But that's your opinion, on what's a good or bad idea.

You may think MPAC and OCoT are bad ideas, but many would disagree.

Really? Who? Who thinks useless bureaucracy is a good idea?

How about Walkerton? But that was only human lives lost, not money, so probably no big deal in your books, just like Harris closing every hospital and school he coulod get his hands on and putting the proviince at the bottom of just about every mearsure.

Clearly there's a divide in our thinking that's not going to narrow. I don't like anything either party does and you don't like anything only one of them does.

Get back to me when Hudak has a government and you criticize something he does while in power. McGuinty's been shit, I agree, but Harris was worse (or, at least as bad). You disagree with that, which is the proof of my assertion above.

Bullshit.

[popcorn]

Walkerton? The one where two employees decided not to do their jobs and falsify records and where the blame was laid at the feet of the public utlitiy? Really Beaver, trying to pin Walkerton on the Premier is laughable. I know you're going to point do private water testing to be the cause but it's just not the case.

Chapter 11: The Ministry of the Environment Budget Reductions

In January 1998, an internal MOE document reported that the ministry had been “particularly hard hit” in com­parison with other ministries. It stated that since 1995–96, the MOE budget had been reduced by 48.4%.

... I conclude that the budget reductions had two types of effects on the tragedy in Walkerton. First, with respect to the decision to privatize the laboratory testing of drinking water samples, and especially the way in which that deci­sion was implemented, the budget reductions are connected directly to the events of May 2000. S
econd, in the case of the MOE’s approvals and inspec­tions programs, the budget reductions are indirectly linked to the events in May 2000 in that they made it less likely that the MOE would pursue proac­tive measures that would have prevented or limited the tragedy.

...On many occasions during the MOE’s first business plan process in 1995 and 1996, ministry staff warned senior management, the Minister of the Environment, and the Cabinet that the impact of the budget reductions being imposed on the ministry presented risks to the environment and public health.

11.4 The Cabinet Decision and the Lack of a Risk Assessment
The MOE’s business plan, with its discussion of associated risks, was approved by the Cabinet on February 28, 1996. As I have mentioned, those risks were significant. The business plan warned of a reduced capacity in the MOE to detect or control violations of environmental standards because of slower response times, less information available for responding to inquiries, and reduced technical expertise.

...Premier Michael Harris, who chaired the Cabinet meeting at which the MOE’s business plan was approved on February 28, 1996, testified that he would have asked if the impacts were a concern, but he does not recall making such an inquiry. He does not recall seeking advice regarding whether the risks could be managed. Premier Harris could not identify any documents that persuaded him that the increased risks to the environment and public health could be managed. He accepted that as chair of the Policy and Priorities Board and chair of the Cabinet, which approved the 1996 business plan, he is accountable if any of these reductions are found to have contributed to the tragedy in Walkerton.

What did McGuinty to do improve the situation post-Harris?

And we're going to blame Harris for closing hospitals and overlook the massive transfer cuts (30 billion) from the federal government during his era?

You'd be surprised to know that the Ontario government replaced all the funds they didn't receive from the feds and added more!

Again, what did McGuinty do to "fix" that problem? I didn't see him go back and open all facilities again.

He's actually cutting 3 billion over the next few years

You're right, that's an outdated figure from middle of 2011. When the Auditor General released his 2011 report, he pegged the number at 30,000. To be fair, at this point, many of these are construction jobs related to building 'green' facilities and infrastructure, not actual 'green energy' jobs.

All the while, Ontario bleeds $400-500 million a year from the losses to OPC. Billions were spent to generate a "whopping" 1500MW of wind power that did nothing to reduce Ontario's emissions from power generation and added to the over surplus of hydro Ontario already produced.

Well, the "potential" future cost if no changes are made is officially pegged at $200M by 2018, but The IESO has already drafted new rules that will allow it to shut output from wind and solar operators to the system when there’s surplus power. Really, this is a problem of the wind/solar program being too successful. When McG took office in 2003, there were ten (10) wind turbines operating in all of Ontario. By year-end 2011, there were over 900. That's progress. Also you should note that energy surplus is often sold at a profit, only sometimes is it sold at a loss or given away.

