![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The civic elections are towards the end of the year. Between now and then it is highly likely that there will be a provincial election..
In normal circumstances these might be broadly independent things; but a confluence of factors means that the civic elections could be entirely recast by the provincial results.
Item: The budget documents prepared by the staff in the city project funding difficulties in 2015 and 2016 which will almost certainly have to be met by some combination of raising taxes, getting more money from the provincial government on an ongoing basis, and retrenching in spending.
Item: The major issue identified by a recent poll among voters in the city is public transit, which takes a very considerable investment (and which is currently underfunded).
Item: One of the recurring themes of the past several years has been the stress on what we might call social infrastructure (particularly low-cost housing, homelessness, and the TCHC problems). One of the gaps in the current civic budget was an acceleration of the removal of monies which had been available from the province under the Housing Stabilization Fund but which Toronto has lost (faster than other cities). An NDP government might provide more money in this area -- although many of their high-profile policies seem to be aimed at homeowners rather than people on the fringes who don't vote --, but the PC's would probably seriously hurt it. The NDP is far from being a moderate wing of OCAP.
Item: The provincial Conservatives are basically the party of the hinterlands (with the exception of the far north, which tends to go NDP). Although it would target the suburban belt around Toronto. it has no real foothold in Toronto itself -- Holyday's by-election win is a testament more to his personal popularity than attachment to the party -- and certainly no realistic hopes for any significant number of seats in the city. (Contrast this with the state of the party under Davis/Robarts, when it had a significant representation in Toronto.)
Item: Hudak has committed the party to a set of policies which would be deeply problematic for Toronto. Between their low-tax and deficit reduction focus and their rather bizarre (small-C conservatives would normally be expected to focus on value for money) support for subways to the exclusion of other forms of rapid transit, Toronto can hope for little help from a PC government in either transit network development or general funding to support social infrastructure.
Toronto has never been in the saddle as far as Ontario politics goes: there have been only three premiers of Ontario from (metropolitan) Toronto since Confederation: George Drew, Bob Rae, and Kathleen Wynne. The policies of the government during the post-war years was largely Toronto-friendly. The current situation puts it in play really only between the Liberals and the NDP (in some ridings), although there are a few ridings in the inner suburbs which could go conservative in a sweep.
The NDP in Ontario seems, to put it mildly, to be basing its appeal on the middle class, with a large dash of anti-corporate tax policy thrown in. (The big problem being that they seem to keep overallocating any increase in revenue which might come from corporate tax rate increases[1]. Well, one big problem; the other is that to avoid scaring off middle-class voters they are, if anything, being flanked on the left by the Liberals under Wynne. Against McGuinty, who was about as conservative as you could be and still be a Liberal, this may have been an attractive approach. Under Wynne, it has real problems.)
It's not as though the Liberals are exactly radical in their policies these days. Wynne, like all Liberals, is a moderate, but a left-leaning one (at least by comparison to her predecessor), and Horvath is not much more radical.
Looking at the current poll results, at the extreme lack of charisma (and sense) shown by Hudak, and the track record of the past year or so under Wynne, it looks to me as though there are only four likely results:
1) Most likely: another Liberal minority government. This probably means "funding tools" for transit and (if the economy doesn't crater) at least the possibility of a new civic government being able to get more funding for social infrastructure purposes as well.
2) Next most likely: the PCs have a weak plurality but no majority. This might mean a Liberal / NDP coalition, but is more likely to be a short-lived PC government. I say short-lived because the colours they've nailed to the mast make it highly unlikely that they will get any other party to support the policies they have committed themselves to. This means a year or so of stasis at best before we do a lather, rinse, recycle. The PCs will not keep Hudak long if he loses the following election.
3) Possible: Wynne campaigns really well and manages a (small) Liberal majority. In this case, we can definitely look at transit-friendly policies for the next four years as well as possible social infrastructure initiatives, although nothing dramatic.
4) Possible: the PC's manage to catch a trailing wind and manage a majority. Look for four years of government which is essentially hostile to Toronto, especially as they will see this as a vindication of Hudak's approach.
But here's the kicker for the civic election: in cases 2 and 4 it won't matter very much what policy the new administration has (assuming it's not Rob Ford). Or at least, the differences between any of the non-Ford leading candidates will be swamped by the need to focus on really good management with very little leeway for new programs or any extension of existing ones.
If there's a Conservative win, the only thing that will really matter will be dumping Rob Ford. (Not only is he a bad mayor, but the feedback effects between him and Hudak in office would be in issue in themselves.)
If there's a Liberal win (or even an NDP-led Liberal/NDP coalition, which I tend to discount but maybe shouldn't rule out entirely) then there would be enough room for policy differences at the civic level to have a real impact -- especially on the transit file and in areas affecting housing
[1]An estimate which is relatively speculative, as corporate taxes is one of the areas where the Laffer curve actually seems to have some application.
