Sparks flew during the debate portion of the Barrie-Innisfil all-candidates meeting on Wednesday night.
While audience cheering and yelling did drown out some of the points being made by candidates during the debate prompting at least one warning from the moderator, the candidates took each other to task on issues such as navigating red tape, accountability and jobs.
Five out of eight candidates showed up for the last debate for the riding before June 7: Ann Hoggarth for the Liberals, Andrea Khanjin for the PCs, Pekka Reinio for NDP, Bonnie North for the Greens and Stacey Surkova of the Trillium Party. Jake Tucker of the Canadian’s Choice Party did not appear, but did send in prepared opening and closing statements.
The debate was hosted by the Barrie Chamber of Commerce and was held at Georgian Downs.
While all the candidates reiterated their positions on multiple issues, the event got heated once the debate portion took off. Candidates were given five minutes to debate questions where they were encouraged to interrupt each other.
Janis Ramsay of the Innisfil Journal asked a debate question about the Sunshine List and how the candidates and their governments are planning to curb high salaries in the future, and that’s when the clashes began.
Reinio demanded to know why the PCs have not yet released a costed platform.
“If they’re so concerned with accountability, why have they not released a fully costed platform? We are a week away from the election,” he asked, to cheers from the audience.
Hoggarth started by referencing the Drummond Report.
“Drummond has taken a look at Mr. Ford’s promises and has confirmed that he has been lying all along,” added Hoggarth. “The PCs will have to cut jobs in order to make this plan work, and his promises are so expensive that the PCs would run the largest deficit of any of the major parties.”
Khanjin responded by indicating that the PCs did release their platform on Wednesday.
“I’m sorry that our platform didn’t have a $7 million error in it,” started Khanjin. Yells and cheers from the audience drowned out the rest of her comments.
“There are no numbers or calculations in it... it’s a plan,” Reinio shot back, about the PC plan. “My campaign manager did a quick survey of it and to his eye, it looked like there was a $20 billion deficit over the next four years in that plan, however there are a number of things that are missing... it’s very hard to tell any numbers. We need a costed plan so people can make an informed decision,” he said.
“We will not be shrugging off responsibility like the NDP leader...everyday on policy there’s been a costing. I’m sorry you haven’t been paying attention,” responded Khanjin.
“Providing a drip, drip, drip of policy talking points is not a platform,” said North. “The Green Party of Ontario has had a fully costed platform. We show you where the money comes from and where the money goes. We are honest... we look you in the eyes and we tell you where we have to raise revenue and we also help out by showing where you can save money.”
Surkova started criticizing the Green platform, asking how the Greens can show where the money is coming from without having a budget yet to work with, but North cut her off.
“Why don’t you show me where your budget is?” North asked, pointedly.
“The Auditor General has to show the numbers (first),” replied Surkova.
The candidates yelled over each other until Hoggarth interrupted to ask, “Let’s see what kind of shell game the conservatives are playing... it clearly means fewer jobs, higher deficit. Does Ms. Khanjin agree with the analysis of Mr. Drummond?”
“I feel like this is an insult to my intelligence for you to say that this is a platform,” added Reinio.
“As Stacey mentioned, the FAO and the (auditor) general have said the debt is way bigger than the Liberals have anticipated. They have cooked the books,” responded Khanjin.
“To say (the PC plan) is fully costed is not true!” yelled out Hoggarth. “They have made a major flaw. $7 million over five years is unaccounted for. You can’t have someone be in the government, running a government with a flaw like that, and they had two years to work on that.”
“Did you know that your deficit is larger than it actually is?” responded Khanjin, coolly.
“Well... when the conservatives handed it over, maybe,” said Hoggarth, to more yelling and cheering from the audience.
Referring to the calculation error in the NDP platform, Reinio applauded his party leader for her reaction to the error.
“Andrea Horwath took ownership for her problem and has revised the (NDP) budget...” said Reinio, only to be cut off by moderator Michael Johns, an associate professor of political science at Laurentian University.
BarrieToday asked a debate question about red tape and how the parties differentiate between regulations that need to be streamlined/removed and those which need to be added/maintained.
“We need to create affordability in this province, so we don’t drive businesses out of the province (and essentially say), ‘Suck it up... if you can’t afford to have your employees, maybe you shouldn’t be in business’,” said Khanjin.
“The programs we have in place led to evidence-based regulations, without compromising environmental protections, health standards and the safety of our workers,” responded Hoggarth, but then she switched gears.
“I find it interesting that the PC candidate would quote Donald Trump at a recent debate... when she said that for every new regulation, we should get rid of two. I believe this is irresponsible and reckless,” to more yells and cheers from the audience.
“Ms. Hoggarth, that was said originally by Tony Clement before Donald Trump was even elected. So, I think I need to educate the educator here,” Khanjin shot back. She kept speaking, but audience yelling drowned out the rest of Khanjin’s comments.
North brought the debate back to the topic at hand by reiterating that the Greens want to reduce payroll taxes for small businesses. She also brought up wanting to see more protections for citizens from data breaches, bringing up the Highway 407 breach.
Reinio referenced failed Liberal projects as evidence of a system that isn’t working.
“Many years ago, the Liberals tried to bring in programs to do with wind turbines. They failed to negotiate or discuss with stakeholders, municipalities and ratepayers and whether you agree with wind power or not, it has fallen by the wayside because of a lack of consultation,” said Reinio. “In terms of regulation or deregulation, we always need to be talking to stakeholders before making decisions.”
“We can’t make policy in an ivory tower like the Liberals have been doing for 15 years... we need to talk to people. Listen to your constituents. They’ll tell you where the red tape is,” said Khanjin.
“Our government works and it is responsible,” said Hoggarth.
“People get punished for running successful businesses and creating jobs,” said Surkova. “This is unfair! Before creating any regulation, you have to make sure people aren’t going to struggle... they aren’t going to lose jobs.”
“The Green Party is saying they want to respect the bargaining process for teachers, but we have to balance that with back-to-work legislation when it’s needed,” said North, to be cut off by the timer.
After the debate portion, the candidates fielded questions from the audience on cannibis legalization, LGBTQ issues, student debt and the sex education curriculum.
The debate wrapped up with Johns urging people to vote, regardless of party affiliation.
“It’s really easy for us to be involved in politics to criticize everybody... it takes enormous courage to put your name on a ballot. It doesn’t matter which party you support, the fact that we have eight people in this riding that are willing to put their name forward and present their ideas and be judged by the community at large... we are better for it,” said Johns.
“Democracy doesn’t work if we don’t have choice.”
The full debate will be broadcast on RogersTV on Friday at 7 p.m., and will be replayed over the weekend and throughout the week leading up to election day on June 7.
