Ontario Fall election

[Shwa]

I shouldn't even talk to you but I'l give it one more try and hope you'll be civil.

...

You simply excuse anything the protesters did. You'd champion Charles Eng if he were a native.

You hope he'll be "civil" yet you invoke Charles Ng and suggest that CR would find something defensible about his acts because of his race.

Right. Good one Wild Bill. A pitiful attempt at trying to avoid Godwin's Law. The content might be different, but the stink is just the same.

Completely pathetic.

[Wild Bill]

You hope he'll be "civil" yet you invoke Charles Ng and suggest that CR would find something defensible about his acts because of his race.

Right. Good one Wild Bill. A pitiful attempt at trying to avoid Godwin's Law. The content might be different, but the stink is just the same.

Completely pathetic.

Hey, just look at virtually every stand CR has taken on native issues and my point is proven! NOBODY is absolutely and totally in the right every single time on every single issue! Natives are human beings like the rest of us, not gods!

And you know, you almost always come across more than a little pretentious yourself...

[charter.rights]

Do you have any idea how much of an inconvenience it was to have the main highway into the town blocked? To have your electricity gone for days? Setting aside the presence of townspeople, why were TV cameramen beaten up and robbed of their equipment?

You make everything sound like something out of a dry history textbook. These were real people! You should read Blatchford's book "Helpless". You are arguing without much information, or at least information only from one side.

The people in Eastern Ontario have endured far worse - between ice storms, mass black-outs, blocked 401 and bridges - and we don't hear them complaining.

[charter.rights]

Hey, just look at virtually every stand CR has taken on native issues and my point is proven! NOBODY is absolutely and totally in the right every single time on every single issue! Natives are human beings like the rest of us, not gods!

And you know, you almost always come across more than a little pretentious yourself...

No one is advocating that the Natives are always right, least of all me. However, when you do not stick to the facts and instead resort to blathering rumour and delusion then I chime in. If you find me responding to you so often it is because you are the worse offender of factless propaganda.

[capricorn]

There's just too many questions for me to feel anything but uneasy when it comes to a gigantic wind turbine in my backyard.

This is getting very worrisome RuralWatcher. Why isn't this stuff making headlines?

According to 1,000 pages of internal government emails, reports and memos released under Ontario’s Freedom of Information Act, the government scrambled to figure out how to monitor and control noise pollution.

The documents were released after a lengthy and costly battle waged by Barb Ashbee. Ashbee and her husband Dennis Lormand say they suffered a series of ailments after wind turbines began operating near their home in Amaranth, near Shelburne, northwest of Toronto. The area is now home to 133 wind turbines — the largest industrial wind farm in the province.

After being told theirs was the only complaint in the area, Ashbee and Lormond learned that MOE officials at the Guelph District Office had been tracking more than 200 complaints dating back to 2006 when the wind farm first started operating.

Their home was bought out by Canadian Hydro Developers (now Transalta) in June 2009, one of six homeowners who sold their houses to the utility company.

---

"It was terrible—we'd go nights in a row with no sleep," said Ashbee. "It was a combination of the loud noise—the decibel, audible noise—and also this vibration that was in the house that would go up and it would go down."

---

Ashbee said she called the power company and the environment ministry night after night and was initially told by government enforcement officers that hers was the only complaint in the area.

"We were told [the wind company] was running in compliance, that there were no problems.

"We’d just have to get used to it."

But she said the Ministry of Environment (MOE) was misleading her, and that there had been hundreds of complaints.

---

CBC News presented some of the ministry documents to Ramani Ramakrishnan, a Ryerson University professor and acoustics specialist who has written several reports and conducts noise pollution training for MOE staff.

Ramakrishnan has recommended to the MOE that wind turbines in rural areas should have far stricter limits but says if the province enforced the regulations – it would have a major impact on wind farms around the province.

"First implication," Ramakrishnan says, "is that the number of wind turbines in wind-farms would have to be reduced considerably and wind-farm developers would have to look for localities where they are not impacting the neighbourhood.

