The Better Angels of Our Nature

Like many who follow politics closely, I consider myself to be deeply cynical. Probably the best window into the human soul, politics is the arena where often the worst aspects of our natures prevail; greed, selfishness, abuse of power all have ample opportunity to find expression in this venue.

Yet despite many years of observing these terrible truths about ourselves, I have never completely abandoned hope for the possibility of something better. Recent events have provided some basis for that hope, despite the best efforts of the Harper neoconservatives to remake us in their own image and accept them as Canada's natural governing party and all that that implies.

In this vein, a couple of articles are worth perusal. The first, Seven things Kathleen Wynne's victory tells us about ourselves, offers two especially important insights:

It’s about character.

“It shows that Ontarians don’t vote first for platforms or policies,” says political consultant Randi Rahamim with the Toronto-based firm Navigator Ltd. What people sense is bred in the bone proved more important than the Liberal scandal over gas plants or the ORNGE air ambulance fiasco. “Character matters most and people have a gut feeling about that. Who do they want to have a coffee with?”

I regard this as especially important, inasmuch it suggests that we have not totally lost the ability to relate to politicians as fellow human beings, regarding them as more than just stereotypes of self-interest and corruption. To see the face of human integrity in our leaders implies we are able to look beyond those who can best serve our own narrow interests through more tax cuts, tax credits, and continued erosion of the traditional role of government.


She makes us feel good about who we are as a community and, on a wider scale, a province.

[Peter] Donolo compares her appeal to U.S. President Barack Obama’s effect on Americans in his first campaign in 2008. “There’s a real sense of optimism that they see reflected in her,” says Donolo.

There’s so much to get us down, starting with the lack of jobs and the way a dollar doesn’t stretch anymore. That could have been lethal for Wynne; her own party has been in power since 2003.

Instead, she included her definition of government as part of her stump speech, stressing that people pay taxes to cover social services. She also made it clear the government must respect the value of hard-earned dollars.

Clearly this is related to the issue of character. People's response to Wynne was, once again, a human response that includes concern about the larger community, something the federal government has been working steadily and consistently to undermine, and mirrored in Tim Hudak's gleeful blood lust for cuts.

In her column today, Heather Mallick writes on a similar theme of optimism. Entitled Liberals won because voters aren’t cynics, she reflects on Wynne's election win as a victory for the inclusiveness that progressives fight hard for:

We elected a woman premier, imagine that. I spent years worrying that the advance of gay rights had seemed to sidestep women, with lesbians as hidden in the shadows as ever.

There was a time when a divorced woman who had fallen in love with another woman would have been shut out of public life. Welcome, Premier Wynne.

Wynne’s budget was left-wing in that it had goals that can only be accomplished by government. The job of government is to be visionary, to plan for the future. The private sector can’t do that because it isn’t built into their structure.

And there was Wynne winning votes partly with the sheer force of her obvious decency, warmth and humour, a Canadian version of another much-loved politician, Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

While I am far from certain that the Liberals deserved the majority they achieved, and while I have been around long enough not to get too swept up in a self-congratulatory mood, this election experience does give hope that "the better angels of our nature" Abraham Lincoln referred to in his inaugural speech more than 100 years ago have not deserted us; rather, it seems more likely they have lain dormant, awaiting someone to reawaken us to their reality.

Following Politics Too Closely Takes Its Toll

I imagine that many people who follow politics closely do so in the belief that it is one of the few arenas that offers the possibility of change on a wide scale. Enlightened public policy, backed by the appropriate fiscal measures, can help bring about greater social and economic equity, thereby contributing to a more balanced and compassionate world. Unfortunately, perhaps inevitably, that hope is almost always dashed. Consequently, many of us fall victim to a deep cynicism about human nature.

In the current Ontario election campaign, there is much about which to be cynical. Three parties, all deeply flawed, all vying for our vote. There is the prospect of voting for a government long past its best-before date, the Liberals, whose leader, Kathleen Wynne, has thus far been unable to lay to rest the ghost of Dalton McGuinty. Next, Tim Hudak, leading the Progressive Conservatives, seeks to resurrect the ghost of Mike Harris, accompanied by an egregious contempt for the electorate's intelligence, reflected in his facile use of a fictitious number, one million, for the number of jobs he will create by cutting 100,000 of them.

