Ontario will do just fine without the Liberals

[Anonymous]

When a government is in power for 15 years — as was the case with the just defeated Liberals in Ontario — some people foolishly come to think of it is infallible and god-like.



Because to hear the uninformed bafflegab now being spouted about terrible decisions by former Liberal premiers Kathleen Wynne and, before her, Dalton Mcguinty, you'd think Ontario simply cannot survive without the Liberals. Which is utter nonsense. For example, according to Liberal cheerleaders and apologists, Premier Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives, by scrapping Wynne's cap-and-trade scheme, have abandoned a plan that would have rained billions of dollars of free money down on lucky Ontarians



To say nothing of reducing industrial greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change.



In the real world, scrapping capand-trade will save Ontario consumers, and businesses, at least $5.2 billion between 2017 and 2020, even if the Ford government pays back all of the carbon credits the Liberals sold to industry for a total of $2.8 billion in 2017 and 2018.



It's also doubtful the government will need to reimburse the full amount, since it gave out free carbon credits to most major industrial emitters for all of their emissions in 2017, and most of them in 2018.



Ford is also shutting down one particularly controversial industrial wind project (so far) that was opposed by the local municipal government, as most projects were, with critics warning the project's owner says it could cost Ontarians over $100 million.



Even if that's true, it has to be weighed against the cost of buying inefficient, unreliable and unneeded wind power from private developers for 20 years, for which the previous Liberal government, according to Lysyk in her 2015 report, overpaid by $9.2 billion.



Unsurprising since, as Lysyk noted, Ontario was paying twice the U.S. average for wind power, and 3.5 times for solar power.



Ford said during the election campaign he believed in man-made climate change so it's legitimate to challenge him on what he plans to do about it.



But doing what he said he would do in scrapping capand-trade and getting out of the financial madness of wind power, where possible, is just common sense.

[Anonymous]

And while we are on the subject of the Liberals, let's look at their federal counterparts. Doug Ford is doing battle with Trudeau, just like Manitoba's Brian Palliser and Quebec's Philiiipe Couillard over the costs province's must bear because of the flood of illegal border crossings.



This is from Candace Malcolm of Sun News Media



When someone crosses the border illegally, it's fair and accurate to call them an "illegal border crosser."



That isn't controversial. Earlier this year, I visited Roxham Road — the unofficial port of entry where approximately 95% of all illegal border crossers enter Canada. The Canadian government has put up a sign that makes it clear as day.



"STOP: It is illegal to cross the border here or any place other than a Port of Entry. You will be arrested and detained if you cross here."



Even the Liberals believe border-hopping at unofficial crossings is illegal.



"Crossing the border in between official border crossings is illegal," said Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau a few months ago in the House of Commons.



It's bizarre, therefore, that Liberal immigration minister Ahmed Hussen is picking a fight with Conservative Ontario Premier Doug Ford over Ford's use of the term "illegal border crossers"



[size=150]Ford has firmly stated that the illegal border crisis is 100% Trudeau's responsibility, and that Ford's provincial government refuses to pick up the tab for the already strained social services and housing that asylum claimants are entitled to receive.



The federal government has created a mess — with Trudeau's open border, allare-welcome attitude and messaging – and thus, the feds should be responsible for paying for it.[/size]



In the past, the Liberals have abandoned resettlement groups, leaving them scrambling to help migrants with strained budgets and limited resources.



This week, Hussen told reporters he believes Ford's words are inaccurate and "difficult to understand," emphasizing his preference for the Liberal euphemism "irregular migration."



This simply distracts from the real issue.



The Liberals would rather talk about vocabulary and pick imaginary fights with Conservatives than discuss their record when it comes to the border crisis.



Under Trudeau, the number of illegal border crossers has proliferated. There have been upwards of 70,000 asylum claims in the past 18 months — a drastic spike over numbers from recent decades.



And while self-selected migrants without a valid visa are streaming into our country at a rate of about 50 per day, the feds have no system to quickly determine who is a bona fide refugee and who is simply trying to jump the immigration queue.



The government makes no distinction between these two very different camps of people, and, once in Canada, both are given the exact same rights, benefits and legal process.



[size=150]The current wait time to have a refugee case heard before a judge is anywhere between 20 months and 11 years, and, in the meantime, these asylum seekers get goldplated access to provincially-funded social services.

[/size]

When someone crosses the border illegally, in an effort coordinated by human trafficking rings, and comes from a safe country (the United States) it's fair to be skeptical and accurate to call their actions illegal.



True refugees are desperate, and will submit their applications in the first safe country they arrive. The folks crossing at Roxham Road, by contrast, are opportunistic and savvy — more likely queue-jumping economic migrants than refugees escaping persecution and violence.



Words matter, and we should strive to be truthful and accurate in our speech. But that's the opposite of what Hussen and the Liberals are trying to do here — they're trying to confuse the issue and enforce politically correct gibberish to water down the truth.



The reality is, this illegal vs. irregular word feud is nothing but a distraction – designed to shift the conversation away from the Trudeau government's failed record on immigration and border security.

[Anonymous]

And an editorial from Sun News Media about the ongoing fight between Trudeau and Ford over who should pay for illegal border crossers.



Leave terminology debate aside, illegal crossings a problem





The word from ottawa is that we're no longer supposed to refer to illegal border crossers as "illegal" border crossers.



Thanks, but no thanks. our word choice works just fine.



on Monday, federal Immigration Minister ahmed Hussen chastised ontario Premier doug ford and his colleagues for using the term.