"A five-decibel reduction in acceptable noise is quite noticeable and perceptible" and the MOE field staff are recommending up to 10 decibel reductions in some cases.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/09/21/wind-turbines.html

So the province, i.e MOE and McGuinty's government, is concerned that applying regulations would impinge on the progress of their green energy agenda, at the expense of the health of citizens. So the solution is to buy out and silence the citizens who are negatively affected. Disgusting!

[charter.rights]

This is getting very worrisome RuralWatcher. Why isn't this stuff making headlines?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/09/21/wind-turbines.html

So the province, i.e MOE and McGuinty's government, is concerned that applying regulations would impinge on the progress of their green energy agenda, at the expense of the health of citizens. So the solution is to buy out and silence the citizens who are negatively affected. Disgusting!

Even after pharmaceuticals are approved for use, there will be some people experiencing side effects. The science behind noise pollution is still evolving. However, all the concerns are anecdotal so far, and there are no medical studies or confirmation that the illnesses were caused by the wind turbine effects. There is no need for panic.

Back in the 80's I worked for Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation as a UFFI Consultant. I measured houses for formaldehyde and other UFFI off gases and visited more than 1000 houses in a 3 1/2 year period. The concern was that UFFI was a health hazard and society had gone mad worrying about it. I was one of about 250 such consultants hired by CMHC during that program.

Out of the 1000 homes (from Kingston to Toronto to Owen Sound to North Bay and all points in between) only about 10 tested above acceptable levels where people complained about itchy eyes, chronic cough or headaches. Out of those 10 we traced about 6 to environmental formaldehyde, such as a farmer spreading manure on the field next door during testing, to the installation of new carpet or the purchase of new furniture, to excessive cigarette smoking during the week of testing. The 4 that were confirmed to have high levels caused by the UFFI had some medical effect to the homeowners health but only 1 was severe enough for them to seek medical attention.

The net result of those tests is that the rate of effect experienced by homeowners was less than those allergic to penicillin or rag weed. And those that had an allergy to formaldehyde also had other allergies and were prone to getting sick more often. At the end of the day the panic was blown out of proportion and people spent lots of money removing a product that was otherwise safe, inexpensive and effective...when installed correctly (which is another story). The greatest opponent of UFFI by the way was Fibreglass Canada who used every opportunity in their marketing and in the lobbying of government to condemn UFFI.

Right now we have to wait for the science of measuring noise pollution to become more accurate. The anecdotal reports have not been verified and there is no need for panic. Wind and solar energy is a green alternative for producing electricity that will become pivotal as the nuclear stations start to close. We can't afford to shut it down because a few people might be sensitive to it. Buying them out seemed like a viable alternative.

Edited September 23, 2011 by charter.rights

[Shwa]

Hey, just look at virtually every stand CR has taken on native issues and my point is proven! NOBODY is absolutely and totally in the right every single time on every single issue! Natives are human beings like the rest of us, not gods!

And you know, you almost always come across more than a little pretentious yourself...

You simply excuse anything the protesters McHale did. You'd champion Charles Eng if he were a white supremacist.

If the shoe fits...

[capricorn]

The science behind noise pollution is still evolving. However, all the concerns are anecdotal so far, and there are no medical studies or confirmation that the illnesses were caused by the wind turbine effects. There is no need for panic.

Of course it's evolving. But governments don't care about that; all they care is pushing a green agenda and the effects on people be damned. Same goes with the wind industry that can't wait to collect hefty multi-year taxpayer funded subsidies to fund their operations.

About anecdotal evidence, at one time, there was no clinical evidence that smoking was a health hazard although there was plenty of anecdotal evidence. So don't tell me that anecdotal evidence is worthless.

