Ontario Budget 2014 -- Election

Boges · May 10, 2014

Teachers have gotten just about everything they want under this government. To say giving some back makes kids dumb is hilarious hyperbole.

SteveTheRep · May 10, 2014

As a new user of this forum, I'd like to make my response here. I'm graduating high school in a month's time. Now the teachers of my school have expressed their interest to oust the Liberals, but by doing that they are giving a slap to themselves. Bill-115 affected them greatly removing their right to bargain in contract talks also removed the right to strike. Being the son of teachers I see their frustration. Now with this upcoming election I believe it is in their intent to refuse their ballot.

Now this "calling" Hudak will attempt will take a swing at the young teachers. Seniority will rule and all the young teachers are the ones who'll take the hit. Regardless this calling is needed.

Smaller of bigger classes, never impacted my success.

John · May 10, 2014

Firing 100,000 workers is going to save taxpayers anything. First of all, if they are retiring then they are out of a job, which means EI, which I think is already in the red. If these people can't find jobs, then its welfare, unless of course, Hudak gets rid of that too, then its on to the Food Banks. Is it impossible to bring down the debt and be easy on the people? The there's the problem of a teacher teaching bigger classes and its the kids that lose there. Didn't this guy learn anything form the Harris era??

" if they are retiring then they are out of a job, which means EI" When did that happen?

"If these people can't find jobs..." Are you saying that 100,000 people won't find jobs...or not be ingenious enough to somehow become self sufficient? One of the great failings of the Left is that they don't believe people can, or will, do anything to better their own lives.,,that once they've been laid off they will stay laid off for the rest of their lives...forever collecting EI and welfare.

" Is it impossible to bring down the debt and be easy on the people?" I think "the people" have had a pretty easy ride for the past 11 years. Laying off 100,000 people sucks...but think of how big the problem will be after 4 more years of Liberal rule.

"Didn't this guy learn anything form the Harris era??" Didn't Wynne learn anything from the Rae era???

Edited May 10, 2014 by John

CPCFTW · May 10, 2014

Teachers don't put in more hours when class sizes go up. The school day is only as long as the school day is. What will happen is that children will receive less attention from the teachers.

But hey, making Ontario kids stupid will only benefit the Conservatives in the long run. It's a good way to invest in the party's future.

Watching and grading 30 kids takes more work than 16 kids. I don't see why they'd be any more stupid. University lectures have hundreds of students and we seem pretty capable of churning out 30 year old unemployed arts grads who can chant "occupy!!"

cybercoma · May 10, 2014

Watching and grading 30 kids takes more work than 16 kids. I don't see why they'd be any more stupid. University lectures have hundreds of students and we seem pretty capable of churning out 30 year old unemployed arts grads who can chant "occupy!!"

So you have no idea the difference between teaching grade school, high school, and university, but feel qualified enough to call for larger class sizes and larger workloads. Go figure.

Michael Hardner · May 10, 2014

As a new user of this forum, I'd like to make my response here. I'm graduating high school in a month's time. Now the teachers of my school have expressed their interest to oust the Liberals, but by doing that they are giving a slap to themselves.

Hi SteveTR - to be clear ... are you in BC then ?

Michael Hardner · May 10, 2014

Teachers have gotten just about everything they want under this government.

The sick days change was a big concession given the disputatious environment, you have to acknowledge that.

Michael Hardner · May 10, 2014

I'm glad Hudak came out and said it early. There are WAY!!!! to many Public servants. I'll repeat, the budget is DOUBLE what it was 11 years ago when the Liberals took over. There's no way that's justifiable.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/hudak-vows-to-cut-100000-public-sector-jobs-if-tories-win/article18580284/

A Globe and Mail analysis of Statistics Canada data shows Mr. Hudak’s plan, if implemented, would reduce the public sector by about 9 per cent, putting it back to its size in 2006. Since 2000, the public sector has grown more than twice as fast as the provincial population.

Well, I guess I should be careful what I wish for. Here we have a bold substantive statement that will likely frame the Ontario campaign around the centre of gravity of Ontario's current challenges.

I have very low expectations of the three leaders, but at least the campaign should be about something real - not Tory's religions schools issue, not an expensed bagel at eHealth but the core question of what government should be doing.

So, we have the issue - but what about the discussion ? Wynne will frame it in emotional drapery, I expect, and Horwath will ring loud alarm bells. What about Hudak ? My expectation for any candidate who puts forward a plan like this is that they explain how this will happen ? Will he ? Can he ?

There was a recent politican who - from "the" public's dim memory - promised to cut the gravy train. I wonder where he is today ?

Boges · May 10, 2014

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/hudak-vows-to-cut-100000-public-sector-jobs-if-tories-win/article18580284/

Well, I guess I should be careful what I wish for. Here we have a bold substantive statement that will likely frame the Ontario campaign around the centre of gravity of Ontario's current challenges.

I have very low expectations of the three leaders, but at least the campaign should be about something real - not Tory's religions schools issue, not an expensed bagel at eHealth but the core question of what government should be doing.

