[GraphicMatt]

It should gradually be reduced to 10%. That's a sensible, round number most people could live with.

Pfah, up it to 15 again with one per cent automatically going to municipal governments. We lived with a 15% sales tax for years and the 2% cut was so ill-advised.

Tax cuts, when possible, should come in the form of income tax cuts.

 

[GenerationW]

We also lived with a 0% sales tax for far longer than that.

 

[afransen]

We also lived without health care, universities, schools, highways, subways, etc.

 

[spider]

HST is 13% everywhere and can not be raised or lowered by the Provinces, hence the term Harmonised. Participation in this system removes the ability to adjust the level of taxation from the Provincial governments.

 

[Whoaccio]

1.) This thread should be merged with the other Hudak-OPC thread into a general Ontario PC related thread.

2.) Hudak's success/failure will rest on his ability to highlight McGuinty's failures. Its a truism that people generally vote against one party as opposed to for another, so Hudak's job is to show people why McGuinty is bad. That was the problem with John Tory, 90% of his policies were identical to McGuinty's and he failed to take advantage of possible weaknesses at the time (i.e. health premium, unfair support of the 'big 3', rising spending or such).

3.) McGuinty will have had, basically, an 8 year free ride with respect to opposition. There is a general perception that 'he hasn't done anything wrong.' That perception has to be the first target for Hudak. It's not necessarily untrue, but its more a matter of perception then anything else. For instance, it has been quite clear that the manufacturing industry has long term macroeconomic problems. That's been clear since McGuinty's first term, and yet his government's policy towards this issue is undeniably reactionary. I'm not saying it's an easy topic, but if nobody makes the case that McGuinty has failed here then nobody will think that. Hudak wouldn't even have to, really, propose an alternative. Just make the case that McGuinty failed.

4.)Other issues; failure to address Ontario's energy needs, failure to deal with the paper industry, failure to meaningfully lower interprovincial trade barriers, failure to lower marginal taxes on capital. I'm not sure on the polling data here, but opposing McGuinty's planned daycare/kindergarten policies may be successful. It's a polarizing issue, and it's conceivable that some kind of an early education credit (worth the approximate value of quality daycare), available to stay at home moms as well as those who choose daycare, could have greater popularity amongst parents than unionized public day care. I'm still waiting for someone to propose merging the catholic & general public schools.

 

[lordmandeep]

Next election will start off over the economy and then it will become a referendum of the Harris years in the end.

 

[kEiThZ]

Dalton's going to win. The Hudak win pretty much means the red tory vote will be going to Dalton. And the NDP isn't much of a threat any more. Dalton's got a lock on this province.

And that's too bad....a strong opposition always keeps the government on its toes.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I'd say the NDP would actually have a shot at taking the opposition position if they had a really charismatic leader. They only need to take 9 seats from the Tories to do it. Horwath hasn't really impressed me much, though.

 

[Tewder]

Harris (and Eves, but Eves was just a patsy) destroyed government services and left a huge infrastructure deficit all in the name of fiscal conservatism. Spending needed to go up drastically after he and Eves left office.

It is blatantly partisan at best, disingenuous at worst, to conveniently overlook the context of the Harris cuts:

1. Harris inherited the unprecedented mess left by Rae and the NDP including the highest levels of debt in the province's history, the highest taxation levels in North America and a recession. How else do you magically control debt and spending when raising income through taxation is not an option???

2. *And* Harris had to manage all of the above in the face of cuts to federal healthcare funding as downloaded by Chretien's liberal leadership.

It seems a little facile to blame Harris solely for any damage to social programs as he was merely the one left with no choice but to make the tough and unpopular cuts. Did he cut a little too much? Maybe, but as McGuinty's ehealth scandal and Paul Martin own scandals have shown there is no shortage of corruption and waste in government spending/(miss)handling of taxpayer money. I for one would like to see a little less of the socialist entitlement/knee-jerk raising of taxes culture that has come to define Ontario and a little more of a return to the spirit of ingenuity and responsibility that once defined the work ethic here. Social programs are important and are sorely needed indeed but not without greater oversite, increased budgetary constraint/responsibility and greater control of bureaucracy and unions.

 

[afransen]

1.) This thread should be merged with the other Hudak-OPC thread into a general Ontario PC related thread.

2.) Hudak's success/failure will rest on his ability to highlight McGuinty's failures. Its a truism that people generally vote against one party as opposed to for another, so Hudak's job is to show people why McGuinty is bad. That was the problem with John Tory, 90% of his policies were identical to McGuinty's and he failed to take advantage of possible weaknesses at the time (i.e. health premium, unfair support of the 'big 3', rising spending or such).