Properly Interpreting the Epidemiologic Evidence of Industrial Wind Turbines on Nearby Residents by Carl V. Phillips PHD, Populi Health Institute

There is overwhelming evidence that wind turbines cause serious health problems in nearby residents, usually stress-disorder type diseases, at a nontrivial rate. The bulk of the evidence takes the form of thousands of adverse event reports. There is also a small amount of systematically-gathered data. The adverse event reports provide compelling evidence of the seriousness of the problems and of causation in this case because of their volume, the ease of observing exposure and outcome incidence, and case-crossover data. Proponents of turbines have sought to deny these problems by making a collection of contradictory claims including that the evidence does not "count", the outcomes are not "real" diseases, the outcomes are the victims' own fault, and that acoustical models cannot explain why there are health problems so the problems must not exist. These claims appeared to have swayed many non-expert observers, though they are easily debunked. Moreover, though the failure of models to explain the

observed problems does not deny the problems, it does mean that we do not know what, other than kilometers of distance, could sufficiently mitigate the effects. There has been no policy analysis that justifies imposing these effects on local residents. The attempts to deny the evidence cannot be seen as honest scientific disagreement, and represent either gross incompetence or intentional bias.

There is overwhelming evidence that large electricity-generating wind turbines (hereafter: turbines) cause serious health problems in a nontrivial fraction of residents living near them. These turbines produce noise in the audible and non-audible ranges, as well as optical flickering, and many people living near them have reported a collection of health effects that appear to be manifestations of a chronic stress reaction or something similar. However, many commentators (dominated by those who stand to profit from national government subsidies for building wind turbines, particularly energy companies and local governments) have repeatedly claimed that there is no evidence of risk. This appears to be widely believed by those unfamiliar with the evidence but who believe that turbines are an eco-friendly energy source (a claim that is subject to debate) and think that anything "green" must be harmless to people.

While it is typical for industries and their supporters to downplay risks and argue that the benefits make the risks worthwhile, the wholesale denial of the evidence by both business and government in this case is reminiscent of such claims as "there is no evidence that smoking causes cancer" "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction". However, unlike most industry denials or casus belli, where critical thinkers know to exercise some skepticism before accepting the claim, the denial of the evidence of turbines seems to have produced widespread credulity among those who would be expected to know better. This may be because the epidemiologic evidence is complicated and the attempts to deny it sound like the language of science. In response to that abuse of science, the goal of this paper is to empower interested observers to understand the nature and quality of the epidemiologic evidence and the weakness of the common arguments used in attempts to deny it.

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2011/health-policy-expert-hammers-wind-energy-junk-science/

The following paper discusses a study at length done on the health of residents near wind turbines.

10th International Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem (ICBEN) 2011, London, UK

---

This study, which is the first controlled study of the effects of IWT noise on sleep and

health, shows that those living within 1.4 km of IWT have suffered sleep disruption

which is sufficiently severe as to affect their daytime functioning and mental health. Both

the ESS and PSQI are averaged measures, i.e. they ask the subject to assess their

daytime sleepiness and sleep quality respectively, over a period of several weeks leading

up to the present. For the ESS to increase, sleep must have been shortened or

fragmented to a sufficient degree on sufficient nights for normal compensatory mechanisms

to have been overcome. The effects of sleep loss and daytime sleepiness on cognitive

function, accident rate and mental health are well established (WHO 2009) and it

must be concluded that at least some of the residents living near the Vinalhaven and

Mars Hill IWT installations have suffered serious harm to their sleep and health.

The significant relationship between the symptoms and distance from the IWTs, the

subjects’ report that their symptoms followed the start of IWT operations, the congruence

of the symptoms reported here with previous research and reports and the clear

mechanism is strong evidence that IWT noise is the cause of the observed effects.

IWT noise has an impulsive character and is several times more annoying than other

sources of noise for the same sound pressure level (Pedersen & Persson Waye 2004).

It can prevent the onset of sleep and the return to sleep after a spontaneous or induced

awakening. Road, rail and aircraft noise causes arousals, brief lightening of sleep which

are not recalled. While not proven, it is highly likely that IWT noise will cause arousals

which may prove to be the major mechanism for sleep disruption. It is possible that the

low frequency and infrasound components of IWT noise might contribute to the sleep

disruption and health effects by other mechanisms but this remains to be determined

and further research is needed.