So, we have the issue - but what about the discussion ? Wynne will frame it in emotional drapery, I expect, and Horwath will ring loud alarm bells. What about Hudak ? My expectation for any candidate who puts forward a plan like this is that they explain how this will happen ? Will he ? Can he ?

There was a recent politican who - from "the" public's dim memory - promised to cut the gravy train. I wonder where he is today ?

And that politician was elected comfortably.

His personal problems are irrelevant in the debate about cutting government waste and growth.

Now if there's video of Hudak smoking crack then the Tories have problems.

Interestingly Ford did Hudak a bit of a favour in his recent scandal. He was taped saying he didn't support Hudak because he has a "pro-Gay" agenda. Hudak doesn't have to separate himself from Ford, Ford did that for him.

Michael Hardner · May 10, 2014

And that politician was elected comfortably.

For better or worse, he was. And the "gravy" was found according to him but the facts are still a little dim, you must agree. At least they are to "the" public.

His personal problems are irrelevant in the debate about cutting government waste and growth.

Allow me the wry aside, as I have very little pleasure in my life.

Interestingly Ford did Hudak a bit of a favour in his recent scandal. He was taped saying he didn't support Hudak because he has a "pro-Gay" agenda. Hudak doesn't have to separate himself from Ford, Ford did that for him.

That's a politically relevant aside, I would say.

By the way, I looked at Hudak's background and it doesn't encourage me that he would be able to oversee a government restructuring on this scale.

I work with corporate Canada, and it make come as a shock to you that I believe the gravy is there, as governments and corporations work under a similar background. I also believe there is a holy grail of win-win-win out there: cutting expenses, improving services, passing the savings to the poorest and middle class.

I firmly believe it can be done, but in my travels I have never met a single executive who cared to do that very very difficult work - and that's in the private sector.

The latest wisdom I have seen on the topic comes from R. Buckminster Fuller:

"You never change things by fighting the existing reality.

To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."

― Richard Buckminster Fuller

A new organization to execute government policy, paying reasonable wages, and focussed on results could be built to supplant the existing framework. But it would be expensive at the start: you would have to pay transition costs and services would be duplicated.

Big Guy · May 10, 2014

Looks like Hudak jumped on to the campaign ice and quickly fell on his bum. 100,000 public service job cuts? There are about 1,000,000 public service employees in Ontario. Take away the federal and municipal workers (which the province has no control over) and those involved in the health field and that leaves about 500,000. People involved in Ontario public education are half of that. Assuming that those 100,000 come from this pool then he will be getting rid of 50,000 teachers. How can you get rid of that many teachers and not have major workplace disruptions?

The Wynne campaign has decided to run against Harper thereby marginalizing Hudak and painting Hudak as another Harper/Harris. When Hudak says power plants, Wynne spins to Harper/Harris.

Hudak is starting this campaign like he did the last one. His team has to sit down, decide the direction and get that momentum going.

Personally, I have yet to have a dog in this fight but do watch and try to analyze campaigns. Tim Hudak has to crank things up a level or he is going to get blown out again.

Come on Tim, get your game face on and start doing some damage!

Edited May 10, 2014 by Big Guy

Shady · May 10, 2014

We need to change Ontario energy policy. We also need to end the cronyism of wasting billions in ridings just to win elections. We also need a much smarter, better managed provincial government. The Liberals are the antithesis of all of this. In fact, they're the perpetrators of all of these issues. Electing Wynne will only exacerbate the problems. She needs to go. She seems like a nice person, and it's cool that she likes to jog, but I couldn't care less.

Boges · May 10, 2014

No he isn't. I swear people are talking out of their button regarding Hudak.

In 2011, he didn't separate himself enough from Mcguinty so it was largely seen that he wasn't any kind of alternative.

With this announcement he certainly is distinguishing himself from the status quo.

I'd people to address the stat that Michael posted that the public sector has grown at twice the population since 2000.

I don't like how people see the public sector as some employment program.

I read what Hudak said and a lot of those jobs savings will come from contracting out.

Municipalities have been doing that for years.

Why should IT workers, cafeteria staff or custodians be directly employed by the government?

Sure wages will be lower but they're ridiculously high in the first place.

Boges · May 10, 2014

No he isn't doing the same stuff as in 2011. I swear people are talking out of their button regarding Hudak.

In 2011, he didn't separate himself enough from Mcguinty so it was largely seen that he wasn't any kind of alternative.

With this announcement he certainly is distinguishing himself from the status quo.

I'd people to address the stat that Michael posted that the public sector has grown at twice the population since 2000.

I don't like how people see the public sector as some employment program.

I read what Hudak said and a lot of those jobs savings will come from contracting out.

Municipalities have been doing that for years.

Why should IT workers, cafeteria staff or custodians be directly employed by the government?

Sure wages will be lower but they're ridiculously high in the first place.

Argus · May 10, 2014

Look at how well the wealthy have done over the past few decades, thanks to governments paying attention to these things.

