Thank you to the reviewers Academic Reviewers • Sylvia Bashevkin, PhD. Principal of University College, University of Toronto. Professor of Political Sciences Former President of the Canadian Political Science Association (2003-2004) • Emily Gilbert, PhD. Director of Canadian Studies Program. University of Toronto. Professor of Geography and Canadian Studies • Nelson Wiseman, PhD. Associate Professor of Political Science. University of Toronto. CBC Constitutional Expert Publication Reviewers • Alex Greco, Editor, University of Toronto’s St. Michael’s College “The Mike” Student Newspaper. • Sam Presvelos, Executive Editor, LPE Media Group. • Dan Seljak, Executive Editor, University of Toronto’s St. Michael’s College “The Mike” Student Newspaper. Table of Contents • Introduction 01 • The 1990 Campaign and the 1995 Victory 02 • Healthcare Reform and Restructuring 03 • Education Reform 07 • Partisan Government Ads 11 • Government Consultants and Untendered Contracts 12 • Labour Relations 14 • Welfare and Tennant Reform 16 • Tax Cuts and Fees 17 • Special Interest Groups and Lobbying 18 • Transportation 21 • Highway 407 22 • City of Toronto Amalgamation 23 • The Hydro Legacy 24 • Bypassing the Legislative Process 26 • They are proposing what? 27 • The Ministerial Sequel and Radical Caucus 29 • Choosing Leaders 30 • Concluding Statements 30 Part II: The Effects of a Downsized Public Service and More Deregulation: The Harris Government in Ontario • Introduction 31 • Plastimet & USE Hickson Fire 32 • Walkerton 34 • Safety Inspection Privatization (TSSA - Technical Standards and Safety Authority) 36 • Concluding Statements 37 Mismanaging During Storms: The Mike Harris, Eves and Hudak Conservatives in Ontario By: Neville Britto It has been nearly 15 years since the self-proclaimed small “c” Neo-Conservatives first strolled the halls of Queen’s Park under one of Canada’s most right wing platforms, the “Common Sense Revolution”. As you must be aware, a recent Ipsos-Reid poll shows that over 41% 1 of Ontarians are displeased with the current Liberal government and want change. Changing voter attitudes suggest that, the possibility of a non-Liberal government coming into power on Oct. 6, 2011 is something worth considering. Realistically, the New Democrats (NDP) simply do not have the same influence they once did under the direction of Bob Rae. Currently the Ontario NDP is just teetering on the cusp of the “third party” title as they hold 10 seats in the legislature, only two over the 8 seat threshold. The likely alternative is Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives. To fully understand the implication of another Conservative government in Ontario we have to take a long hard look back through the Government of Ontario yearbook focusing especially on the rule of Premier Mike Harris, and to a lesser extent that of Premier Ernie Eves between 1995 and 2003. The Harmonized Sales Tax (HST), Eco Fees and the rising Hydro rates have definitely hurt the current government’s popularity with the voting electorate. However, the teeter-totter game of politics that the Progressive Conservatives (PC) and the New Democrats (NDP) are playing with the voting populous is also very interesting. The current leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario, Tim Hudak, vigorously supported the HST before the Liberals implemented it. On April 23, 2009 before the Economic Club of Canada he proudly exclaimed, “now I know that some business leaders support the Harmonized Sales Tax and to be clear, I believe that there’s little sense in allowing two separate governments to apply two separate sets of taxes and policies and collect two separate groups of sales taxes.”2 Could the HST campaign have asked for a better endorsement? However, when the Liberals actually adopted the policy and implemented it on July 1, 2010, Hudak “changed” his position. All of a sudden he came out swinging against the HST, and coined his new mantras against the “Dalton McGuinty Tax Grab,” the DST - Dalton Sales Tax,” and proclaimed that the government had gone “Off the Rails.” In the official joint Federal-Provincial HST agreement, the Premier has to notify the federal government six months in advance before it chooses to revert to its previous sales tax collection system. The McGuinty Liberals are an easy target, Hudak has never mentioned his Conservative cousins and former 1 Nguyen, Linda. "Ontario Voters Would Turf McGuinty: Poll." The Globe and Mail [Toronto] 21 Nov. 2010. Print. 2 Hudak, Tim. Economic Club of Canada, Toronto. 23 Apr. 2009. Address. 