At one time, solace might have been found in the New Democratic Party. Sadly that time is no more.

Its leader, Andrea Horwath, now inhabits an unenviable category. Having abandoned traditional progressive principles, like a pinball caroming off various bumpers, she emerges as one wholly undone by a lust for power.

Having forced this election by rejecting a very progressive budget on the pretext that the Liberals cannot be trusted, she is floundering badly as she tries desperately to reinvent herself and her party as conscientious custodians of the public purse, promising, for example, to create a new Savings Ministry, cut $600 million per annum by eliminating waste, and lower small business taxes.

Few are fooled by her chameleon-like performance. Carol Goar's piece in today's Star, says it all: Ontario NDP sheds role as champion of the poor: Andrea Horwath campaigns for lean government, forsaking the poor, hungry and homeless.

Horwath, says Goar, is so preoccupied with winning middle-class votes, assuring the business community she would be a responsible economic manager and saving tax dollars that she has scarcely said a word about poverty, homelessness, hunger, low wages or stingy social programs.

She continues her indictment:

She triggered the election by rejecting the most progressive provincial budget in decades, one that would have raised the minimum wage, increased the Ontario Child Benefit, improved welfare rates, and provided more support to people with disabilities. She parted ways with the Ontario Federation of Labour and Unifor, the province’s largest private-sector union. And she left MPPs such Cheri DiNovo, a longtime advocate of the vulnerable and marginalized, without a social justice platform to stand on.

No vision. Not a scintilla of progressive policy. Only the perspective of an uninspired and uninspiring bookkeeper.

Abandon all hope, ye who enter here, is what Dante said was inscribed on the entrance to hell. These days, it could equally apply to those who have thrown in their lot with the Ontario NDP.

It's All One Big Coincidence

Glad that Ontario Premiere Kathleen Wynne has put to rest that ugly speculation that the province's change in attitude toward a subway for Scarborough has nothing to do with the upcoming provincial byelections.

Fathoming The Reactionary Mind

I readily admit that I find it difficult, if not impossible, to fathom the extreme right-wing mind. To me, it is a mind mired in a world of fantasy, willful ignorance, and intractable denial. Magical thinking seems to be a substitute for cogitation. Name-calling in lieu of discussion. Denunciation instead of deliberation. And I would be quite content to leave such minds alone, content as they are in delusions of grandeur and superiority, except for the fact that they bother and disrupt the business of the adults in society.

The above, I'm afraid, is an all too apt description of the leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party, young Tim Hudak.

Yesterday, Kathleen Wynne brought down her throne speech in the Ontario legislature. As reported in the Globe, with nods to both the NDP and the Conservatives, the speech trod a fine line between fiscal responsibility and social spending in its effort to garner support from both parties.

Despite the reasonable and conciliatory tone of the speech, young Hudak, as is his wont, immediately rejected any possibility of support. The Star's Martin Regg Cohn notes the following:

Tory Leader Tim Hudak followed Wynne at the microphone to say his party would vote against the speech, instantly marginalizing himself just as he did last year for the Liberal budget (allowing the New Democrats to dictate the agenda).

He went on to reject any possibility of countenancing road tolls or congestion fees to address the problem of gridlock in the GTA until government waste [is] first eliminated. As Cohn tartly observes: Hmmm. Now there’s a Tory inaction plan: foster more political gridlock so that traffic gridlock festers for another generation.

I have no idea whether Kathleen Wynne has either the capacity or the political capital to reverse the significant damage done by her predecessor. I do know, however, that for Hudak to reject out of hand even the possibility of working collaboratively for a time, insisting instead on an imminent election, is the mark of an untutored and immature mind, wholly consistent with the extreme right-wing mentality described at the start of this post.

Cynical Politics - Ontario Style

It is likely a truism to observe that the value burning brightest in the hearts of most political parties is the passion to get and retain power. Concern for the public good is at best but a very distant secondary concern.

We are reminded of this fact by the reaction of Ontario's political opposition to Kathleen Wynne's winning of the leadership of the Ontario Liberal Party, thus rendering her the next premier of the province. In his column today, The Star's Martin Regg Cohn offers the following trenchant observations:

With graceless timing, Tory Leader Tim Hudak disgorged an attack ad on the first business day after Wynne’s weekend triumph.

