is at the end comprised of one main thing: the right to strike.

But this right, the one that defines the strength of unions, is one that the Liberals have no problem overriding, again and again, even before a strike vote has been called.

Rokossovsky

I called privatization of Hydro One, and neither, you nor Unionist, Sid Ryan, Jerry Dias, or Judy Rebick, even sniffed it. Some were bought, and some were sold, but at the end of the day all you need to do is go to the opening post to find out who really called the result of the last provincial election.

Unionist

Unionist, on April 28, 2014 wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:

The Liberal Party of Ontario is bad news.  We need the Ontario NDP to be elected here.

Yes, and you need them FAST. Because if anything is sold off before they're elected, it can never become public again. Not sure why, but apparently that's a strict rule with other provincial NDPs that lobbied against privatization when in opposition but did nothing to reverse it once in power.

Cf. Manitoba Telephone System, Potash Corporation, etc.

Sadly - true then, still true.

 

Rokossovsky

Unionist wrote:

Unionist, on April 28, 2014 wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:

The Liberal Party of Ontario is bad news.  We need the Ontario NDP to be elected here.

Yes, and you need them FAST. Because if anything is sold off before they're elected, it can never become public again. Not sure why, but apparently that's a strict rule with other provincial NDPs that lobbied against privatization when in opposition but did nothing to reverse it once in power.

Cf. Manitoba Telephone System, Potash Corporation, etc.

Sadly - true then, still true.

That you were shilling then, and are shilling now. Not one of your precious union bosses warned of privatization of Ontario hydro, and you vilified those who did. You say that "everyone knew that privatization was on the Liberal agenda", but can't find a single quote from Sid Ryan or Jerry Dias, suggesting that they cared, let alone one demanding that the NDP should make the demand for reversal of any privatization deal enacted by the government they wanted to elect.

Not even a sniff or a whiff of a demand for reintegration or repurchase of lost assets from OFL or Unifor, throughout the election campaign, not even a call opposing further privatization or that it was on the agenda of the party they were giving the members money too.

It's a sad day when the Labour movement campaigns to the right of the NDP.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

CUPE Ontario vows to fight Hydro One sell-off

Selling off part of Hydro One is a mistake that will cost generations of Ontarians, warns Fred Hahn, president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Ontario.

“Hydro One generates more than $6 billion in revenue and belongs to the people of Ontario. Selling off revenue-generating assets means future generations of Ontarians will be footing the bill for yet another government’s short-sightedness,” asked Hahn, in response to a government plan for an initial public offering that will sell off 10-15 percent of Ontario’s publicly owned electricity transmission and distribution company.

quote:

CUPE Ontario was involved in a broad coalition that successfully prevented the complete sale of Ontario Hydro by a previous provincial government, and is once again fully committed to defending this important public infrastructure.

“There’s a reason we keep this vital infrastructure public,” said Hahn. “Ontarians saw the hard work and dedication of our hydro heroes after the ice storm last year. Our members worked around the clock, under dangerous conditions to restore power to Ontarians. History tells us that privatization would have left Ontario in the dark.”

http://cupe.on.ca/archivedoc2914/

....

..from   Keep Hydro Public

http://www.keephydropublic.ca/email_your_mpp

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

CUPE vows to fight Liberal plan to privatize Hydro One: Public will pay with lost control, rising rates

Toronto, ON. – CUPE Ontario is mounting a massive campaign to stop Premier Kathleen Wynne’s plans to privatize Hydro One, CUPE Ontario President Fred Hahn announced today.

“The Hydro One selloff is a short-sighted plan by the Liberal government that will mean higher electricity bills and a loss of billions in long-term revenue that could be invested in public infrastructure and services,” said Hahn. “But Hydro One isn’t sold yet. There’s time to stop this privatization mistake, and we’ll do everything we can – from mobilizing people across the province to legal action, if necessary – to stop the Liberals from selling off what we’ve built together over more than a century.”

http://cupe.on.ca/cupe-vows-to-fight-liberal-plan-to-privatize-hydro-one...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Opposition grows to Hydro sell-off

quote:

First Nations have expressed their displeasure with the plan as well. “It is critical that Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne consider First Nations a vital partner in the decisions related to this sale,” said Serpent River First Nation Chief Isadore Day, who is running for Ontario Regional Chief. “These resources are assets intended to benefit everyone and must therefore include First Nations in both the discussion and decision-making process. Generation, transmission and distribution of electricity all occur on treaty lands. It is a requirement that First Nations are inclusive at all stages of this sale.”

quote:

“My first comment would be ‘its not hers to sell’,” said Greg Young, who along with other Manitoulin Islanders has been circulating a petition against Hydro One increases. “It belongs to the people of Ontario. Lets face it, pre-1999, when we got our power from the completely public , Crown corporation of Ontario Hydro, electricity was reasonably priced for Ontario Energy Consumers. But I think in light of some very recent developments, it’s pretty clear that the Liberal government has had this planned for some time.”

http://www.manitoulin.ca/2015/04/22/opposition-grows-to-hydro-sell-off/

Rokossovsky

Thanks!

