babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Former NDP MPP QUITS The Party Over Their Opposition To Road Tolls

Mighty Middle
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2016

==


Comments

Mighty Middle
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2016

Former NDP MPP Paul Ferreira (York-South Weston) has announced via Twitter he has quit the NDP over their aligning with the PC Party in opposing Road Tolls. Prior to his election as an MPP he was chief of staff to Howard Hampton and special advisor to Andrea Horwarth.

He first tweeted

Will be watching tomo's #onpoli debate on Brown #toll motion closely. If #ONDP sides w/ #PCPO, I'll have to reconsider party support #topoli

After the NDP voted with the PC Party Ferreira tweeted

A very sad day. After more than 25 yrs, today I quit #ONDP. Support for Brown's #toronto #toll motion last straw. cc @AndreaHorwath #onpoli

I'm afraid party I grew up with, of big & bold ideas, has lost its way. #Reactionary & teetering on #irrelevancy right now. #ONDP #onpoli


Misfit
Offline
Joined: Jun 27 2014
Good for the NDP to oppose this. And this thread reminds me of a really annoying former babbler who would post threads just like this one here. Threads that were all Toronto centric, pro Liberal and anti-NDP. I am not naming any names, but your thread topics are suspiciously familiar.

Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

If the City of Toronto wants to levy road tolls - that is its choice and if Toronto voters don't like it, they can defeat John Tory and all city councillors who support it in the next election. I don't see why the Ontario government should interfere.

Personally, I'm an agnostic on road tolls as a way to raise revenue, but what I am NOT agnostic about is the the fact that cities NEEEEED much more revenue - especially for transit and other infrastructure. If the Ontario NDP wants to oppose allowing cities to level road tolls - then that's fine BUT they must put their money where their mouth is and announce how they would go about raising the same or more new revenue! The thing I find trite and irritating about Andrea Horwath is that she is always, no no no no no to every single solitary mechanism for generating revenue and then yes yes yes yes yes to increasing spending by massive amounts on everything under the sun. It insults peoples intelligence to put forth that crap.


Ken Burch
Offline
Joined: Feb 26 2005

Why does it matter if a FORMER MPP quits the party?  And a former MPP who lost most of the elections he contested at that?


robbie_dee
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2001
Stockholm wrote:
The thing I find trite and irritating about Andrea Horwath is that she is always, no no no no no to every single solitary mechanism for generating revenue and then yes yes yes yes yes to increasing spending by massive amounts on everything under the sun. It insults peoples intelligence to put forth that crap.

It worked for Rob Ford. Also I don't know if you heard but a reality television star with no political experience was recently elected President of the United States by promising to kick out ten million immigrants and build a massive wall along that country's southern border, which somebody else would pay for. Don't knock pandering, it seems to be a winning strategy.

Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Insulting peoples intelligence can work for rightwing politicians because people in the rightwing "universe" tend to be poorly educated people with very low political literacy. They don't care if the people they vote for are mindless demagogues. Voters who are left of centre/progressive tend to be much less forgiving of that


Mighty Middle
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2016

Ken Burch wrote:

Why does it matter if a FORMER MPP quits the party?  And a former MPP who lost most of the elections he contested at that?

Would you say the same about Nathan Shen who has run both Municipally and Provincially and so far has batted zero? Not to mention he has left his School Trustee position, not once but twice to run for higher office? And so far has failed each and every time (notwithstanding winning School Trustee)

Stockholm wrote:

Personally, I'm an agnostic on road tolls as a way to raise revenue, but what I am NOT agnostic about is the the fact that cities NEEEEED much more revenue - especially for transit and other infrastructure. If the Ontario NDP wants to oppose allowing cities to level road tolls - then that's fine BUT they must put their money where their mouth is and announce how they would go about raising the same or more new revenue! The thing I find trite and irritating about Andrea Horwath is that she is always, no no no no no to every single solitary mechanism for generating revenue and then yes yes yes yes yes to increasing spending by massive amounts on everything under the sun. It insults peoples intelligence to put forth that crap.