Do you mean 'wealthy' as in rich people with limosines and yachts, or 'wealthy' as in Kathleen Wynne's new definition of anyone earning $150,000 a year?

Argus · May 10, 2014

Teachers don't put in more hours when class sizes go up. The school day is only as long as the school day is. What will happen is that children will receive less attention from the teachers.

But hey, making Ontario kids stupid will only benefit the Conservatives in the long run. It's a good way to invest in the party's future.

So tell me, is it not true that student scores on reading and math have been steadily going downhill? So what good are the new, smaller class sizes doing us exactly?

Icebound · May 10, 2014

According to the article, substandard airline maintenance is the fault of Transporation Canada regulations, not the private sector.

Read it again. It is the fault of the LACK of TC regulation, or at least, the LACK of TC oversight.

But anyway... whether more public spending can solve the myriad of messes that private industry creates may be debatable.... BUT FOR SURE....the solutions are not simple, and it is not a given that LESS public spending and FEWER public employees is somehow the magic road toward solving them.

Smallc · May 10, 2014

Read it again. It is the fault of the LACK of TC regulation, or at least, the LACK of TC oversight.

Industry is supposed to be policing themselves, while the government regulates and polices the industry overall. It's like the new push in many countries to get federal meat inspectors off of the floor and into the back while industry does the direct inspecting. They can be more objective that way. It's all about the system.

Edited May 10, 2014 by Smallc

cybercoma · May 10, 2014

So tell me, is it not true that student scores on reading and math have been steadily going downhill? So what good are the new, smaller class sizes doing us exactly?

do you think they'll go up with students getting less attention? For the record, our math and reading scores despite dropping are a full grade level above the OECD average.

Shady · May 10, 2014

do you think they'll go up with students getting less attention? For the record, our math and reading scores despite dropping are a full grade level above the OECD average.

Why were student scores better in the past when class sizes were larger? Also, why is being above the OECD average despite the drop ok with you, but when it comes to our fiscal and economic position as a country being much better than OECD countries, despite a drop, a big problem for you?

cybercoma · May 10, 2014

There's multiple factors affecting student achievement. Class size is one of them. Research empirically show this to be the case. There are other influences though. Smaller classes won't mean improved grades when the teachers are not not very good. Students of competent teachers will however benefit. The other issue is socioeconomically disadvantaged children struggling. Smaller class sizes do not benefit them the same as other students. Getting rid of teachers is not going to help them either because the resource workers that help them are the first to go.

But let's be clear about where we stand with PISA. Canada is a Top 10 country and in the 15th percentile. We outrank the US on almost every measure. Shanghai, Hong Kong, and Macau are all ranked separately, but are part of China and in the top 10 as well. When you look at the more successful countries and economic regions, they all have something in common. They spend more on teachers, teacher training, and teacher resources. Having said that, can you guess which province outranks the Canadian average? It's Québec.

So don't come in here and suggest that cutting back from our teachers--hiring less, paying less, and training less--is going to somehow improve student achievement. You're completely wrong and all it takes is a look at the PISA numbers to see that.

Icebound · May 11, 2014

Industry is supposed to be policing themselves, while the government regulates and polices the industry overall. It's like the new push in many countries to get federal meat inspectors off of the floor and into the back while industry does the direct inspecting. They can be more objective that way. It's all about the system.

Is that push because of "efficacy" or because of "cost"?

But in any case, today's "industry" is about the bottom line, and if industry could get away with no policing at all, it would do so.

Cars would never be as safe as they are, if Ralph Nader had not come along and pushed for regulation..., although I suppose if it was not him, it would have eventually been someone else.

The airline "SMS" model (where industry policies itself according to the regulations)... may be valid, put you need sufficient inspection to prove that it is actually so, and not just lip-service to a big binder of rules, sitting on the shelf.

...

Smallc · May 11, 2014

Is that push because of "efficacy" or because of "cost"?

But in any case, today's "industry" is about the bottom line, and if industry could get away with no policing at all, it would do so.

It's not a push from industry. It's a push from regulatory bodies, from what I understand.

Icebound · May 11, 2014

It's not a push from industry. It's a push from regulatory bodies, from what I understand.

Right!... cost-cutting.

Argus · May 11, 2014

So don't come in here and suggest that cutting back from our teachers--hiring less, paying less, and training less--is going to somehow improve student achievement. You're completely wrong and all it takes is a look at the PISA numbers to see that.

Sorry, but all I see is that over the last some years we've poured buckets of cash into education, paying more, as far as I can tell, than anybody else, cut class sizes, given huge raises to teachers, and brought in all manner of fancy new teaching methods the education ministry and all the education people seem to be in love with, and the result has been... falling grades.

So now, given the need to cut in order to balance the budget, you seem to think education is inviolable. But that's not possible. The biggest budgeary items the province has are health care and education. Together they make up 64% of the budget. How do you imagine Ontario can balance its budget without chopping from both? Alternatively, how long do you think Ontario can go on not balancing its budget?