In normal circumstances these might be broadly independent things; but a confluence of factors means that the civic elections could be entirely recast by the provincial results.
Item: The budget documents prepared by the staff in the city project funding difficulties in 2015 and 2016 which will almost certainly have to be met by some combination of raising taxes, getting more money from the provincial government on an ongoing basis, and retrenching in spending.
Item: The major issue identified by a recent poll among voters in the city is public transit, which takes a very considerable investment (and which is currently underfunded).
Item: One of the recurring themes of the past several years has been the stress on what we might call social infrastructure (particularly low-cost housing, homelessness, and the TCHC problems). One of the gaps in the current civic budget was an acceleration of the removal of monies which had been available from the province under the Housing Stabilization Fund but which Toronto has lost (faster than other cities). An NDP government might provide more money in this area -- although many of their high-profile policies seem to be aimed at homeowners rather than people on the fringes who don't vote --, but the PC's would probably seriously hurt it. The NDP is far from being a moderate wing of OCAP.
Item: The provincial Conservatives are basically the party of the hinterlands (with the exception of the far north, which tends to go NDP). Although it would target the suburban belt around Toronto. it has no real foothold in Toronto itself -- Holyday's by-election win is a testament more to his personal popularity than attachment to the party -- and certainly no realistic hopes for any significant number of seats in the city. (Contrast this with the state of the party under Davis/Robarts, when it had a significant representation in Toronto.)
Item: Hudak has committed the party to a set of policies which would be deeply problematic for Toronto. Between their low-tax and deficit reduction focus and their rather bizarre (small-C conservatives would normally be expected to focus on value for money) support for subways to the exclusion of other forms of rapid transit, Toronto can hope for little help from a PC government in either transit network development or general funding to support social infrastructure.
Toronto has never been in the saddle as far as Ontario politics goes: there have been only three premiers of Ontario from (metropolitan) Toronto since Confederation: George Drew, Bob Rae, and Kathleen Wynne. The policies of the government during the post-war years was largely Toronto-friendly. The current situation puts it in play really only between the Liberals and the NDP (in some ridings), although there are a few ridings in the inner suburbs which could go conservative in a sweep.
The NDP in Ontario seems, to put it mildly, to be basing its appeal on the middle class, with a large dash of anti-corporate tax policy thrown in. (The big problem being that they seem to keep overallocating any increase in revenue which might come from corporate tax rate increases[1]. Well, one big problem; the other is that to avoid scaring off middle-class voters they are, if anything, being flanked on the left by the Liberals under Wynne. Against McGuinty, who was about as conservative as you could be and still be a Liberal, this may have been an attractive approach. Under Wynne, it has real problems.)
It's not as though the Liberals are exactly radical in their policies these days. Wynne, like all Liberals, is a moderate, but a left-leaning one (at least by comparison to her predecessor), and Horvath is not much more radical.
Looking at the current poll results, at the extreme lack of charisma (and sense) shown by Hudak, and the track record of the past year or so under Wynne, it looks to me as though there are only four likely results:
1) Most likely: another Liberal minority government. This probably means "funding tools" for transit and (if the economy doesn't crater) at least the possibility of a new civic government being able to get more funding for social infrastructure purposes as well.
2) Next most likely: the PCs have a weak plurality but no majority. This might mean a Liberal / NDP coalition, but is more likely to be a short-lived PC government. I say short-lived because the colours they've nailed to the mast make it highly unlikely that they will get any other party to support the policies they have committed themselves to. This means a year or so of stasis at best before we do a lather, rinse, recycle. The PCs will not keep Hudak long if he loses the following election.
3) Possible: Wynne campaigns really well and manages a (small) Liberal majority. In this case, we can definitely look at transit-friendly policies for the next four years as well as possible social infrastructure initiatives, although nothing dramatic.
4) Possible: the PC's manage to catch a trailing wind and manage a majority. Look for four years of government which is essentially hostile to Toronto, especially as they will see this as a vindication of Hudak's approach.
But here's the kicker for the civic election: in cases 2 and 4 it won't matter very much what policy the new administration has (assuming it's not Rob Ford). Or at least, the differences between any of the non-Ford leading candidates will be swamped by the need to focus on really good management with very little leeway for new programs or any extension of existing ones.
If there's a Conservative win, the only thing that will really matter will be dumping Rob Ford. (Not only is he a bad mayor, but the feedback effects between him and Hudak in office would be in issue in themselves.)
If there's a Liberal win (or even an NDP-led Liberal/NDP coalition, which I tend to discount but maybe shouldn't rule out entirely) then there would be enough room for policy differences at the civic level to have a real impact -- especially on the transit file and in areas affecting housing
[1]An estimate which is relatively speculative, as corporate taxes is one of the areas where the Laffer curve actually seems to have some application.