Currently, wind/solar is just an auxiliary source for a primarily conventional gas-and-nuke power grid, but I bet the day isn't too far off when the roles reverse; where wind/solar provide the baseline power for the grid and conventional plants are only fired up to meet spikes in demand or dips in green output, and/or when most homes and buildings are primarily self-generating through their own wind/solar installations and the power grid is just a back-up source.

It's also interesting to see McNuggets praised for helping to bail out Ontario's manufacturing base re: the auto industry, while Harper was castigated for "wasting taxpayer's money" for the same thing.

Some people were for the bail-outs, some weren't, it wasn't a left-right thing. I don't think there was anyone praising one while castigating the other.

In Ontario, the end cost after all the friggin' windmills is FAR from reasonable and demand has been MORE than met for decades without the stupid things.

Wrong. Between 1998 and 2005, the province was almost always a net importer.

Only since 2006 has Ontario exported more power than it has imported (every year in fact).

Again, being a victim of our own success.

This isn't all attributable to wind, mind you. By year-end 2011, McG had added 8,900 megawatts of generating capacity since he took office (4 million homes' worth), of which, approximately 2,000 megawatts (almost 1 million homes)was from renewable sources. Also, energy consumption has been declining since 2005 as traditional manufacturing has continued its decline across North America.

Simply put, green energy has not reduced emissions, except possibly by accident as some heavy industries pulled out to look for cheaper hydro rates.

Closing the coal plants reduced airborne particulates (smog) by over 90%, which is what the article says. The article is about his entire environmental legacy, not just wind and solar initiatives.

Who the fuck wants to buy a piece of property with a wonking big 100m tall turbine or two on it?

I assume you mean NEAR it.

But who wants to by property near an airport, landfill, gas plant, nuke plant, prison, quarry, casino, or any other such thing? Doesn't mean we shouldn't have any of those.

McGuinty is villain for ignoring NIMBYism and building turbines near some property owners but also for succumbing to NIMBYism and NOT building gas plants near other property owners. Sounds like he can't win for losing.

In fact, if Ontario had just shut down the coal plants and never bothered building windmills, Ontario would still have over 31,000 MW of installed capacity.

The plan is to phase-in a new technology and phase-out an older technology, to do that responsibly there will be overlap. The new technology will inevitably be expensive when new, but become cheaper (and more efficient) as it becomes more prevalent - not unlike other new technologies.

Pretty easy to be "green" when a combination of economic failure and insane, ever increasing power rates (Samsung needed their profits padded) has turned your economy moribund.

Yes, the rest of the world was booming while Ontario and only Ontario faltered. Ever hear of something called the global economic meltdown?

From the Walkerton Report http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/walkerton/part1/WI_Chapter_11.pdf (PDF). Too much to copy and paste for you to get a full appreciation, here are some of the jucier parts:

What did McGuinty to do improve the situation post-Harris?

Harris enacted massive tax cuts and tax freezes - if these were all such tough decusions and he was doing the best he could to maintain services, why the tax cuts and corporate giveaways.

Also, did you give Miller any slack over provincial downloading? Do you criticize Harris for UNPRECEDENTED downloading he forced on cities, that has left Toronto a financially challenged city ever since??? No you conveniently dodge that...downloadings only bad when Liberals do it. Only Harris deserves excuses eh? It's the Fed's fault, the underlings fault, the municipalities fault, the fault of everyone who doesn't have a PC party membership right? Meanwhile only Liberals are to blame for things that happen when they are in government. Gimme a break.

Didn't you just finish saying he closed the hospitals because he had no choice?

Now you're saying Harris had more money than ever. Mostly from one-time sell-offs of things like hospitals, schools and highways (at firesale prices). The stock market bubble was also good for the economy Continent-wide, but had nothing to do with anything happening in Ontario.

Dude are you sure you live in Ontario? McGuinty's already BUILT 18 new hospitals since he took office...thats 2 per year (Harris closed 28 hospitals) and the Liberals upgraded/refurbished many more. He also hired almost 12,000 nurses (Harris fired more than 6,000).