Next, NDP Leader Andrea Horwath laid a crass political trap of her own by demanding a costly full judicial inquiry into cancelled gas plants (which the NDP also wanted cancelled) instead of letting MPPs and the auditor general do the accounting job they’re paid to do. To be clear, Horwath’s first “ask” was to demand Wynne arrange her own hanging.

His column goes on to point out the patent hypocrisy in the attacks, hypocrisy that includes Hudak's complaint over losing four months of time in the legislation owing to the crass McGuinty prorogation after announcing he was stepping down. Despite being in apparent high dudgeon over this waste, he refused to support an NDP plan to tighten the rules of prorogation.

In Cohn's withering assessment, Andrea Horwath appears to be morally in tune with young Tim:

Horwath, who first demanded that prorogation be constrained, made no mention of that — or any other constructive idea — in her Monday news conference (or 10-minute private phone call that followed with the incoming premier). Instead, Horwath invited Wynne to sign her own death warrant by — improbably — setting up a commission to provide opposition ammunition in time for the next election.

Cohn goes on to point out that the auditor general will be releasing his report in March on government waste, so such a probe would also seem to be redundant.

The columnist deduces that instead of trying to co-operate for at least a few weeks to pursue the public good, as they were elected to do, both leaders and their parties [p]erhaps ... have concluded co-operation is too risky, lest it undercut their bedrock support.

Therein lies yet another instance of the abject failure of politics in our country.

Some Questions Leadership Aspirants Need To Answer

I have recently written some posts bemoaning the paucity of policy undergirding the campaigns of those who would become the next leader of the Liberal Party, both on the provincial (Ontario) and federal level. Substituting for substance are tired bromides and platitudes that, in an earlier, less cynical age might have been sufficient to inspire, but now fill the seasoned observer with ennui and suspicion.

I was pleased to see Martin Regg Cohn addressing the issue in this morning's Toronto Star. Lamenting the lack of substance in the provincial leadership race, his piece lists six questions he says aspirants need to answer:

1. With unemployment hovering at 8.3 per cent, what’s your concrete plan to not just create but keep well-paying jobs?

2. Should motorists pay for driving on congested roadways? (road tolls, congestion fees, etc.)

3. Can you make future pensions a present-day priority?

4. Do you have the political stamina to tackle welfare reform?

5. As a rookie premier, will you stay green?

6. How do you persuade people to back you, while you’re cutting back on what you give them?

While these are all excellent questions, I hope Mr. Cohn remembers that it is the responsibility of journalists not only to ask these questions, but also to ensure the politicos don't simply fob off non-answers in response.

McGuinty's Craven Manipulations Continue

There is no evidence of a slow-down in the craven practices of Ontario's slickster premier, Dalton McGuinty. With some uncertainty over whether his gambit to buy his way to a majority government by bribing Liz Witmer to vacate her seat to become head of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, thus opening the way for a September 6 byelection, dauntless Dalton is relentless in his efforts to impress upon the public his ability to be a tough guy when it comes to public service workers.

His latest musings about ending bankable sick days for firefighters and police, a benefit he is currently legislating way from teachers, is especially transparent and disingenuous. This will occur to those rational enough to think straight after the 'education premier's' latest embrace of the politics of division and his goal of public outrage if they remember that police and firefighters are under municipal, not provincial jurisdiction.

Of course, facts apparently are intended to play little role in this demagogue's thirst for majority government.

Thwarting Democracy, Ontario-Style

I recently linked a post to a story from the Star detailing how Dalton McGuinty, Ontario's Premier, has reported to his caucus the wooing of at least two more members of opposition parties in the hopes of securing the majority government denied to him by the electorate in the last provincial election.

It is perhaps not surprising the the response to Dalton McGuinty's corrupt gambit has been decidedly muted. With the national political landscape littered with politicians lying about the true cost of F-35 jets, election-tampering through misleading robocalls, and Harper-imposed limitations on debate over an omnibus budget bill that will covertly dismantle environmental regulation and lower the living wage, anything going on within the provinces must seem like pretty small potatoes to our intrepid journalists.

