Ontario PC leadership race

Here's a previous thread on the race.

[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/central-canada/julian-fantino-seek-ontario-p... Fantino to seek Ontario PC leadership?[/url]

It would be a mistake to dismiss Hillier as a nutjob.   He represents an easy solution set for some very marginalized people.  The progressive left has failed to even acknowledge many of the underlying concerns, which leaves the floor open for the Hillier types. 

I think, when push comes to shove, the candidate who promises not to discuss religious schools will win this race. Most Conservative activists should recognize that issue as a suicide pill and candidates who aren't smart enough to recognize there's a silent majority opposed to revisiting the issue will be punished.

At this stage, I'd say that's Christine Elliott's biggest advantage.

Yeah, Bookish Agrarian, I agree with you. If you think back to the early days of the reform party, they were competing with the NDP in a lot of ridings, not the old PCs. They were fighting over voters who felt ignored by the two big mainstream parties. I can see Hillier solidifying support among those voters; the problem is that there just aren't enough ridings like that to come anywhere close to winning government.

Well, there's the right to keep and bear anti-aircraft missiles, water fluoridization, black helicopters, the list goes on...

From the "budget" thread:

"Also - and this question is for Bookish Agrarian (or anyone with links to farm country) - can Andrea propose something to end the alienation of country and city? Does the common plight of marginalized folk in economic crisis present an opportunity for New Democrats? "

----------------------

As a onetime farm (hobby/weekend) owner in Lanark County and a onetime farmpage editor, I understand the social setting for Hillier's success, BA.  But for folks who don't like to talk about country folk in disparaging fashion (a wonderful liberal position but it should not be an excuse for remaining ignorant) what is missing in NDP policy and activity?

Farmpunk is impressed with visitations by the Cons.  And the cons certainly know the small business side of farm life and the dilemma of making aliving from the soil if you don't have the acreage or the credit- even if they do  nothing about it. But why in hell can't New Democrats take up the small-farmer issues? I never hear them broached here. My Can. Tire mechanics raises turkeys on the side and he is being conscripted, gradually, as my car goes in for work. It's really a huge ignorance out there in unreadsville, not just in liberal platitudesville,  isn't it?

I for one am not being disparaging towards rural people. I'm being disparaging towards Randy Hillier and his brand of neo-fascist phony populism. I would genuinely like to know specific examples of issues that he gets away with exploiting because the "left" doesn't address them. And, i want to know about issues that the left would ever want to touch with a ten foot pole in the first place - because while Hillier might get votes by attacking First nations and immigrants - i don't think anyone wants to see the ONDP getting into a bidding war with him over who can appeal more to the "hate" vote.

I'd like some examples of actual progressive policies stances that the left could propose that people think would make the rural rednecks who are part of the Randy Hillier cult suddenly start voting NDP and singing "Avanti Popolo".

Tommy_Paine wrote:

"Thanks for proving my point that the left not only doesn't get it, some elements on the left are just plain fucking stupid."

The abandonment of poor and working class whites by the Democrats back in the 60's and 70's gave the Klan and David Duke an opening to exploit in many places.

Rural people and urban people may be facing what looks like different problems, but they can be reduced to a commonality.  It's something I (who doesn't, admittedly, see everything) don't see the ONDP, let alone the left, recognizing.

 

 

And the point I was trying to make, although Tommy as usual you are much more articulate.

oldgoat wrote:

Quote:

Thanks for proving my point that the left not only doesn't get it, some elements on the left are just plain fucking stupid.

 

The first part I don't know, the second part of course, but we can at least be civilized, ok?

It is nice to see that expressing prejudice and prejorative views about rural people is still the last great bastion of allowable discourse on babble.

Stockholm wrote:

I for one am not being disparaging towards rural people. I'm being disparaging towards Randy Hillier and his brand of neo-fascist phony populism. I would genuinely like to know specific examples of issues that he gets away with exploiting because the "left" doesn't address them. And, i want to know about issues that the left would ever want to touch with a ten foot pole in the first place - because while Hillier might get votes by attacking First nations and immigrants - i don't think anyone wants to see the ONDP getting into a bidding war with him over who can appeal more to the "hate" vote.

