News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.3K     0 

Oh, since she's pretty much the only provincial politician to openly and consistently support new, dedicated funding I thought it was either this...

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/funding/investment_strategy.aspx

...or this...

http://transitpanel.ca/news/report-making-the-move-to-fund-transit?p=1

But whatever amuses you, politically.



Word. I don't know why people find it hard to wrap their heads around this. All this transit needs to be built just so we can try to tread water in the face of growth. Don't build it and that top picture will be a happy memory - of how we thought we had bad congestion but had no clue, really.

It's not going to happen - that's the hot air. All this posturing for nothing.
 
It's not going to happen - that's the hot air. All this posturing for nothing.

That's not really Wynne's fault if she presents a budget which includes funding as part of it; then gets outvoted.

If she doesn't present the funding in the budget then Wynne can be held accountable for lack of transit investment.
 
Building transit is just delaying the inevitable, which is Toronto becoming like Bangkok in terms of traffic congestion.
 
Building transit is just delaying the inevitable, which is Toronto becoming like Bangkok in terms of traffic congestion.

What is your suggestion? There are few cities with substantial/sustained economic growth which do not have significant congestion problems; but of those that do exist, high-capacity transit systems carrying the bulk of the trips seems to be a common feature.
 
Last edited:
What is your suggestion? There are few cities with substantial/sustained economic growth which do not have significant congestion problems; but of those that do exist, high-capacity transit systems carrying the bulk of the trips seems to be a common feature.
They include many other incentives and disincentives. I meant to say building transit alone is just delaying the inevitable.
 
And what makes you think the budget is going to pass?

Was gonna say. Seems like the best opportunity for the opposition to call the election they seem to want so bad.

I'm calling it now: Another Liberal minority. People want a change, but not so much that they are willing to give the keys to Harris Jr. And unless Zombie Jack Layton becomes leader of the NDP, it seems unlikely that they will make a dent.
 
And what makes you think the budget is going to pass?

If the budget doesn't pass, we will go to an election and it will be because of the opposition parties. (The positive spin is that we can have an election ABOUT transit, but I wouldn't expect the level of discourse to be high.)

Any way you slice it, if Wynne puts it in the budget, she's not blowing hot air, back to the OP.
 
If the budget doesn't pass, we will go to an election and it will be because of the opposition parties. (The positive spin is that we can have an election ABOUT transit, but I wouldn't expect the level of discourse to be high.)

Any way you slice it, if Wynne puts it in the budget, she's not blowing hot air, back to the OP.

Ah politics....there is always two sides/views to every issue. It could be argued that the ML funding/investment recommendations could have been implemented by the government in the fall....but that would have lead to the vote that could have brought down the government....at a time they felt they could not win.....so the panel was struck to delay the matter and give Ms Wynne time to rebuild the Liberal's election hopes.....if the spring comes and they still feel there is no chance to win, don't expect the government to include the funding tools/taxes in their budget.....if they feel they can win at that time, they will include them in the budget and try to entice the opposition to defeat them on it.

This is not, in and of itself, a criticism of the government of the day....just the sort of politics we always get.
 
Ah politics....there is always two sides/views to every issue. It could be argued that the ML funding/investment recommendations could have been implemented by the government in the fall....but that would have lead to the vote that could have brought down the government....at a time they felt they could not win.

Not a whole lot would be accomplished in bringing forward a proposal that is guaranteed to be shot down by opposition. It'll be a decade before we get this chance again. NDP made their position pretty clear on what Metrolinx put forward.

Ultimately, it needs to be a package the NDP will lean toward being in favour of. Golden's package is much closer to that; now it's time for Wynne to gamble that it is close enough. Oddly, I wish Lastman was mayor at the moment as he was the king of consensus building. I think this whole thing would have gone through (or been killed) long ago if either Lastman or Miller were currently mayor.
 
Last edited:
Not a whole lot would be accomplished in bringing forward a proposal that is guaranteed to be shot down by opposition. It'll be a decade before we get this chance again. NDP made their position pretty clear on what Metrolinx put forward.

Ultimately, it needs to be a package the NDP will vote in favour of. Golden's package is much closer to that than Metrolinx's was.

The NDP have made the same statement about the Golden plan...if it includes increased gas taxes...they won't support it.

Ultimately, any plan will only be brought forward when the government feels good/better about their re-election chances.
 
The chances of the NDP picking up more seats aren't great. And I don't they'll want to work with a potential Conservative government. This makes an election unlikely IMO.
 

Back
Top