None of this, of course, excuses what is happening, which is nothing less than an attempt by Dalton McGuinty to achieve voter nullification/suppression, an insidious, corrupt and probably illegal pursuit under the Criminal Code of Canada. As reported in The Star, the following section is likely applicable:

“Every one who … purports to sell or agrees to sell an appointment to or a resignation from an office, or a consent to any such appointment or resignation, or receives or agrees to receive a reward or profit from the purported sale thereof … is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.”

Don't expect any arrests anytime soon, as the Premier continues to quite openly show his contempt for the will of the electorate that withheld a majority from his party in the last provincial election. Instead, expect more defections soon as politicians follow Liz Witmer's decision to abandon the political ship for a more comfortable ride on the gravy train.

Expect as well new depths of political cynicism from the public as a result of these self-serving decisions.

Andrea Horwath, Tim Hudak: Unlikely Allies

“Outrageous proposals for new spending and reckless tax giveaways like these are unacceptable.” So says Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan, in high dudgeon over the intention of NDP leader Andrea Horwath, and supported by Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak, to introduce a private member's bill to remove the provincial portion of the HST from home heating bills.

According to Duncan, the proposal would cut provincial revenues by nearly $350 million a year and that raising corporate taxes — as the NDP would like to do — is no answer to lost revenue.

Hmm... as I have mentioned before, the key to critical thinking is to have access to an extensive array of information and a willingness to digest and incorporate that information into one's worldview. Here is some information that is vital in assessing Duncan's denunciation:

Despite the fact that Ontario faces a very large deficit and debt, the following tax regimen attends to the business world:

Ontario Corporate Income Tax Rates, 2010 - 2013


General Corporate Income Tax Rate
2010 2011 2012 2013
Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1
Federal 18 16.5 15
Provincial 14 12 11.5 11 10
Combined 32 30 28.5 28 26.5 26 25

Corporate Income Tax Rate for Income from Manufacturing and Processing*
2010 2011 2012 2013
Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1
Federal 18 16.5 15
Provincial 12 10
Combined 30 28 26.5 25
* Also applies to income from farming, mining, logging and fishing

Small Business Corporate Income Tax Rate*
2010 2011 2012 2013
Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1 Jan 1 July 1
Federal 11
Provincial 5.5 4.5
Combined 16.5 15.5

You will note in the above chart, taken from the Ontario government's website, that despite Duncan's denunciation of a measure that would benefit untold numbers of ordinary citizens, he is more than willing to cut provincial revenues by as much as 2% to benefit the corporate world.

Oh, I know it would be easy to justify this ongoing and seemingly ineluctable drive to subsidize business as the price of remaining a competitive regime that is attractive to corporate entities, but the problem with that reasoning is that Ontario, as is Canada as a whole, is already very competitive in its rates vis a vis the United States, and offers singular advantages over the latter jurisdiction in terms of infrastructure, an educated workforce, and basic healthcare for all. According to KPMG's 2010 Competitive Alternatives study of international business costs confirmed it again in 2010: Canadian business costs are once again the lowest in the G7.

Perhaps one of the most telling and, from my perspective, damning detail is this one:

Ontario’s corporate income tax rate (provincial and federal combined) is lower than that of any U.S. state, Japan or France and will drop to 10% by 2013.

So, it seems to me that we have a real obligation to critically assess and, when warranted, challenge this government in all of its assertions. To do anything less is to allow a corporate-driven and influenced elected body to make a mockery of democratic principles.

And You Wonder Why People Have Contempt For Politicians?

Watch/listen to this to find out one of the reasons:

Will That Be One Smirk Or Two?

Watching the news last night, I was reminded once more of how personally repugnant my decision to vote for the McGuinty government is. I cited the reasons for my shift in yesterday's post, and although from my perspective there is no reasonable alternative in my riding, it still does not sit well with me.

During a news scrum yesterday, McGuinty was asked how much the decision to halt the still-ongoing construction of the Mississauga power plant (a decision the Premier insists was not prompted by electoral concerns) is going to cost taxpayers. His reply: “That is the subject of continuing conversation.”

He was then asked how much it had cost to halt the Oakville power plant last year after sustained demonstrations and representations by the people. His answer, this time with a smirk, was “That is the subject of continuing conversation.”