It is always fascinating to me how the legitimate grievances of rural people are just ‘hate’ stuff.  My God there couldn’t possibly be some real issues that the right are exploiting.  I’ve had it happen within the NDP when I was told from the podium that consulting farmers on environmental policy was not necessary as that wasn’t an environmental issue.  I mean it’s not like they own most of the land or anything and might have had a thought or two on these issues.

Here are some issues just off the top of my head.

Species at risk legislation.  The legislation puts all of the costs on the individual landholder to save species.  Yet it was all of us as a society that caused the problem.  In some cases the good stewardship of the individual rural landowner is being rewarded by downloading all of the (often considerable) costs of maintaining that refuge for identified species.  This is a legitimate concern, yet within the NDP leadership contest some were trying to use being concerned about this very poor legislation as a wedge issue against Gilles Bisson.

Clean Water regulations- no one is against clean water, but again the entire cost burden is being shifted towards the individual land owner.  These types of things should be a partnership, not an imposing of costs on those often least able to pay for it.

Education issues – the NDPs rhetoric is almost entirely urban-Toronto biased.  There is a failure to even attempt to understand the often much different pressures put on schools in low growth areas.

Farm issues- the NDP has some good policies, but too often the rhetoric is basically everyone should just switch to organics.  I say this as an organic farmer.  The problems are much bigger than that.  Organic farmers are facing many of the same pressures their conventional neighbours are facing.  Food is a common ground issue, but farmers feel neglected as part of the solution and as a reflection of the broader society the NDP is no better.  The right at least talks to farmers and rural people, they create a presence for themselves.  The NDP can’t even be bothered to show up at the International Plowing Match in any real sense an event that attracts over 90,000 people (most of them non-farmers).  The right is of course full of it, but they at least act like they give a crap. 

I could go on and on and address things like the recent SPCA act, the Green Energy Act, and a good dozen other things without even trying hard.  But it would take up a lot of space and this is already too long.  Basically though the theme that runs through them that as marginalized people rural residents often have the costs, economically, community and otherwise, shoved down on them to be borne by the individual.  With a farm economy in crisis before, but due to the same reasons as manufacturing, it is not hard to figure out that someone, anyone, speaking up for them, even if the solutions proffered are out to lunch, would get traction.  Ontario has lost 62% of its under aged 35 farmers in the last 15 years.  In any other industry that would be a crisis.  Agri-food is the second largest industry in Ontario I would remind you.  However, even though the base is eroding to this important economic sector the NDP often ignores the issues altogether.

One final note.  After the Green Energy Act was announced I wrote a letter to all 4 leadership candidates to talk about some of the very negative social, economic and environmental impacts it could have on rural communities.  I have a fairly prominent position in the 3 D world.  Only two campaigns bothered to get back to me.  Of course I didn’t just complain, I offered positive alternatives that were environmentally sustainable and would have a much greater economic impact on our communities and province.  Take a wild guess were the two candidates who weren’t interested, during a leadership campaign, to even discuss a less urban -centric view of that issue?  The right is exploiting economic issues at their base.  It is those who are not looking at the reality who think it only a 'hate' agenda.  If the left cannot address real economic grievances and economic justice for rural people then we might as well fold up the tent and all go out for some imported Chineese Apple concentrate made into juice that is grown with known carcinegeons we banned here in Ontario a decade ago.

"And the cons certainly know the small business side..."   

Not just farms as small business, but also small business in general.  It's largely a mythology that Conservatives are for small business.  The second people to feel the pain of Harper's cuts to social assistance were the street front small business people.    And, they are going to suffer more as cuts to wages for industrial workers leaks it's way through the economy.

Facts is facts. As a direct result of Conservative and Liberal long time and continuing attachment to neo liberal economic philosophy,  WalMart is doing just fine, thanks, while Mom and Pop bankrupcies are continuing to increase.

We tend to think that wedge issues like abortion or gay marriage has created a crevass between rural and urban voters.   But there's nothing like people's bottom line to build bridges.

TP:

"Not just farms as small business, but also small business in general.  It's largely a mythology that Conservatives are for small business.  The second people to feel the pain of Harper's cuts to social assistance were the street front small business people.    And, they are going to suffer more as cuts to wages for industrial workers leaks it's way through the economy."

-------------------------------------

Unless you can show me where every Chamber of Commerce in this province has walked out on the party, I 've no idea where you are coming from on this TP. Nada.  Where do you thiink the Cons get their million little donations from?

