On
Thursday night, the CSA and Civic Engagement held a meet and greet with
Guelph’s MPP candidates, in the Bullring. Candidates were on hand to speak
about their platform, issues pertaining to students, and answer questions.
After the meet and greet student representatives from each party addressed
generic questions regarding major policy areas; education, environment,
economy, energy, etc.
It is very exciting to see other students hushed and huddled
around political candidates, discussing the direction of Ontario’s future.
Aside
from questions regarding each party’s platform; it was interesting to note the
body language and demeanor of each candidate and the students who listened to
them. The most obvious and interesting contrast is that of the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives. Liberal Liz Sandals sat in an armchair encircled by students on
couches, while PC Greg Schirk stood closely surrounded by students. When
I stood listening to Mr. Schirk, the audience seemed tenser than with other
candidates. I feel for him, he is up against a tough crowd. Guelph is a swing
riding with a history of electing NDP, Progressive Conservative and Liberal MPPs; but the
university student body is more left leaning. Mr. Schirk handled himself very
well when a student became slightly confrontational regarding Mr. Schirk’s use
of the term “red-tape reduction”. In a casual style, he gave the student his
business card and asked to set up a future conversation. Very classy.
A
consistent point of contention between the Liberals and Conservatives is the
Green Energy Act. While some praise the act for “greening” the province’s
energy sources, Conservatives claim the act has been responsible for raising
the cost of energy in Ontario. I feel conflicted, as per usual, about the act.
My understanding is that the Green Energy Act was sort of
getting-ahead-of-itself. The essence of the Act was that the Liberal government
would offer a subsidy to the construction of “green” energy projects and
purchase energy from them at a grossly inflated rate.
Ok,
that sounds awesome, but it was apparently too successful. Now the government
is locked into long term contracts, paying a premium for energy.
Ok,
that’s all fine and dandy; I understand that the investment helps the
environment in the long term. The problem is this, as Liz Sandals explained: so
many projects were built in rural areas and the existing grid infrastructure
could not handle the power delivered from the subsidized projects. As a result, we have a bunch of useless
green energy projects sitting around, taking up space, and not adding power to
the grid.
Now
let’s get back to reality; the Conservatives claim this project has been
responsible for raising the energy costs. This may be partly true, but to what
degree? Energy prices are constantly increasing; natural gas becomes harder to
find, coal is more expensive to mine, and oil… don’t get me started on oil. The Green Energy Act may have under preformed its expectations, but not because it
exorbitantly raised your electrical bill. When I asked Mr. Schirk about the act
he said it was unfortunate that the government was locked into the contracts,
and the project would not be sustainable in the future.
The
NDP’s James Gordon, Green’s Steve Dyck, and Communist Drew Garvie were also on
hand, but due to lack of time I couldn’t listen to them in-depth.
No comments:
Post a Comment