I agree with Stockholm. Horwath has a history of opposing Road Tolls going all the way back to 2011. Which is fine. But then come up with an idea to generate revenue (in Ontario)

So far her only idea is increasing corportate taxes by 1% and reducing government spending (Appointment of a minister of savings and accountability)

Should be noted that the NDPers on city council support road tolls so this is not pro Liberal and anti-NDP policy idea.


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Mighty Middle wrote:

Should be noted that the NDPers on city council support road tolls so this is not pro Liberal and anti-NDP policy idea.

Be careful about how you generalize on that...I suspect that NDPers on council from downtown wards such as Cressy and Layton and Perks et al likely support tolls. I have not heard suburban NDP councillors like Augimeri and Peruzza weigh in. and now former ONDP candidate Neethan Shan is running in the upcoming municipal byelection to fill Raymond Cho's seat in far northeastern Scarborough...I'll be curious to see what position he takes.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Mighty Middle wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Why does it matter if a FORMER MPP quits the party?  And a former MPP who lost most of the elections he contested at that?

Would you say the same about Nathan Shen who has run both Municipally and Provincially and so far has batted zero? Not to mention he has left his School Trustee position, not once but twice to run for higher office? And so far has failed each and every time (notwithstanding winning School Trustee)

I agree with Ken that this is a stupid non-story and yes I would say the same about Nathan what's his name whom I have never heard of either. 


robbie_dee
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2001
I respect Paul Ferreira. He put in a lot of work to rebuild the NDP in York South Weston and it's too bad he was only actually able to serve as MPP for the year or so he did. I agree with him on this issue, too, although I won't be quitting my membership over it. But who the heck is Nathan Shen?

jjuares
Offline
Joined: Jan 21 2012
It is a non story. As for the issue of tolls, I am against them as I see them as a regressive tax.

Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005
jjuares
Offline
Joined: Jan 21 2012
Good article. I may have to look at attitude towards tolls. He sees tolls not as ways to fund infrastructure but as a way of discouraging the use of cars and to even the disparity between cars and transit.

Mighty Middle
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2016

jjuares wrote:
Good article. I may have to look at attitude towards tolls. He sees tolls not as ways to fund infrastructure but as a way of discouraging the use of cars and to even the disparity between cars and transit.

That is Paul whole point as he feels Tolls is a progressive policy that is good for the environment. Sees Andrea stance just pandering for votes on this.

As Michael Laxer in the above column writes

"Frankly, for the ONDP to join hands with Brown's Conservatives in some broad attack on tolls and to embrace a paint-by-numbers right wing anti-tax stance is typical of the party now and is grotesque."


jjuares
Offline
Joined: Jan 21 2012
Mighty Middle wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Good article. I may have to look at attitude towards tolls. He sees tolls not as ways to fund infrastructure but as a way of discouraging the use of cars and to even the disparity between cars and transit.

That is Paul whole point as he feels Tolls is a progressive policy that is good for the environment. Sees Andrea stance just pandering for votes on this.

As Michael Laxer in the above column writes

"Frankly, for the ONDP to join hands with Brown's Conservatives in some broad attack on tolls and to embrace a paint-by-numbers right wing anti-tax stance is typical of the party now and is grotesque."

In the end the NDP would be better off concentrating on Wynne's right wing privatization agenda. The secondary issue should be the lack of ethics of that government.

Mighty Middle
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2016

jjuares wrote:
In the end the NDP would be better off concentrating on Wynne's right wing privatization agenda. The secondary issue should be the lack of ethics of that government.

I couldn't agree with you more


lagatta4
Offline
Joined: May 9 2013

I think public transport matters (and other development and environmental issues) are very important. Yes, it is important to attack the sitting government, but it is also important to make positive proposals and not just criticize. Michael Laxer's post was very good indeed. The real problem is a lack of efficient public transport, within Toronto and throughout the GTA. Idem here.


jjuares
Offline
Joined: Jan 21 2012
lagatta4 wrote:

I think public transport matters (and other development and environmental issues) are very important. Yes, it is important to attack the sitting government, but it is also important to make positive proposals and not just criticize. Michael Laxer's post was very good indeed. The real problem is a lack of efficient public transport, within Toronto and throughout the GTA. Idem here.