Attitudes to IWT and visual impact have been shown to be factors in annoyance to IWT

noise (Pedersen et al. 2009) but have not been demonstrated for sleep disturbance.

Most respondents in the present study welcomed the IWT installations as offering economic

benefits. The visual impact of IWT decreases with distance, as does the noise

impact making separation of these factors impossible.

We conclude that IWT noise at these two sites disrupts the sleep and adversely affects

the health of those living nearby. The current ordinances determining setback are inadequate

to protect the residents and setbacks of less than 1.5 km must be regarded as

unsafe. Further research is needed to determine a safe setback distance and to investigate

the mechanisms of causation.

http://docs.wind-watch.org/Nissenbaum-et-al-ICBEN2011_0158_final.pdf

[RuralWatcher]

I'm not anti-green energy. We need to do more to find ways to create energy in a responsible, cost-efficient manner.

But, I think wind is the wrong way to go. The best it can ever be is a secondary power source to help alleviate strain on the grid. When do we need extra power? Generally, on hot, humid days when people have air conditioners cranked. Those are also the days when there's no wind. What good are wind turbines that don't spin when we need them? At one point on July 22, 2011, one of the hottest days of the year, wind energy was responsible for 14 MW (out of a possible 1,334 MW, or 0.01% of capacity) of electricity in the province of Ontario.

For every study that says there's no health impact to people living near them, there's one that says there is. What am I to believe? To me, that's a pretty good reason to be very worried about this. I have a home in a nice, quiet rural area that myself and my wife built for our retirement.

We were offered a lease for a wind turbine, but based on the location of our home on our property, we declined. Any turbine built on our property would have been too close to our home for our comfort. The salesman who visited us told us we might as well sign because our neighbours immediately to the north and south of us had already signed. It turns out neither one had signed and in fact, my neighbour to the north had to threaten to call the police to get the salesman leave his home. That's wrong. That's how they turn neighbour against neighbour. They will tell you anything to get you to sign.

The turbine to be built on the land immediately to the east of my home appear to be in direct path of migrating geese every spring and fall. They land in a pond not far from where that turbine will be. I voiced this concern to the wind company, who promised me they would pass it along to the MoE and MNR as they conducted their wildlife studies. When I contacted both provincial agencies months later, they said the wildlife studies had been completed and when asked if they were informed about my concern, they indicated they were not. It was my mistake to trust the wind company to make my concern known to the MoE/MNR.

I don't know if these turbines will affect me. But to imply that I'm just fear-mongering and getting all worked up over opinions is insulting. I am genuinely worried because there's too much conflicting information and I don't know what to believe. I think there's been too many people affected by these things to be written off as in their heads. There's a chance I have to live beside these huge things for 40 years (if I'm lucky enough to live that long). I can't sell my home as I've been told by a real estate agent that my property is essentially worthless with a turbine going up 550-555 metres from the house. He told me my best opportunity to sell would be to see if any of the neighbouring landowners would be interested in buying and so far, they are not. I can't afford to sell my property well below what I paid for it and still buy another home.

And there IS a gag order on the people bought out in Ripley. I know one of them and he was told unequivocally he was legally forbidden to speak out against wind turbines or talk publicly about his experience. And for the record, he was a turbine lease holder, so it's not like he was against wind turbines from the beginning.

I'm also not a fan of the pig barn or chicken barn comparison for justifying a lack of consultation. It's not right plan out these projects and not allow for adequate consultations. If there's nothing to hide and nothing to fear, then there should be more open consultations. What they do is send out the odd postcard (that essentially tells you nothing other than "we're still going to build it") and hold meetings that only allow for 1-on-1 conversations. You don't get to hear the answers other people are given because they separate people as they enter the meeting hall. The whole thing is just too shady for me to feel comfortable.

Edited September 23, 2011 by RuralWatcher

[capricorn]

I'm not anti-green energy.

Neither am I.

I think there's been too many people affected by these things to be written off as in their heads.

Military personnel returning from war zones had the same problem. It took years for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to be classified as an illness.