3.) McGuinty will have had, basically, an 8 year free ride with respect to opposition. There is a general perception that 'he hasn't done anything wrong.' That perception has to be the first target for Hudak. It's not necessarily untrue, but its more a matter of perception then anything else. For instance, it has been quite clear that the manufacturing industry has long term macroeconomic problems. That's been clear since McGuinty's first term, and yet his government's policy towards this issue is undeniably reactionary. I'm not saying it's an easy topic, but if nobody makes the case that McGuinty has failed here then nobody will think that. Hudak wouldn't even have to, really, propose an alternative. Just make the case that McGuinty failed.

4.)Other issues; failure to address Ontario's energy needs, failure to deal with the paper industry, failure to meaningfully lower interprovincial trade barriers, failure to lower marginal taxes on capital. I'm not sure on the polling data here, but opposing McGuinty's planned daycare/kindergarten policies may be successful. It's a polarizing issue, and it's conceivable that some kind of an early education credit (worth the approximate value of quality daycare), available to stay at home moms as well as those who choose daycare, could have greater popularity amongst parents than unionized public day care. I'm still waiting for someone to propose merging the catholic & general public schools.

I agree that this would be the best strategy for Hudak to follow. I lived in his riding for many years, and I do it worries me that he may be able to take power in 2011.

Regarding the marginal tax rate on capital, by the time the election rolls around, McGuinty will be able to claim significant progress. 2009 budget laid out a plan to cut the marginal rate in half, largely through the HST and corporate tax cuts. To complain about both would be a case of sucking and blowing at the same time.

 

[afransen]

It is blatantly partisan at best, disingenuous at worst, to conveniently overlook the context of the Harris cuts:

1. Harris inherited the unprecedented mess left by Rae and the NDP including the highest levels of debt in the province's history, the highest taxation levels in North America and a recession. How else do you magically control debt and spending when raising income through taxation is not an option???

2. *And* Harris had to manage all of the above in the face of cuts to federal healthcare funding as downloaded by Chretien's liberal leadership.

It seems a little facile to blame Harris solely for any damage to social programs as he was merely the one left with no choice but to make the tough and unpopular cuts. Did he cut a little too much? Maybe, but as McGuinty's ehealth scandal and Paul Martin own scandals have shown there is no shortage of corruption and waste in government spending/(miss)handling of taxpayer money. I for one would like to see a little less of the socialist entitlement/knee-jerk raising of taxes culture that has come to define Ontario and a little more of a return to the spirit of ingenuity and responsibility that once defined the work ethic here. Social programs are important and are sorely needed indeed but not without greater oversite, increased budgetary constraint/responsibility and greater control of bureaucracy and unions.

I would point out that the waste/corruption to which you refer both involved microscopic amounts of money in the context of the respective budgets. Insofar as you only provide anecdotal evidence, it is not clear that 'there is no shortage' of corruption/waste to cut.

A far more fruitful path to follow would be curtailing the powers of the public unions.

 

[GraphicMatt]

It is blatantly partisan at best, disingenuous at worst, to conveniently overlook the context of the Harris cuts:

1. Harris inherited the unprecedented mess left by Rae and the NDP including the highest levels of debt in the province's history, the highest taxation levels in North America and a recession. How else do you magically control debt and spending when raising income through taxation is not an option???

2. *And* Harris had to manage all of the above in the face of cuts to federal healthcare funding as downloaded by Chretien's liberal leadership.

Sure, the feds and their "download everything!" strategy didn't help matters. But whatever the reason, after Harris & Eves, McGuinty absolutely needed to increase spending - especially in critical areas like healthcare and education - to restore them to what they once were.

It seems a little facile to blame Harris solely for any damage to social programs as he was merely the one left with no choice but to make the tough and unpopular cuts. Did he cut a little too much? Maybe, but as McGuinty's ehealth scandal and Paul Martin own scandals have shown there is no shortage of corruption and waste in government spending/(miss)handling of taxpayer money. I for one would like to see a little less of the socialist entitlement/knee-jerk raising of taxes culture that has come to define Ontario and a little more of a return to the spirit of ingenuity and responsibility that once defined the work ethic here. Social programs are important and are sorely needed indeed but not without greater oversite, increased budgetary constraint/responsibility and greater control of bureaucracy and unions.

While I do always think there's room for cost savings through efficiency in government, it's a bit of a political red herring in my opinion. Conservative governments do tend to 'find savings' when they enter office, but generally it's through cutting healthcare, education, welfare and infrastructure. That's not being fiscally conservative - that's just screwing people over.

But maybe Hudak is different?

 

[kEiThZ]

A far more fruitful path to follow would be curtailing the powers of the public unions.

Careful there...you're starting to sound Conservative.

 

[afransen]

I've always been anti-union. I'm pink enough in other ways to make conservatives clutch their guns a little tighter.

 

[GenerationW]

We also lived without health care, universities, schools, highways, subways, etc.

Not true. We paid for all those things when Ontario had PST rates of 7%, 5%, 4%, 3% and 0% (and I'm not advocating a return to 0%).