"I'm very concerned by Premier ford and (provincial) minister (lisa) Macleod really making statements that are difficult to understand when it comes to how they're describing asylum seekers," Hussen said to reporters in Halifax.



"These are people who we have a legal obligation to give a fair hearing to, and so we're applying Canadian law, we're applying international law and that requires all levels of government to work together," Hussen continued.



These words were echoed in a press release sent out to the media by the Canadian association of Refugee lawyers.



They claim assigning the phrase "illegal" to any asylum claimants in Canada is inaccurate and that "the pejorative connotation associated with the term 'illegal' implies these claimants are doing something they should not or getting away with crimes."



Here's the problem in all of this: Those who cross the border illegally are doing something they shouldn't be doing, and it's a crime.



Canada hears all asylum claims, even those who cross into Canada through illegal means. That's where they get a fair hearing. Canada is signatory to a united Nations Refugee Convention that allows for just that.



legitimate refugees fleeing war and persecution are screened from those who understandably may wish to move to Canada for a better life, and potentially criminals and terrorists.



We have one hearing process for refugees, and another for immigration where those who want to emigrate here must undergo a rigorous application process.



Prime Minister Justin trudeau a year ago, after creating the border crisis with his "#Welcometocanada" tweet, was eventually forced to make that differentiation.



"for someone to successfully seek asylum it's not about economic migration," trudeau told reporters. "It's about vulnerability, exposure to torture or death, or being stateless people."



Those who show up at our borders do have tragic and compelling stories. But let's not kid ourselves all are refugees.



Politically correct hectoring about terminology distracts from the broader issue: That illegal border crossings are undermining our immigration system.

[Chuck Bronson]

They can wait in line like everyone else.  The last thing we need is a migrant crisis like the US or Europe.

[Anonymous]

They can wait in line like everyone else.  The last thing we need is a migrant crisis like the US or Europe.

We already have one. More than half the homeless shelter spots in Toronto are occupied by border crossers. Montreal is in the same boat.

[Chuck Bronson]

We don't really have the same problem out West, so I guess I'm just not as aware of the scope of the problem as you guys are...



Then again, we get enough of your welfare bums, when Social Services gives them a one-way bus ticket out to here, 'cause they like the mild weather when they slum around parks and alleys doing their drugs of choice...

[Anonymous]

We don't really have the same problem out West, so I guess I'm just not as aware of the scope of the problem as you guys are...



Then again, we get enough of your welfare bums, when Social Services gives them a one-way bus ticket out to here.

Greyhound doesn't go out West anymore.

[Anonymous]

When a government is in power for 15 years — as was the case with the just defeated Liberals in Ontario — some people foolishly come to think of it is infallible and god-like.



Because to hear the uninformed bafflegab now being spouted about terrible decisions by former Liberal premiers Kathleen Wynne and, before her, Dalton Mcguinty, you'd think Ontario simply cannot survive without the Liberals. Which is utter nonsense. For example, according to Liberal cheerleaders and apologists, Premier Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives, by scrapping Wynne's cap-and-trade scheme, have abandoned a plan that would have rained billions of dollars of free money down on lucky Ontarians



To say nothing of reducing industrial greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change.



In the real world, scrapping capand-trade will save Ontario consumers, and businesses, at least $5.2 billion between 2017 and 2020, even if the Ford government pays back all of the carbon credits the Liberals sold to industry for a total of $2.8 billion in 2017 and 2018.



It's also doubtful the government will need to reimburse the full amount, since it gave out free carbon credits to most major industrial emitters for all of their emissions in 2017, and most of them in 2018.



Ford is also shutting down one particularly controversial industrial wind project (so far) that was opposed by the local municipal government, as most projects were, with critics warning the project's owner says it could cost Ontarians over $100 million.



Even if that's true, it has to be weighed against the cost of buying inefficient, unreliable and unneeded wind power from private developers for 20 years, for which the previous Liberal government, according to Lysyk in her 2015 report, overpaid by $9.2 billion.



Unsurprising since, as Lysyk noted, Ontario was paying twice the U.S. average for wind power, and 3.5 times for solar power.



Ford said during the election campaign he believed in man-made climate change so it's legitimate to challenge him on what he plans to do about it.



But doing what he said he would do in scrapping capand-trade and getting out of the financial madness of wind power, where possible, is just common sense.

I can hardly wait until our next premier scraps our very expensive carbon tax.

[Chuck Bronson]

Greyhound doesn't go out West anymore.

They still do, but not for long!  I hope this doesn't mean you'll fast track us a bunch of your bums before service stops!

[Anonymous]

Greyhound doesn't go out West anymore.

They still do, but not for long!  I hope this doesn't mean you'll fast track us a bunch of your bums before service stops!

A former premier of Alberta used to do that..



I am sure new bus comapnies will start up connecting the major centres of the West with Ontario.

[Chuck Bronson]

What makes you think we want your bums?  We do NOT want your bums!  Your bums should remain your problem!

[Anonymous]

What makes you think we want your bums?  We do NOT want your bums!  Your bums should remain your problem!

I never thought you wanted our social assistance recipients..



Even our late premier who gave social assistance one way Greyhound tickets knew many British Columbians didn't want them.

[Chuck Bronson]

Maybe we can send 'em back!

[Anonymous]

Maybe we can send 'em back!

Your NDP government would never do that.

[JOE]

I'm sure Ontario needed a change.



15 years of one party in power seems a tad too long.



And Wynn did seem a bit loony.



Should be interesting to see how long the Tories last.



But it'd be a mistake for them to think they can go back to the ways of Mike Harris.



Perhaps the Liberals went too far in one direction, but the Tories shouldn't think they can do it in reverse.