And there IS a gag order on the people bought out in Ripley. I know one of them and he was told unequivocally he was legally forbidden to speak out against wind turbines or talk publicly about his experience. And for the record, he was a turbine lease holder, so it's not like he was against wind turbines from the beginning.

I read somewhere about one state in the US having the same type of gag order.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Latest poll shows PC and LP tied.

40000 respondents, enough for seat by seat break down. I haven't seen that released [updated, now I have below] but, they had the seats that will win the election (less than 2% lead).

http://www.thestar.com/staticcontent/1058980

Edited September 25, 2011 by MiddleClassCentrist

[capricorn]

Even with such a huge poll, Bozinoff emphasized there are some questionable results.

The survey suggests the Liberals would win Parkdale-High Park, an NDP stronghold for dynamo Cheri Di Novo, but lose St. Catharines, a seat held since 1977 by popular Grit Jim Bradley. As well, it forecasts the Conservatives picking up Liberal-held Kitchener-Conestoga and Kitchener Centre, but falling short in Tory Elizabeth Witmer’s long-time riding of Kitchener-Waterloo. And McGuinty himself is shown as only slightly ahead in his home riding of Ottawa South, one of the most reliably Liberal ridings in the province.

“There are a few anomalies,” Bozinoff said.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1059053--massive-poll-finds-minority-looming?bn=1

Considering it was an interactive voice-response telephone poll (robo calls) there is a possibility that some segments of voters were under-represented or over-represented. Nevertheless the sheer size of the poll is a good indication that the race is tight.

Personally, when I answer the phone and there is no human voice at the other end, I hang up.

[capricorn]

http://www.thestar.com/staticcontent/1058980

I can't access anything east of Durham on that linked map.

[RuralWatcher]

I can't access anything east of Durham on that linked map.

I guess that re-affirms that nothing outside the GTA matters.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

I can't access anything east of Durham on that linked map.

Yeah, I was interested in my personal riding too.

But the smaller the area, the fewer the respondents.

I wonder if I can find a list somewhere.

[Jack Weber]

I already know who's going to win my riding....

It's the erstwhile Tory leader who is also my current MPP...

Edited September 26, 2011 by Jack Weber

[charter.rights]

I already know who's going to win my riding....

It's the erstwhile Tory leader who is also my current MPP...

So why vote?

[Jack Weber]

So why vote?

Because people like my Grandfather fought in Europe,and my Dad's cousin unforunately spent time in a NAZI POW camp,so I would have opportunity to excercise my democratic priviledge...

Then again,there's alot of hilljacks where I live...This goofy Freedom Party is getting alot of attention here...Maybe Wine Tasting Tim gets cut down to size by the infantile libertarians???

Edited September 26, 2011 by Jack Weber

[Boges]

Dalton's doing it again!

Less than two weeks before the Ontario election, the Liberals have announced they are halting construction of a controversial gas-fired power plant in Mississauga.

Liberal candidates Charles Sousa, Donna Cansfield, Laurel Broten and Dipika Damerla gathered in the Toronto suburb on Saturday to announce that the Eastern Power Ltd. plant would not go forward at its current location on the Toronto-Mississauga border.

Residents had vigourously opposed the plant.

“Since the plant was proposed in 2005, our neighbourhoods have grown considerably and I know folks in the community are concerned,” said Sousa. “Ontario Liberals will make sure we have enough electricity in the right places, and ensure the rules for power-generating facilities will put Ontario families first.”

The Liberals said in a release that they would work with the developer to find a new location for the 280-megawatt plant, but they did not say where that would be, other than it wouldn't be built in west end Toronto or Mississauga. The Liberals also said they would work with community groups and the energy sector to develop a more rigorous way to determine where gas-fired plants would be located.

If you can't see this as a cynical ploy to buy votes then you're not paying attention.

So you wanna build a plant in Oakville. No those people are rich and they have a Liberal MPP so we won't build it there. What about Etobicoke/Missisauga border. Nope the election race is too close.

Watch Dalton build it in Burlington or Milton if they elect a Tory MPP. Halton Hill/Milton already has a gas-powered plant.