1 cabinet colleagues (Baird, Clement and Flaherty) even though they had an equal share of the HST negotiations. Could it also be because as treasured Canadian comedian Rick Mercer describes, John Baird (former colleague of Hudak) incessantly “barks like a rabid dog” at the mild suggestion that God forbid his party of government actually did something wrong! Hudak is highly “critical” of the HST but has left out one key piece of information, his “removal” strategy! The unpopular ECO fees campaign was another golden gear-switching moment for Hudak’s party. At the starting line, the PC caucus came out swinging. However, when Environmental Commissioner Gord Miller released his report stating it was a good idea, they popped it into reverse and floored the gas. The Official Opposition PCs and NDP routinely accuse the Liberal government of being “wishy washy.” But, are the opposition parties not displaying the same behaviour? In the recent election of Rob Ford (son of Harris MPP Doug Ford Sr.) as mayor in Toronto may be indicative of a shift to conservatism. His election was based on a “fiscal restraint” platform. Ford claimed that “Respect for Taxpayers” was his driving force. However, on Ford’s first day in office he cancelled Transit City, a joint provincial-municipal funded surface Light Rapid Transit (LRT) plan. Taxpayers had already coughed up over $130 million to the plan when it was slashed. Is that what one would deem “respect” for taxpayers? What troubles me most though is how short a memory Torontonians and Ontarians have. It just seems like supercharged partisan “tax cut” lip service and spin doctoring untruths and the public falls for it hook, line and sinker every single time. It is almost like it was taken verbatim from a political science textbook and applied to just about every election scenario. To understand this we need to look at the hard text and facts, the writing has been on the wall for years. The Harris government provides excellent insight into the implications of a shift t to the right in Ontario. The problem however was no one really stopped to take notice when the alarms sounded. Will history follow its time honoured tradition and repeat itself yet again in 2011? Only the people of Ontario will tell. The 1990 Campaign and the 1995 Victory: Even today, more that fifteen years since the Harris government was elected, it is still regarded as one of the most controversial governments in Ontario’s history. Although the Harris government campaigned under the banner of the Progressive Conservative party in the elections of 1990, 1995 and again in 1999 many experts argue the values of the so-called “Common Sense Revolution” agenda were more in line with the more radical Reform Party of Canada (popular in Western Canada) as opposed to the more socially minded Federal Progressive Conservatives.3 The Reform Party of Canada (later the Canadian Alliance, and now the Conservative Party of Canada) was a neo-liberalist right wing radical party that focused primarily on ideals of populism (“average citizen’s needs”). Party leader Preston Manning had long advocated for a socially conservative (anti-abortion, etc.) smaller government agenda. Manning’s Reform manifesto, The New Canada, promoted ideals such as service elimination and the privatization of services.4 Mike Harris would prove to be one of his closest ideological disciples, sacrificing the people of Ontario in the process. While the Harris government campaigned on the philosophy of smaller 3 Brooks, Stephen. Canadian Democracy. 6th ed. Toronto: Oxford, 2009. Print. 4 Manning, Preston. The New Canada. Toronto, Ont., Canada: Macmillan Canada, 1992. Print. 2 government and less intervention, their “reforms” stretched government intervention into just about every realm possible from healthcare to landlords. In his piece, With a Good Deficit You Can See Forever, author Adrian Adamson beautifully summarizes this agenda: “With a good budget crisis running we can do almost anything we want. We can savagely cut spending and roll wages back to the 1978 level— or lower. Spending too much on schools? Slash. Don't you know we have a budget crisis? Doctors making too many people well? Cut their salaries. Close half the hospitals. Don't you know we have a budget crisis? Any public service workers still working? Lay them off. Don't you know we've got a serious budget crisis? Cut! Slash! Downsize! Start with the public service. Everybody knows those teachers and hospital workers don't work. Make it easy. Start with a really vicious campaign against them and everyone will cheer. Don't forget. We've got a really serious budget crisis!” 5 The recession of 1995 was The Conservative Party’s long awaited moment. While the recession was significant no doubt, the Harris government’s approach and strategy was highly problematic, as can be seen in their response to the significantly reduced transfer payments instituted by the Liberal federal government. In Alberta, a similar right-wing Conservative government under the direction of Ralph Klein, cut government spending and programs accordingly but left taxes alone as they were stable streams of government revenue. When the Chrétien Liberals balanced the books and started increasing provincial transfers, Alberta and the other provinces slowly restored their programs and services. The Harris government, however voluntarily chose to be the “village fools” of Canada when they not only hacked away significant chunks of Ontario’s programs and resources but significantly reduced their tax revenue in the midst of a recession and mounting debt.