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

By supporting the Hydro One Selloff, (a process which was started by Bob Rae and continued through Mike Harris), ALL THREE political parties in Ontario are responsible for this massive irresponsibility which has cost Ontario its manufacturing sector.

Cheap and stable hydro rates were the main thing which attracted business to Ontario, and it is no coincidence that when Rae started fucking with it, business started to leave. There were other factors like Mulroney's trade deal, but low and stable Hydro rates would have mitigated the problem considerably.

Comparison to Quebec is the elephant in the room. With a much smaller population base and a much smaller GDP per capita, Quebec has managed to move into balanced budget territory. In addition it is able to maintain a bigger public sector per capita than Ontario (whose finance minister claimed is now the lowest cost government in North America - whatever that means), chaper college tuition rates, and a number of things which makes it a much better place for a low income disabled person like myself to live in.

This keeps the Don Drummonds at bay about selling off assets (AT LEAST FOR NOW).

I don't like addressing other people by name because I have finally concluded it is impolite, but one poster here has made an excellent point that you need a political culture to defend public services and public corporations. We seem to have this culture in Quebec, and they do not seem to have it in the rest of Canada.

Experience in Britain, the USA, Canada and every other place shows that when you privatize a public service, you have to raise the price by at least 40% to pay for the shareholder dividends and the executive bloat.

Rokossovsky

I have no idea where you are getting this information that the 1990-1995 NDP government supported or advocated for Hydro privatization. I am willing to believe it, but as far as I know Rae always opposed it.

But its a red herring anyway. It isn't about "parties" its about policies.

jas

The Enronization of power markets is happening across Canada. In BC, the Socred-erals, rather than selling off Hydro, restructured it to be primarily a buyer of private energy, rather than a producer and seller. It is already saddled with contracts for private energy projects which are coming online in the next few years. Moreover, the energy purchases will be required even at times Hydro can't use it. BC Hydro is restricted from constructing any new power generation, with the notable exception of the massive, multi-billion-dollar, Site C Peace River dam project, which they figure BC taxpayers and hydro ratepayers can foot the bill for, and the power from which will be used for oil and gas extraction in NE BC and Alberta.

Some say this is the equivalent of privatizing Hydro, since it effectively has put it on a course to bankruptcy.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

montrealer58 wrote:

I don't like addressing other people by name because I have finally concluded it is impolite, but one poster here has made an excellent point that you need a political culture to defend public services and public corporations. We seem to have this culture in Quebec, and they do not seem to have it in the rest of Canada.

.i see things a bit different. new cultures everywhere are coming up as we speak. this has come out of the square occupations. look at what is happening on the ground in greece. the movements are spectacular. their sights are held high because they envision a different world..imho. look at que and bc. look at first nations. this is our time and people are coming forward. seems like this sell off will be an important struggle in many ways. enough bickering i say with those who are our allies. lets get on with change.

mark_alfred

Good to Ryan waking up at last.  From the link,

Sid Ryan wrote:

“Wynne sold herself to Ontarians as the ‘Social Justice Premier’ but she has presented us with a budget drafted by bankers, for bankers,” said Ryan. “This budget has identified many important problems but it arrives at all the wrong solutions. Ontario needs long term, stable and reliable revenue to protect valuable public services and to lift people out of poverty,” said Ryan.

Rokossovsky

mark_alfred wrote:

josh wrote:
">http://ofl.ca/index.php/ontariobudget2015/

Good to Ryan waking up at last.  From the link,

Sid Ryan wrote:

“Wynne sold herself to Ontarians as the ‘Social Justice Premier’ but she has presented us with a budget drafted by bankers, for bankers,” said Ryan. “This budget has identified many important problems but it arrives at all the wrong solutions. Ontario needs long term, stable and reliable revenue to protect valuable public services and to lift people out of poverty,” said Ryan.

CUPE wasn't going to sit idly by and let the Liberals dismantle the public sector. They were ok with "strategic voting" as compromise within the OFL, but Fred Hahn bristled at the May 1 Liberal budget right from the start. While OPSEU may not be a member of the OFL, CUPE is, and Ryan needs to say something to appease that part of his constituency.

As I observed during the election, one of the bigest mistakes of buying into the Liberal fearmongering and strategic voting, has been demobilizing the ability of the unions to opposed the government they elected, and told their members to vote for.

It is absolutely no surprise that Ryan is a Johnny come lately to this "realization" about Wynne.

Oddly, Liberal party booster, Jerry Dias, of UNIFOR who took an active interest in the budget (calling the budget "decent", and recomending NDP support) and who was vocal throughout the subsequent election won't even sign his name to the UNIFOR release on this budget, shopping that task out to the union's Ontario Regional Director Katha Fortier, who sugar coats the bitter pill as much as possible.

Quote:
TORONTO, April 23, 2015 /CNW/ - The Ontario provincial budget tabled today includes important investments that could lead to a brighter future, but also takes risks that might lead to the lights going out.

"Some of the measures in this budget will help secure a stronger future for Ontarians, while others, namely the privatization of Hydro One, are remarkably short-sighted," said Katha Fortier, Unifor Ontario Regional Director.

Ontario budget generates optimism and concern--UNIFOR