In the article he said Toronto has 2 and half lines of LRT. That surprised me because that puts it no further ahead than Edmonton, a city of a million.

lagatta4
Offline
Joined: May 9 2013

Yes, it seems odd. What is included in that, streetcars? GO trains?


robbie_dee
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2001

jjuares wrote:
Good article. I may have to look at attitude towards tolls. He sees tolls not as ways to fund infrastructure but as a way of discouraging the use of cars and to even the disparity between cars and transit.

I support tolling the Gardiner and DVP for two reasons: (1) I think its appropriate for the users of these particular roads to bear the costs of the substantial repairs that they require and (2) I think it puts on the table the broader issue you identify, which is discouraging cars and evening the disparity between cars and transit. RE: #1 obviously a balance needs to be struck between funding infrastructure from user fees vs. out of general revenue paid for out of (hopefully more progressive) taxation. Personally I happen to think the Gardiner and DVP present a good case for considering user fees but obviously other infrastructure projects would raise different considerations.

RE #2, again, tolling the Gardiner and DVP is a good conversation starter but it will only move the ball along a little ways. As many have pointed out, tolling those two roads will likely push a number of drivers onto other roads which is not really an improvement. We also need to start talking about congestion charges.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Ask not for whom the road tolls.

Ok, I'm donne.


Caissa
Offline
Joined: Jun 14 2006

You seem in Ernest, Unionist.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

It's the Queensway, Caissa - no hemming!

Haw haw.


Caissa
Offline
Joined: Jun 14 2006

Oh, a Moveable Feast.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005
Well burrowed, road toll!

Mr. Magoo
Offline
Joined: Dec 13 2002

Quote:
I think its appropriate for the users of these particular roads to bear the costs of the substantial repairs that they require

I think that's reasonable.

But then I also think it's reasonable for transit to have some kind of fare, even if it's supplemented by collective taxation, for exactly the same reason. 

Why should the daily users of transit pay no more than those who never use it?  Because "it's good for all of us"?  Well, anything that moves goods and people to where they need to be is good for all of us.


Ken Burch
Offline
Joined: Feb 26 2005

I'd hope there would at least be a toll subsidy for the unemployed who were driving to look for work or for those just coming back into work after a period of unemployment(as well as those unable to work due to disability.


cco
Offline
Joined: Apr 25 2005
Mr. Magoo wrote:

Why should the daily users of transit pay no more than those who never use it?

Why should the chronically ill pay no more for health care than those who never use it?

Ken Burch wrote:

I'd hope there would at least be a toll subsidy for the unemployed who were driving to look for work or for those just coming back into work after a period of unemployment(as well as those unable to work due to disability.

Yes, we could set up an unbelievably complicated and expensive toll rebate program, with everybody lobbying for an exemption and the existing empowered classes most likely to get one. Or we could use the existing tax infrastructure, subsidize roads (and transit) out of general revenue + gas tax, and target disadvantaged groups for aid through that system.


Mighty Middle
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2016

Ken Burch wrote:
Why does it matter if a FORMER MPP quits the party?

jjuares wrote:
It is a non story.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
I agree with Ken that this is a stupid non-story

Why an NDP veteran cut his party ties over tolls

https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2016/12/13/why-an-ndp-veteran-cu...

So much for it being a "non-story"


Ciabatta2
Offline
Joined: Jan 23 2009

I think the problem isn't that the NDP is opposing road tolls, but that they're not articulating a mature reason for doing so.

 

I think there is a good reason for not tolling rolls - it's inequitable, it hurts the less fortunate the most and the reality is that many people across the economic spectrum really have few reliable and workable options for transit.

 

The City needs revenue?  Raise taxes.  That's more fair, that's more equitable.  The reality is that the tools are unlikely to take cars off the roads, and they are unlikely to fund the costs of car infrastructure.

 

But I don't hear the NDP saying that.  Let the PCs articulate the "citizens are squeezed" policy.  The NDP should be making the point about fairness.  It's like they purposely put their feet in the trap again.  They're going to get clobbered by Wynne, even if she loses (and I don't think she will.)


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments