[BurlOak]

Nope - that's the perogative of the premier and the legislature, which are elected to deal with these issues. We don't have an election to go to war, or set the budget - much less raising a percentage point or two in taxes. And people who are against the tax will be hostile regardless of whether she has a majority or not - it has no bearing on the tax, must less justification for it.

Besides, eventually we will have an election - if the parties won power are against it, it will be their perogative to remove the tax then.

AoD

The issue is between what is Wynne's legal right and what is the responsibility for an ethical and honest government. Typically, the decision on a war is made in pretty short order. This one there has been plenty of time to pass it by the electorate.

The best way to kill the tax in the future is to bring it in by unethical means. That is what happened in BC with their HST.

 

[BurlOak]

Since Harris was gone 7 years before the harmonization was announced and 8 years before it was implemented....she might as well blame Leslie Frost

But I think it is much more politically popular to blame Harris for everything. And people will probably believe it.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

So this question to instertnamehere, alvin, to, corsuganti, anyone:


Will this pass, or are we screwed?

 

[innsertnamehere]

Depends on how much Wynne is willing to budge on the kinds of taxes. If she insists on an HST increase, she may face trouble. But if she is willing to switch out the HST and maybe the gas tax for a corporate tax increase, it may happen.

 

[nfitz]

But if she is willing to switch out the HST and maybe the gas tax for a corporate tax increase, it may happen.

How would you make the corporate tax increase regional, and how would you direct it to transit.

This is as much about providing long-term protection for the revenue stream as it is anything else.

 

[BurlOak]

So this question to instertnamehere, alvin, to, corsuganti, anyone:

Will this pass, or are we screwed?

I thought I heard Frank Klees say that the next election will be a choice between increased taxes to pay for transit or government efficiencies to pay for transit. I think there will be progress on transit regardless. The exact mode may change, but something will be built. There is a bit of lack of credibility for Metrolinx as well since essentially the Big Move is a Liberal plan and not an Ontario plan. Even though ABC's (Agencies, Board, and Commissions) are supposed to be arms length, the firing of OLG CEO goes to show that they are really a branch of the governing party. An election with the Big Move would also help add legitimacy to it.

The only chance of transit not happening is if the Liberals make an election promise to fund transit. We know they have a pretty good record of breaking their promises.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Their promise of all day 2 way Go is coming... in this package. a little later than 2015 though haha.

And as for the conservatives building transit, I see no indication on how or when they will do it. I don't expect a fleshed out plan until election time, but regardless it isn't looking good with them. Sheppard and Yonge subways if we are lucky, likely with little to no GO improvements and no DRL.

 

[gweed123]

Can't they theoretically create a new Sales Tax that is independent of the HST? I realize that that sort of makes the "H" in HST redundant, but a new separate tax would only require Provincial approval, wouldn't it?

Personally, I'm looking forward to the HST increase being implemented Province-wide. Like I've said earlier, it would do wonders for places like Ottawa, K-W, and London. Ottawa would get around $175 million/year from it, which realistically is all it needs in order to build all the LRT extensions it needs to build. It would basically solve the transit capital funding problem overnight. K-W and London I would imagine would be very much in the same boat. K-W could have the entire LRT project paid off before it even opens.

 

[gweed123]

I thought I heard Frank Klees say that the next election will be a choice between increased taxes to pay for transit or government efficiencies to pay for transit. I think there will be progress on transit regardless. The exact mode may change, but something will be built. There is a bit of lack of credibility for Metrolinx as well since essentially the Big Move is a Liberal plan and not an Ontario plan. Even though ABC's (Agencies, Board, and Commissions) are supposed to be arms length, the firing of OLG CEO goes to show that they are really a branch of the governing party. An election with the Big Move would also help add legitimacy to it.

The only chance of transit not happening is if the Liberals make an election promise to fund transit. We know they have a pretty good record of breaking their promises.

"Government efficiencies to pay for transit' is complete and utter BS. Can't stress that enough. Any "efficiencies" found in the budget are going to go to reducing the deficit, NOT directly into transit. "Finding efficiencies to fund transit" is just NeoCon doublespeak for "do absolutely nothing meaningful about it".

 

[ssiguy2]

Oh but there are benefits coming.. Both the York region BRTs and the Mississauga transit way will be online by the next election, along with the ARL. 30 minute GO on the lakeshore lines is starting within the month, and the Georgetown upgrades should be finishing up meaning increased service on the Kitchener line. The RT will be shut down right as the election starts (presuming Wynne fails to pass the 2015 budget, but passes the 2014 one) meaning there won't be any animosity there. Even by 2015 toronto is starting to see the improvements in transit service. (Heck the first phase of the big move starts coming online in October)

The MiWay Transitway will certainly help the people in Miss, but the UP Express does very little for the overwhelming number of Torontonians and even improved GO service on Lakeshore means little as relatively few Torontonians take the GO trains. Those projects certainly couldn't be stopped but Eglinton is a different matter.