Now I realize that politicians never want to hand any ammunition to their opponents, especially during an election campaign, but the 'wink-wink, nudge-nudge' demeanour of the Premier makes us all complicit in the lie he is telling. To brazenly feign ignorance about such costs is in fact to lie to the electorate, the very people our government is supposed to be representing, and the saddest part is he realizes he can get away with it because of our natural passivity and ignorance.

My feelings of impotence and anger grow daily.

UPDATE: The Ontario Premier's professed ignorance notwithstanding, a story in today's Star puts the cost at shutting down both the Oakville and Mississauga power plant projects at about $1 billion.

McGuinty's Weak Apologies and Bill Blair's Misdirection

Having to watch two politicians, Premier Dalton McGuinty and Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, working hard at damage control today over Andre Marin's excoriating report and calls for their respective resignations, was not pleasant. Listening to their efforts to obscure their culpability in lying to the public regarding the so-called 'five-meter' law was even harder. Fortunately, our digital world allows us an electronic record that is indelible. Therefore, I am reproducing a blog post I wrote on June 29th that reflects the duplicitous nature of both the aforementioned gentlemen.

If you have the patience to read the entire post, please pay particular attention to Blair's explanation as to why he didn't reveal to the public the fact that there was no law that allowed his forces to arrest people coming within five meters of the perimeter fence. As well, note Premier McGuinty's comments that summit weekend about the necessity of having extreme measures in place, surely an allusion to the non-existent law, a fact he only revealed after the summit had left town.

Police Chiefs and Premiers

I have to confess that my nose is presently feeling quite abraded and raw, not surprising given its strenuous workout in today’s smell tests, beginning with the spectacle of Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair displaying a cache of ‘weapons’ seized from protesters that turned out to be less than claimed. First, an astute CBC reporter asked about the cross bow that was given prominence. Hadn’t that, in fact, been seized from a car before the summit began and determined to have nothing to do with the G20? Well yes, the good chief sheepishly admitted that it shouldn’t have been there, as reported in The Globe and Mail:

A car search last Friday netted a cross bow and chain saw but they were not determined to be G20 related, and no charges were laid. When this was pointed out, Chief Blair acknowledged the items should not have been displayed but said “everything else” was seized from summit protesters.

However, police also included objects taken from a Whitby, Ont., man who was heading to a role playing fantasy game in Centennial Park Saturday morning. As was reported by the Globe on Saturday, Brian Barrett, 25, was stopped at Union Station for wearing chain mail and carrying a bag with an archery bow, shield and graphite swords. His jousting gear was seized by police, but was on display Tuesday, even though he was not charged and police told a Globe reporter it was a case of bad timing.

The critical thinker, of course, would have even more reason after this display to question the veracity of what he or she was being told. But then things got worse. Blair announced that there was no five-metre rule in place allowing police to search bags and demand identification from interlopers who had violated the police’s ‘comfort zone.’ His justification for this alleged lie: “I was trying to keep the criminals out.”

I say alleged lie, because this came only after an announcement from the Ministry of Community Safety made an announcement that “all the cabinet did was update the law that governs entry to such things as court houses to include specific areas inside the G20 fences — not outside.

A ministry spokeswoman says the change was about property, not police powers, and did not include any mention of a zone five metres outside the G20 security perimeter. “

However — and my nose was really starting to hurt by this point — we remember Dalton McGuinty’s statement of support for the police on Friday after word got out about the secret order-in-council suspending some of our Charter Rights:

Premier Dalton McGuinty denies it was an abuse of power for his government to secretly approve sweeping new powers for police.

“I just think it’s in keeping with the values and standards of Ontarians,” McGuinty told the Toronto Star on Friday amid a battery of complaints from opposition parties, city councillors, civil libertarians and regular Torontonians that the new rules were kept secret and, some say, may go too far.

The rules allow police to arrest and potentially jail anyone refusing to produce identification or be searched within 5 metres of the G20 security zone.

“Most Ontarians understand that there’s something extraordinary happening inside our province,” the Premier said. “We’ve tried to limit the intrusiveness to a specific secure zone as much as we can by working together with our police.”

Despite the fact that it was front page news on several of Ontario’s dailies, Premier McGuinty did nothing to disabuse the public about this seemingly inaccurate information, which leads me to conclude a number of limited possibilities:

He is so inept a Premier that, despite the alleged regulation having been passed secretly by his Cabinet, he knew none of the details;

Chief Blair was lying about these special powers, promulgated throughout the media and eliciting mass confusion and outrage. Were this so, wouldn’t it be incumbent upon McGuinty to immediately terminate the Chief, having gone far beyond anything General Stanley McCrystal did to warrant firing?

He was colluding with the police to continue to perpetrate this ‘falsehood,’ a possibility that would justify our asking how committed the Premier is to Charter Rights and basic democracy;

The regulation was as everyone understood it, but because of the widespread revulsion it inspired, the Liberal Government, realizing the potential political consequences to be so very costly, disavowed any relationship to the odious regulation, therefore requiring Bill Blair to ‘fall on his sword’ over this issue.

The fact that the position of Chief of Police is, de facto, a political one, would likely have convinced Blair that his future would be far better served by obeying his political masters than hewing to the path of integrity.

Further evidence of government and police lying to the public emerges as the McGuinty Government is now stating that no one was arrested under any extended laws, but only regular criminal laws. The critical thinking public will, of course, want to know why 31-year-old Dave Vasey was arrested when he ventured within the allegedly non-existent boundary, refusing to either show his i.d. or allow his bag to be searched, believing he was only enjoying his basic rights of citizenship. Told he would then have to leave, he refused, after which he was arrested under this ‘non-existent’ rule. What then, was the offense for which he was arrested?

These and other questions must be forcefully asked and re-asked in the days to come. To do anything less would be criminal.

A Two-Part Interview with Clayton Ruby

Before starting this political blog, I wrote extensively on my other blog about the abuses of Charter Rights during the G20 Summit in Toronto by both the police and the Dalton McGuinty Ontario Liberal Government.

In this two-part interview by The Real News with Clayton Ruby, the well-known Toronto lawyer discusses both the legality of what happened on Toronto streets in late June, as well as possible ways to prevent future suspensions of our rights.

A Morally and Financially Bankrupt Provincial Government

Some days, it is almost more than I can do to muster even a modicum of faith in our political system. Confronted as we are on an almost daily basis with evidence of corruption, betrayal of the public trust, and reminders that we, the voters, count only at election time, it is difficult to affix any credibility to the utterances of our 'representatives'. Currently, my ire is particularly directed at the Ontario Provincial Liberals, led by Dalton McGuinty.

My acute disaffection with the Premier began in late June, during the G20 summit. It was only after the summit was over that the Premier revealed that the so-called five-meter fence law allowing police to demand that people show their identities and the contents of their knapsacks did not actually exist. This, despite the fact that Bill Blair, the Toronto Police Chief, was trumpeting its importance since the day before the Summit actually began, and Dalton McGuinty was enthusiastically agreeing with him in the press that such extraordinary measures were necessary to provide an adequate level of security for the delegates.

After it was all over, McGuinty simply said that they “could have done a better job in communication” and facilely dismissed the idea of a public inquiry, despite the fact that he had obviously colluded with the police to deprive citizens of their Charter Rights guaranteeing freedom of movement and association.

My disaffection with him has deepened given the events that transpired over the weekend regarding the site for the Pan Am stadium in Hamilton, which I have already written about.

And today comes the announcement that the Provincial Government is going to move into the lucrative field of on-line gambling, whereby they hope to realize a minimum of $400 million dollars annually, choosing to ignore, despite whatever public-relations gestures that will be forthcoming, the gambling addiction of many Ontarians and willfully exploiting that weakness to enrich government coffers.

So now, in a province that is almost financially bankrupt, we have seen, in at least three different ways, its declaration of moral bankruptcy.

One can only hope that voters will take notice and remember during the next election campaign.

What Is Really Going on Here?

In reviewing earlier statements pertaining to the Federal Conservative Government's decree that they would not fund the West Harbour Stadium site, it is obvious that we are being lied to, by both the federal and provincial governments.

Allow me to reproduce part of a report carried in the August 07th edition of The Hamilton Spectator:

In a statement released yesterday afternoon, MPPs Sophia Aggelonitis and Ted McMeekin confirmed the province is pulling its funding from the west harbour. Aggelonitis -- who says she got a phone call late Thursday from the premier's office alerting her of the funding change -- said the move was prompted by a federal government decision to choose the east Mountain.

