17

Tim Hudak elected leader of Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives

Many expect him to steer the party to the right


 

Though it took three ballots, Tim Hudak won the leadership of Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives at the party convention in Markham on Saturday, beating Frank Klees, Randy Hillier and Christine Elliott, the wife of federal finance minister Jim Flaherty. Hudak, who has the backing of some high-profile federal Tories (John Baird, Tony Clement), will succeed John Tory, who resigned as leader in March after losing a key by-election. Though the party has moved to the political centre in recent years, many expect Hudak, a 41-year-old Niagara-area MPP, to swing the PCs firmly to the right. Hudak will get his first shot at the Premier’s office during the provincial election scheduled for 2011.

Toronto Star


 
Filed under:

Tim Hudak elected leader of Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives

  1. He'll have a tough fight. First of all, he'll have to endure the perpetual Liberal attack ads compliments of Toronto Star columnists, Thomas Walkom, Linda McQuaig and others. He will have to deal with an Ontario mind set, that, is oblivious to the importance of enterprise as the provider of wealth, taxes and employment. And he will have to contend with militancy in the form of the WORKING FAMILIES ( coalition of labor groups including the teachers), who ran attack ads on McGuinty's behalf before registered political parties could legal do so. And they sent an army of foot shoulders into Kathleen Wynn's riding, resulting in the defeat of John Tory.

    • are foot shoulders contagious? Are they likely to lead to hand knees?

      yes, newspapers have editorial leanings. They have had them since forever. Get over it. You have the National Post to feed your confirmation bias, and Torstar readers feed theirs in similar fashion. Why is it bleaters like you on both sides of the partisan divide can't see that?

      If Ontario did, indeed, have the 'mindset' to which you refer, then does that mean you are resigned to minority status? why do you hate democracy?

      • Dalton McGuilty, when he was a candidate for Premier, said he would not raise taxes. When he got in to power, he raised them.

        Why does Dalton McGuilty hate democracy?

      • Dalton McGuilty, when he was a candidate for Premier, said he would not raise taxes. When he got into power, he raised them.

        Why does Dalton McGuilty hate democracy?

        • JW,

          Name a political leader in Canada who has not reversed him/herself on an election platform. Some such examples are powerfully disruptive to our ability to buy in to the political scene, others are of the more pragmatic watchagonnado variety. Of course, the political fan posters over your bed are going to influence how you judge the leader in question.

          • The political fan posters above my bed are strictly nonpartisan. I have one each of Ruby Dhalla and Rona Ambrose, and everyday I imagine them competing with each other to be Prime Minister and settling the matter with mud wrestling.

            You seem to suggest that the morality of, or justification for, an action is determined by the amount of other people committing or performing the same action. In other words, if a politician lies, he or she cannot be chastised for it if many others have done the same thing. Nonsense.

            If democracy has anything to do with "the will of the people", it can hardly be called a democracy if the electors elect the candidate who promises to do X, only to have that candidate, once in office, do the opposite of X. This is just tyranny by vote.

          • I may have seemed to be implying one thing but was using the short hand capabilities of these replies to make another, and it speaks to your final point; in our democracy, we elect parliamentarians who have to lead for four +/- years. It is impossible for them to adhere strictly to their election platform and to then ignore "the will of the people" as they perceive it to be. Your MP is supposed to be a diviner of his/her local mood. They use polls. Moods change – just look at the annual "most important priority of Canadians" list for the last 20 years; seldom is the top priority the same year to year.

            If I mistook you for a partisan, it would be for the example you chose; McGuinty raised taxes not after the most recent election, but the one before that. It is arguable that the preceding finance minster for the province gave a different impression of the state of affairs than the actual reading of the books would indicate. In the meantime, there have been more recent 180 degree turns that have made the news. I only have that to go one, and made a judgement call. Forgive me if I were mistaken.

          • So, then, is democracy simply about picking a guy or gal and then waiting to see whatever surprises he or she will deliver? Or, should democracy be about picking a candidate along with his/her [party] platform?

          • Well, first, democracy is a lot of things, not just this aspect. In Canada, with our Westmisnter style and federal construct, and the many regional and lingustic divides we need to accommodate on an ongoing basis, a paltform-only approach is rigid and undemocratic as I said above. At best, platforms are indicative of the policy direction preferred by a particular leader – it often doesn't even reflect the policy direction f the party.

            Holding an opposition leader to the strict words of a financial promise, based on fictitious numbers provided by the Government is a pretty high standard, don't you think? I use that as an example, not gospel for the Ontario scenario.