When people are asked to pay higher taxes for a particular purpose they will want to see results immediately and not 15 years from now. They know infrastructure takes time to build {especially in Toronto} but still want to see tangible results that effect their commute TODAY. Asking people to dip into their food, entertainment, travel budgets every month for the privilege of someday getting a better service is not a way to win friends or influence people.

People do not think about where their taxes will go in 15 years but rather how this will make me even poorer TODAY. People do not think about long term transportation substainability and warm and fuzzy platitudes when they already feel financially squeezed. An immediate free GO transfer in the individual cities offers people an a reason to support the tax.......ya I pay more taxes but now my commute is MUCH cheaper.

This tax will fail if the people paying for it don't see immediate positive results. Queen's Park and Metrolinx have zero credibility both of which are very well deserved so asking people to "just trust me" will not fly. All the grand plans, pretty lines on a map, and statements of "great city building" mean absolutely nothing if the money isn't there and it won't be if people are being asked to pay for something they won't benefit from.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Well, ssiguy - if that's the attitude people take, is it any wonder we have had no meaningful transit expansion for the past generation? The people got exactly what they deserved.

AoD

 

[Adjei]

So Flaherty is trying to tie the province's hands on the HST. If I may suggest some talking points:

1. Conservatives have campaigned on provincial rights and against strong federal government. So much for that.
2. Flaherty was part of Harris government that filled in Eglinton subway, and is still not willing to pay for transit.
3. Conservatives have encouraged sales tax harmonization for tax efficiency purposes, but Flaherty has just made it impossible for any province going forward to agree to a HST.
4. The Conservatives are now actively against a region paying for public goods accruing to that region, instead making everyone in the province pay for it.
5. Flaherty is purportedly part of a "subways subways subways" political group that has thrown up nothing but obstruction to the actual construction of subways.

I think some effective political messaging could be built up around this.

Instead of delivering stable long term infrastructure and transit funding to cities like other nations do, the Feds would rather try to try to muddy the issue even further by talking about people are already taxed out and rather finding inefficiencies when others find initiatives on ways to fund transit. What have the Feds done for transit? Go look at other countries and see what they are doing for their cities.

 

[calimehtar]

The Ontario conservatives (and conservatives in city hall) compound their lack of a compelling financial plan by supporting modes of transportation that are not cost effective. More broadly, in Canada, governments have tied their own hands by cutting taxes when times were good. Raising new taxes is politically very difficult, so now that the HST is 2% lower than a decade ago that revenue will be very hard to get back.

The best case for a conservative government would be an approach like that of George W Bush where they would pay for whatever transit improvements they implement by borrowing money without increasing taxes and then leave the issue for a future government to clean up.

If I thought we could trust a conservative government to build transit in a timely fashion by borrowing money, I would gladly support them, but history suggests it would be foolish to us to trust them. At least the Liberals have shovels in the ground for Eglinton.

 

[ssiguy2]

Well, ssiguy - if that's the attitude people take, is it any wonder we have had no meaningful transit expansion for the past generation? The people got exactly what they deserved.

AoD

As I stated people know that infrastructure takes time to build and realize that it won't pop up tomorrow.People don't have an issue with that and when they see shovels in the ground it reminds them that their hard earned tax dollars are going to where they were intended and not the general slush fund.

That, however, doesn't change the fact that people have bills to pay today, they can't put off their mortgage, rent, food, tuition, entertainment, or transportation bills until the tax stops in 15 years. If Metrolinx wants to win support from the population then people will want to see the trade offs immediately. They can handle the tax increase on one end if they see the increased service and cut to their transit bill on the other.

Metrolinx is asking people for increased taxes with a vague promise of better service in 15 years. That's a very hard sell when the people over 45 will be retiring by then, the young students will be earning enough to have bought a car by then, the elderly will be 6 feet under, and many people will have left the city for one reason or another.

Not only will this provide immediate benefits that people can see but is a real selling point of the tax itself. It can be taken to the public as a way to convince the people that this really is worth supporting and it will help me today and not more than a decade from now.

 

[Rainforest]

Well we can all look forward to enjoying the 3 hour commute to work as traffic gets worse over the next decade. It won`t cost a dime, except for our time.

Most interestingly, it will cost quite a bit in income losses. Many good jobs will leave for cities with better transit, and Torontonians will have to settle for lower paying jobs.

But voters tend not to notice such connection.