[mentalfloss]

Massive poll finds minority looming

A Forum Research survey of 40,750 people — one of the largest polling samples in Canadian political history — has the two parties separated by only 107 respondents, each holding 35 per cent. (14,064 said they will vote Liberal, while 13,957 selected the Conservatives.) Meanwhile, the New Democrats were at 23 per cent and the Green Party at 5 per cent.

Because of the large number of voters surveyed Forum was also able to provide riding-by-riding results. If those numbers were to be repeated on Oct. 6, the Liberals and Tories would be tied at 47 seats with the NDP only holding 13 seats in the 107-member Legislature. However, the results for at least 28 ridings are within the margin of error, so seat predictions are not nearly as reliable as the total sample.

Even so, none of the parties appears likely at this point to be able to win the 54 seats needed for a majority government, which leaves Ontario poised for its first minority government since 1985.

After that vote, the Liberals and NDP signed an accord that toppled the Tories, who had been in power for 42 years.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1059053--massive-poll-finds-minority-looming?bn=1

Edited September 26, 2011 by mentalfloss

[charter.rights]

Because people like my Grandfather fought in Europe,and my Dad's cousin unforunately spent time in a NAZI POW camp,so I would have opportunity to excercise my democratic priviledge...

Then again,there's alot of hilljacks where I live...This goofy Freedom Party is getting alot of attention here...Maybe Wine Tasting Tim gets cut down to size by the infantile libertarians???

So now you contradict yourself. You are now saying it isn't a sure thing that Hudak will win.

As far as fighting for democratic freedoms, it is all hogwash. What they were fighting for really is nothing more than global greed. If they were truly fighting for our freedoms then by the end of each war we should have been just a little more free, and a little more democratic. However the result has been the opposite. With each war and conflict, many more of our freedoms are usurped in the delusional fears of security and our government and societies have been progressively less democratic with every election.

If you want democracy then you should look to the protesters who argue for their rights, or call out government on their wrong-doing. All your voting does is endorse the corruption, the support for corporate greed and the washing away of our democratic rights. Those in the system are incapable of fixing the system because they ARE the problem.

So go ahead and support Harris Hudak. It won't make a bit of difference to your freedoms or the death of your Grand Daddy. They all fought and died in vain.

Edited September 27, 2011 by charter.rights

[Wild Bill]

Dalton's doing it again!

If you can't see this as a cynical ploy to buy votes then you're not paying attention.

So you wanna build a plant in Oakville. No those people are rich and they have a Liberal MPP so we won't build it there. What about Etobicoke/Missisauga border. Nope the election race is too close.

Watch Dalton build it in Burlington or Milton if they elect a Tory MPP. Halton Hill/Milton already has a gas-powered plant.

Wasn't Dalton the guy who wanted that plant in Oakville in the first place? I do remember much controversy about his decision to close the coal-fired plant in Nanticoke. The town didn't want to lose the jobs and suggested converting the plant to much cleaner natural gas. McGuinty was adamant that Nanticoke had to be closed, period. Oakville was supposed to provide the lost capacity.

I saw some figures the other day that showed that the fact we have been in a recession and Ontario's manufacturing activity is far lower than in boom years has saved Dalton's butt as far as blackouts and brownouts. If we were running at normal consumption we would have had a 20 PER CENT shortfall! That's huge!

Maybe Dalton is secretly working to keep Ontario in a recession! We keep hearing about more capacity from the nukes and from Niagara Falls but somehow it never seems to come on line, or at least not in the amounts he's been promising...

Could you imagine the effect if suddenly half the car owners switched to electric??!! What does Dalton think we can do, buy batteries in bulk at Best Buy?

[Jack Weber]

So now you contradict yourself. You are now saying it isn't a sure thing that Hudak will win.

As far as fighting for democratic freedoms, it is all hogwash. What they were fighting for really is nothing more than global greed. If they were truly fighting for our freedoms then by the end of each war we should have been just a little more free, and a little more democratic. However the result has been the opposite. With each war and conflict, many more of our freedoms are usurped in the delusional fears of security and our government and societies have been progressively less democratic with every election.