"We have said all along that we respect the decision-making process and we want to make sure that Hamilton gets a Pan Am stadium," Aggelonitis said. "What has now changed, unfortunately, is that the federal government has told the city it will not fund west harbour."

"We didn't make the decision, but at the end of the day, the province does not have the money to fund a whole stadium. We cannot go it alone," Aggelonitis said.
Local MP David Sweet and federal Minister of Sport Gary Lunn didn't reply to calls for comment.

Ted McMeekin said the federal government passed its decision on to the province through Pan Am CEO Ian Troop.

"Apparently the federal minister called Ian Troop and made it clear that they weren't going to come to the table with money for the west harbour," he said.

Troop issued the following statement via e-mail:
"Toronto 2015 will be able to offer some perspective when we know the city's direction. Until then, we don't have anything to add to the discussion."

According to the above excerpt, the message from the federal government was passed on by Ian troop, CEO of HostCo, to the Provincial Liberal Government. Now, especially given the denial of the Harper Government through Federal Minister of Sport Gary Lunn that such a statement was ever made to Troop, isn't there at least one logical question clear thinking demands?

That question: “Is there any credible way, short of concluding massive incompetence on the part of the Liberal McGuinty Government, that there weren't measures in place and employed to confirm the truth of what they were being told by a private citizen, even if he is is the CEO of the 2015 Pan Am Organizing Committee? In other words, are they trying to tell us that they made no inquiries of the feds about this, but based simply on the Troop notification, they drafted a united front with the feds?

One more thing that is also immediately interesting is that, given the chance when the veto story first broke, both area Conservative David Sweet, and Federal Minister Lunn, declined to comment. Would that have not have been the perfect opportunity to comment, to set the record straight?

Yet only silence. Until, of course, the official story was concocted.

My Letter to McGuinty

While the following may seem quite harsh and unforgiving, it accurately reflects my sentiments regarding the betrayal of Hamilton by the Ontario Liberal Government. This will be of interest only to those who are concerned about the current controversy revolving around the selection of a stadium site for the Hamilton portion of the Pan Am Games:

Dear Mr. McGuinty:

Once more you have provided me with another reason I was right in deciding to withhold my support from the provincial Liberal Party at the next election. Despite claiming for the past few weeks that the location for the Hamilton Pan Am stadium entirely an independent local decision, you have overridden local decision-making and decreed that it must be located on the East Mountain. In addition to that decree, which will wind up costing local taxpayers $80 million more than if it were sited in the West Harbour, according to a staff report delivered to city councillors, I believe you are once more being dishonest with the public as to the reason for your betrayal of your earlier statements of impartiality.

According to your spokesperson Sophia Aggelonitis, the reason for this reversal is that the Federal Government decided it would withhold funding for the West Harbour site, and the Provincial Government cannot go it alone. The only flaw with this fable is that the announcement made it sound as if both the Federal and Provincial Governments were in accord on this issue. Since you stand to lose much owing to taxpayer outrage over this dictate, why would you have gone along with it? Would there not have been more political capital, especially if you hope to have more than one elected Liberal in the area after the next election, had you said that the Province stands behind the independence of Hamilton's decision, and would guarantee the already committed amount of money, provided that a new stadium was actually built for the Pan Am Games?

As well, when questioned by CHCH news host Nick Dixon about the influence that private interests might have played in influencing the decision, her answer was, as they say in television courtroom drama, unresponsive, as she went on to answer a question that wasn't asked, a favorite trick, I have observed of the contemporary evasive politician.

It is clear to me, and probably to many clear-thinking Canadians, that private interests (a.k.a., Bob Young) reached out to other private interests (a.k.a David Braley, the former owner of the Tiger-Cats, former Pan Am board member, current owner of two other C.F.L. teams, and a newly-appointed Conservative Senator) whose business interests are best served by a football league that includes the Tiger-Cats.

Just as you and your Party evaded responsibility for the cruel lie you perpetrated on Ontarians when colluding with the police to deprive peaceful protesters of their Charter Rights, this latest misrepresentation leads me to conclude that your contempt for the people's right not to be lied to merits the withholding of my vote in the next election, and provides me with the motivation to try to persuade as many as I can, through the various media available to me, to do likewise.

Lorne Warwick
Dundas, Ontario