            BTW, my "why do you hate democracy?" line was originally directed at the idea that Onjtario has a mind set with which DS does not agree and votes opposite to how he thinks Ontario should be governed.

          • Well, first, democracy is a lot of things, not just this aspect. In Canada, with our Westminster style and federal construct, and the many regional and lingustic divides we need to accommodate on an ongoing basis, a platform-only approach is rigid and undemocratic as I said above. At best, platforms are indicative of the policy direction preferred by a particular leader – it often doesn't even reflect the policy direction of the party.

            Holding an opposition leader to the strict words of a financial promise, based on fictitious numbers provided by the Government is a pretty high standard, don't you think? I use that as an example, not gospel for the Ontario scenario.

            BTW, my "why do you hate democracy?" line was originally directed at the idea that Onjtario has a mind set with which DS does not agree and votes opposite to how he thinks Ontario should be governed.

          • But something has to be said for having the picture on the box match what is inside the box, so that there are no nasty surprises after you've made your purchase.

            Democracy can certainly mean a lot of things. Personally, I think democracy is an insufficient word, because there are so many different types of democracies, and we, Canadians, have to begin making disintinctions and deciding what kind of democracy we want.

            That one "hates democracy" is not an accusation I would necessarily react to as if slanderous. There is much to dislike about democracies. I support democracy as I support the free market – I think everybody has the right to spend his or her money, or make his or her vote, the way that he or she likes. As the free market can lead to the promotion of numerous bad products, so can democracies do with bad governors.

            What I think democracies do, is ensure that any change is slow and gradual. Most people are comfortable with what they know, and uncomfortable with what they don't. Despite labels of "Liberal" or "NDP", the majority are (small "c") conservative. Thus, what democracies hinder are the fringes, the people and parties that, to use an already exhausted cliche, "think outside the box". The box, in this case, being mass opinion.

            The fringes, I think, is where the ideas are. Of course, ideas can be good or bad. So, what I think democracy does, is spare us the extremely bad ideas, at the expense of the extremely good ideas, leaving us with a slight momentum, sometimes in the right direction, sometimes in wrong, but never moving fast enough to really matter.

          • Your take on democracy matches my own. On the question of election platforms matching the actions taken in the subsequent 4+ years, I will simply repeat that it is extremely difficult for leaders to adhere strictly to their promises. Your line "having the picture on the box match what is inside the box" isn't too far off, but it is more the image of the advertising as opposed to the specifics that should be emphasised.

            A liberal ended up taxing to fix the books instead of cutting programs. To what extent are you surprised, despite his initial impression that he woudln't have to? That matches the image.

          • What surprises me is that he got re-elected.

            I'm lying. That didn't surprise me at all, what surprised was the disinterest and general apathy that led to his re-election… but I guess I've already stated the problems with democracy.

        • Dalton McGuilty hates democracy, because he belives in Green Peace, and so does his brother in the Fed Lib.
          He is tricking the inocent who beleives in a good life, but it is just a huge tax, Green Peace, I beleive is funded by Hugo Savage?? sp He is now going to save water, another huge tax, it is to bring us down so we can be ruled by the other countries, ex: UN

  2. Part of his success will be in reminding Ontarians how McGuinty focused narrowly on clinging to power and failed to address the economic importance of the province. For example, in order to gain support from the teachers, he restored funding to pre-Harris levels. In order to get the capital, he increased corporate taxes from 12% to 14%, thus beginning a steady departure of tax generating enterprise from the province. And today, Ontario has a higher rate of unemployment than the United States as well as Quebec.

    This will be turf war pitting well meaning hard working non unionized Ontarians against the union protected, high paid workers of groups such as OSSTF, Ontario Power Workers, CUPE, the CAW and others.

  3. "In order to get the capital, he increased corporate taxes from 12% to 14%, thus beginning a steady departure of tax generating enterprise from the province."

    Is this a random assertion, or do you have direct cause and effect data to support your thesis?

  4. It looks like a comment of mine regarding Mr. Hudak has been (rightfully) deleted. In it, I attributed the position of Frank Klees on posting hate signs to Mr. Hudak himself. While Mr. Hudak's understanding of human rights tribunals is facile and would make for poor policy, he has not, to my knowledge, issued press releases which could be read as allowing hate signs to be posted by Ontario businesses.

    I apologize for any confusion my earlier post may have created.

Sign in to comment.