If you want democracy then you should look to the protesters who argue for their rights, or call out government on their wrong-doing. All your voting does is endorse the corruption, the support for corporate greed and the washing away of our democratic rights. Those in the system are incapable of fixing the system because they ARE the problem.

So go ahead and support Harris Hudak. It won't make a bit of difference to your freedoms or the death of your Grand Daddy. They all fought and died in vain.

Well...

Thanks for going off on a wacko polemnic and not getting it....

Your "contribution" is greatly appreciated...

[capricorn]

If this is representative of how the ONDP runs its financial affairs, I don't want them anywhere near Ontario's purse strings.

When the Ontario NDP moved into its new Toronto headquarters in 2007, the four-storey structure with its wide stone stairway leading to the first floor was inaccessible to people with physical disabilities.

They created a private corporation with union partners -- the Ontario Cornerstone Leadership Corp. (OCLC) -- to buy the $2.9 million downtown property at 101 Richmond St. E.

Since then, the OCLC received more than $100,000 in grants from the federal government to retrofit bathrooms and install an electric wheelchair lift in the front of the building.

And it appears the corporation raised an additional $100,000 for the work from the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU).

---

The only problem -- the total cost of the project barely tops $100,000 and no work has begun on the electric wheelchair lift funded by the federal government.

---

Ottawa approved both projects in February 2011 and sent cheques to the OCLC -- $75,000 for the wheelchair lift and $25,450 for the washroom makeover, $100,450 in total. The cost of the wheelchair lift was estimated at $92,137 in the application and the bathroom reno at $25,425.

While the washroom work has been completed, no construction has begun on the wheelchair lift.

In fact, there's no record at City Hall showing the OCLC has even applied for a building permit.

This despite an apparent deadline on the NDP's application -- of June 30, 2011 -- for the work to be completed.

---

Finally, OCLC officials declined to comment on their mortgage arrangements for the building

After the OCLC bought 101 Richmond in June 2007, the corporation took out a mortgage of nearly $2.2 million. Three months later, the OCLC registered a second mortgage for $3.4 million.

O'Reggio wouldn't comment on the purpose for the second mortgage, or what was done with the money -- again, citing shareholder's privacy. When asked if the money had been used to help finance Ontario NDP campaign expenses, O'Reggio denied it had, and said the OCLC has nothing to do with the party's expenses.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2011/09/27/18744416.html?cid=rssnewspolitics

The ONDP needs to come clean on this. Why the delay in expending federal funds to a project that required completion last June? Why did the ONDP need to acquire a second mortgage on a property they acquired just 4 years ago? Does the ONDP still have that mortgage money? If yes, was any of this money spent on the ONDP's election campaign?

I hope the feds look into this. Canadian taxpayers are entitled to know the details of what happened to that money.

This cements in my mind why the ONDP would be a bad choice to govern Ontario, in any capacity, including a coalition with either of the other two main parties.

[JKlimkait]

Unrelated to the last post, but I'm a student at Ryerson University downtown Toronto and there are huge campaigns here for students to say no to tuition increases. Also the Student Union has released these flyers grading each party on there education plans. They have it as:

1. NDP

2. Green

3. Liberals

4. Conservatives

I have a huge problem with this. Me, being a Conservative am very upset not only due to the rankings but how they portrayed the info.

I'm posting here so I can get some feedback or to warn other students about voting for parties like NDP. Although tuition may be high now, you must consider that AFTER university or college, etc. you will be looking for a job. The Conservatives as it is, have the seemingly best platform to make Ontario more powerful in terms of our economy and job availability. Although with other parties, (like the Liberals' 'goodie' of reducing tuition by 15%) the promises may happen, but where will the funding come from to make them happen. Taxes will rise, and we will be in major debt (definitely if NDP or even (if by some stroke of luck) the Green party gets elected). We need a party like the Conservatives in power right now, they are our best chance to actually improve Ontario.

Students, please be cautious of your vote, this election is one that is more important than many in the past, choose wisely.