BA - Thanks for finally outlining the issues as you see them. Your previous posts here had all been rather cryptic, and for myself at least, indecipherable.

SSC:

"It's not making fun of rural people. It's making fun of Randy Hillier and his paranoia and strange views and behaviours."

----------------------------------

You still haven't got around to readin' Deer Huntin' ? Randy would be right at home in the hills above you there mate.

George Victor wrote:

BA

"I would start with the local food and food soverignty people.  And of course the NFU is still active and in fact is experiencing a renaissance in Ontario.  "

-----------

Wonderful to hear. And how does the NFU counter the libertarian Hilliers?

By talking about economic reality facing farmers in blunt and straight-forward terms.  But here's the thing.  Hillier and many of his ilk understand the power of economics and often use our material to attack the fundamental failure of Liberals to address real concerns. 

It is base manipulation on their part and we are always aware of how we can be used, but the important part is that the right is willing to address the issues and then provide bullshit solutions.  They have more money and are better organized and out compete because of that.  The mythology that the growth of the Hillier crowd is all based on racism, hate and guns misses entirely what is going on.  They use those issues to point people in their direction - however, they start with legitimate grievances and then tell them it is all the fault of 'pick your target'.  And by abandoning the field to them, we are complicite in the growth of that illegitimate voice

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

George Victor wrote:

BA

"I would start with the local food and food soverignty people.  And of course the NFU is still active and in fact is experiencing a renaissance in Ontario.  "

-----------

Wonderful to hear. And how does the NFU counter the libertarian Hilliers?

 

By talking about economic reality facing farmers in blunt and straight-forward terms.  But here's the thing.  Hillier and many of his ilk understand the power of economics and often use our material to attack the fundamental failure of Liberals to address real concerns. 

It is base manipulation on their part and we are always aware of how we can be used, but the important part is that the right is willing to address the issues and then provide bullshit solutions.  They have more money and are better organized and out compete because of that.  The mythology that the growth of the Hillier crowd is all based on racism, hate and guns misses entirely what is going on.  They use those issues to point people in their direction - however, they start with legitimate grievances and then tell them it is all the fault of 'pick your target'.  And by abandoning the field to them, we are complicite in the growth of that illegitimate voice

  I think this is a perfect lead in to take a look at his speech when he official announced he's running this am.  The key in your comments 'Hillier and his ilk understand the power of economics....they start with legitimate grievances and then tell them it is all the fault of 'pick your target'..... 

 Freedom, Justice, and Democracy 

Quote:

We can only move forward by understanding what made Canada and Ontario a great country and great province.

Some may suggest that it was our natural resources, our proximity to the American markets, or the creativity, industry and ambitions of our ancestors.

All these factors are of course true -– but also incomplete.

Our economic success and prosperity was due to three essentials:

1. The protection of individual freedoms;
2. A legal system based on justice;
3. And a democracy that welcomed and encouraged people and their participation.

Today we are a “have not” province.

And it goes from there......

It's all there BA, just like you said with the exact strategy you pointed out. 

It's a system that squeezes nickels in pursuing the buy low/sell high mantra that is all business. And I guess the Hillier followers signs "Farms feed cities" reflect the feeling of injustice.

The Canadian farmer must be allowed the power of the Japanese and French agrarian in demanding a fair percentage, guaranteed by the state. And we should not have to wait for climate change to end the California dependency ...

Star Spangled Canadian wrote:

Though it may not be a great situation to have a provincial party leader and possible future premier married to the federal finance minister.

Obviously Flaherty, having tried twice for the provincial leadership himself, would defer to his wife if she won it, by stepping down as federal finance minister and going on the fund-raising circuit for her.

Wouldn't he?

Christine Elliott was called to the bar in 1980. She was born in Oshawa and raised in Whitby. He was from Montreal. They moved to her turf.

Quote:

When Flaherty met Ms. Elliott, they were both working in a litigation law firm in downtown Toronto. Both were interested in politics. A year after they married, they decided that Ms. Elliott should run in the 1987 provincial election. But they soon realized they were not sufficiently prepared.

In 1990, Mr. Flaherty threw his own hat in the ring. He lost. "It was a good learning experience," he says. "And in retrospect, it was the best thing that could have happened."

