Tim Hudak is not the first politician to take voters for chumps, and he certainly won't be the last. But the Ontario Conservative Leader's platform, on which he'll fight the fall election, is based on so many dubious, to say nothing of false, premises that he must be counting on the electorate's ignorance for victory.
Like many politicians before him, Mr. Hudak refuses to face facts – or, rather, refuses to tell voters anything remotely resembling the truth. And the truth is that, whichever party wins the election, the provincial budget will have to be cut severely. It's a truth the governing Liberals also prefer to avoid.
Mr. Hudak, who visits Ottawa on Thursday, promises to spend more on health and education, which together take about three-quarters of all government program spending. He can do nothing about rising payments on the debt. So he's left with the threadbare promise to cut spending on what remains by 2 per cent yearly, saying this can be done by not filling public-sector vacancies as they arise.
This is bad math, cleverly disguised. Even if possible – and the reductions aren't possible without cutting or scaling back whole programs – the reductions would be smaller than Mr. Hudak would need to balance a budget to whose deficit he'll add by a series of tax cuts and new spending commitments.
Full Article
Source: Globe & Mail
Like many politicians before him, Mr. Hudak refuses to face facts – or, rather, refuses to tell voters anything remotely resembling the truth. And the truth is that, whichever party wins the election, the provincial budget will have to be cut severely. It's a truth the governing Liberals also prefer to avoid.
Mr. Hudak, who visits Ottawa on Thursday, promises to spend more on health and education, which together take about three-quarters of all government program spending. He can do nothing about rising payments on the debt. So he's left with the threadbare promise to cut spending on what remains by 2 per cent yearly, saying this can be done by not filling public-sector vacancies as they arise.
This is bad math, cleverly disguised. Even if possible – and the reductions aren't possible without cutting or scaling back whole programs – the reductions would be smaller than Mr. Hudak would need to balance a budget to whose deficit he'll add by a series of tax cuts and new spending commitments.
Full Article
Source: Globe & Mail
No comments:
Post a Comment