While he had been going door-to-door, he had received a call from his wife, who had just had an ultrasound. She had been taking fertility drugs in the hopes of conceiving and now she was pregnant with triplets.

"I remember thinking, 'Maybe it would be better if I lost,' " Mr. Flaherty explains. "It would give me several more years of relatively high income compared to political income, and we had a lot of expenses."

After nine weeks of bed rest in hospital, Ms. Elliott gave birth to three healthy boys.

Fifteen months later, tragedy struck. John was hospitalized in intensive care for a month at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children.

"It started with a mosquito bite of some kind," Ms. Elliott explains, her distress palpable still. "The other two, for whatever reason, didn't get it. The best diagnosis the doctors had was encephalitis, inflammation of the brain."

The illness, and John's ensuing developmental problems, altered their lives. But rather than defeat them, the demands of a special-needs child only sharpened their commitment to public service.

She took 2 1/2 years off work, then resumed her legal career.

Quote:

Many urged her to emphasize their connection by running as a Flaherty. But she refused.

"I never changed my name when we married," she says. " It's not who I am. And I figured it would be disingenuous if I did." Besides, they are well-known as a couple in the community, she says.

On weekends, during election time, he goes door-to-door with her and the children. But he worries he could be a liability rather than an asset.

"I don't want to steal her thunder, but I also don't want to harm her provincial campaign because someone gets grumpy with Christine because I've taken a certain position on a federal issue that they don't agree with."

...and shouldn't that have read: "the demands of a special-needs child only sharpened their commitment to [b]the dismantling of the[/b] public service"?

and the prices at the farm gate are a direct result of commodities exchanges and the unregulated financial casino. 

the thinking of small farmers gets manipulated because of historic differences in the background of many small farmers, vs. progressives in cities - there is a real historical experience of being screwed big time by urban loosely-associated 'progressives' who advocate strong government.  i think we've exhausted the threads on that issue, but that's why i brought that up before, and hopefully everyone is sensitive to these dynamics by now. (!?)

so on the specifics of legislation/regulation, that's where the clarifications need to happen. BA has outlined some of the Acts here.  Those need to be pulled apart more for NDP MPs, and everyone else.

The Clean Water Act and related legislation have been discussed in different places here, but in the context of small farmers, the message needs to be elaborated that while costs are downloaded, the governance and management of water is being given to global (urban !) wealthy financial corporations over whom NO ONE has control.  This is done through clauses (like 'other' stakeholders) and intersecting mechanisms in 'trade' deals, along with funding models.

It is done through the Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act, and through Harper's/Flaherty's budget and implementing regs, some of this is at the Progressive Economics Forum website.  (And no, I do not believe for a moment that the P3 model is dead.  Public private partnerships were never about getting $ From the private sector, but about sending more taxpayer $$ To the Already Wealthy private financiers, a process which has been extended by Harper/Flaherty's de-'stimulus'.)

The same process of putting food inspection into the hands of the global corporate giants makes food more unsafe. 

And we could go on. 

on issues of social conservatism, of course there are going to remain undercurrents of differences, it would be naive to think otherwise, but the reality is that people of many different persuasions live and work here together.  Definitely the economic issues reign supreme, and in that regard rural dwellers are pretty much all in the same boat as low income urban dwellers.

did i mention about public services?  pretty minimal out here.  i helped some neighbours put out a fire last year- we all got buckets and did the job while waiting for the volunteer firefighters, who do a great job by the way.  and policing- that's one reason why rural dwellers have guns- there's no cops for miles around when trouble hits.  i can tell you some personal stories on this one.   and rural dwellers aren't trigger happy, they rarely use guns (except in hunting season, another story) the deterence is key.   

what else... well, gotta get back to finishing my taxes...

You got it pretty well right right down to the asshat.  If I am not mistaken he was a government electrician.  So he likely has no business experience either despite the pretence

One must be careful about making fun of rural Ontarians.  In northern Ontario, quite a few NDP candidates get elected federally.  Many of the voters are comfortable discussing deer, moose, and bear hunting.  Vegetarian food is considered ethnic cuisine and can be found in the frozen food section of a supermarket.  Vegetarianism is not vegitimate in some places of Ontario.

"Memories of Zoey's International Toronto Frozen Veggies and Dip."

Charles Adler for one