Ontario Writes Cheque to Fix Cracks in Cornwall Infrastructure – March 13, 2014

Ontario Writes Cheque to Fix Cracks in Cornwall Infrastructure – March 13, 2014

Grant_CrackCORNWALL Ontario – Nearby Prescott Russell MPP Grant Crack rode shotgun with a few ministers of the Wynne Government as they brought a few bags of money to Cornwall to help with our failing infrastructure and flooding issues.

In particular  the reconstruction of sewers on Eleventh, Grand and Miron, and redirection of sanitary flow to another drainage area where sufficient capacity can be developed.

The $2 million dollars was said to help with construction jobs in the area.   SD&G if of course held by PC MPP Jim McDonell.  I know I’ve only worked in Journalism for five years, and do practice the lowly art of Gonzo journalism, but maybe someone will explain to me why our MPP wasn’t on hand for this although MPP Crack is much more respectful of CFN and our audience than MPP McDonell.

“I am proud to be part of a government that invests in infrastructure such as the reconstruction of sewers, roads and bridges.  This project will benefit the City of Cornwall and the riding of Stormont-Dundas-South Glengarry.”

Grant Crack, MPP for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell

So dear viewers of CFN; is this election ramping up attempts to buy a few votes as a Spring election approaches, or simply a government doing its job and providing the services that we pay for with our taxes?       And if so do they deserve a cookie for doing that?

UPDATE 3:01 PM

We were informed that our MPP was in fact present at the event.  He was not quoted or represented in the release we worked from.

Updated 3:35 PM

MPP McDonell sent in the following:

“We pay for these infrastructure projects so it is good to see some of the money come to our region” Stated MPP Jim McDonell

You can post your comments below.

bill mcgimpsey

18 Responses to "Ontario Writes Cheque to Fix Cracks in Cornwall Infrastructure – March 13, 2014"

  1. Marc Pilote   March 13, 2014 at 3:05 PM

    Jamie: Even you, who practice gonzo journalism, must know that only MPs and MPPs from the sitting party are invited to cheque presentations. Since Crack is a Liberal, he gets to show up representing the party although his riding is next door. Since McDonnell is a Progressive Conservative, he is not invited even though he is the MPP for the affected area. In my 30 years of journalism that has always been the case and it likely always will because governing parties don’t want to give any credit to opposition parties. I’m not saying it’s is right or wrong, its just the way it is.

  2. admin   March 13, 2014 at 3:31 PM

    Thanks Marc. I always strive to learn something new each and every day.

  3. john rothwell   March 13, 2014 at 4:01 PM

    so who got the cheque ? the liberals or conservatives and how many hands will be on it before it hits the streets?

  4. Furtz   March 13, 2014 at 5:21 PM

    @ Marc Pilote. I’m not so sure about that. My Conservative MPP. Steve Clark in Leeds-Grenville, mugs for the cameras whenever provincial money flows into our riding. It’s pretty much all he does. He has a nice shiny head and a sweet smile, so he has a job for life if he wants it.

  5. Marc Pilote   March 13, 2014 at 5:40 PM

    John: Cheques likely weren’t even there, although the cash was likely in the affected municipality’s bank accounts months ago. Bet my bottom dollar on it..:) So it’s mayor Bob, the Counties and/or county municipalities that get the cash. (I can see Jamie having a heart attack now….hehehehe)

  6. jules   March 13, 2014 at 6:22 PM

    Jamie politics is the 2nd oldest profession and if you ever read former president Ronald Reagan’s quote it would give you a chuckle. Politics is a mighty dirty game and I myself would not want it by any means. Politicians like lawyers will work for anyone who will pay them.

  7. Marc Pilote   March 13, 2014 at 7:00 PM

    Furtz: I have no doubt your Opposition MPP mugs for the camera. It appears McDonnell is the same kind since it seems to be part of the political game.. However if you look at my first post you will notice I said McDonnell (or Opposition MPP) is not invited…doesn’t mean they won’t show up trying to get credit though, depending on how good their information or executive assistant is. And you can bet they will show up. BTW….that applies to every political party.

  8. David Oldham   March 14, 2014 at 6:00 AM

    Vote buying pure and simple and with borrowed money that we the taxpayers have to pay interest on.

    The provincial debt is increasing monthly now by almost 1 billion dollars ! Politicians love the word “sustainability” it is, however, unfortunate that few understand the meaning or really care. The current provincial government has increased the debt by an astounding 114 billion dollars in less than 10 years and nobody is concerned or worried. Over 50 % of our tax dollars fuel salaries and benefits and still people vote to support this idiocy. No austerity measures just a slow steady erosion of services until what ? you hand over your paycheck and receive nothing in return ? You think Greece has problems ?

    Everybody keep your head buried in the sand, deny reality and stay home watching reality shows on voting day.

  9. Furtz   March 14, 2014 at 2:27 PM

    So, who are you gonna vote for David? The Libs deserve to be tossed out. In fact, they should have been wiped out in the last election. Hudak isn’t fit to lead his party, never mind the province. He can’t even decide whether to destroy or embrace the trade unions! The Cons will be a no-go this time just like the last time. That leaves the Dippers, but I get the impression that they might not be your party of choice.

  10. Marc Pilote   March 14, 2014 at 3:56 PM

    Hi David. I could not agree with you more — the only choice we will have in the future is to cut spending since raising taxes is no longer possible. However before I sign on with a political party I want to know what would be cut, specifically. General statements like “economies will be found” mean nothing. I want to know what services will be cut or reduced and what the savings would be. My understanding is that no party has been that specific, they just hand out platitudes that mean nothing. And one more thing, I don’t want to hear, my favourite program can’t be cut or reduced because it’s so important — all programs are important to some people. I want to hear specifics, specifics, specifics — not BS. How about you start laying out specifics David? Heck, maybe a political party will hear you and adopt some of your ideas.

  11. Hugger1   March 14, 2014 at 4:39 PM

    To say the least the election is going to be interesting. Prepare for all the major parties to bring out their pet projects that will dig deep into our pockets.

  12. Furtz   March 14, 2014 at 6:03 PM

    @ Marc Pilote. The billions of dollars being squandered by our federal and provincial governments have no limit. From invading foreign countries, to hosting and supporting Olympic and Pan-AM sporting circuses, it seems that there is no limit to how much Canadian taxpayers are happy to pay.
    Would you be willing to live without circuses and military adventures in exchange for lower taxes?

  13. Marc Pilote   March 14, 2014 at 6:39 PM

    Furtz: You sound like David and I would say the same to you. Tell me where the billions are being squandered and then suggest the cuts. And btw, if you want to cut Olympics and Pam-Am sporting, how about some of things that may mean something to you that mean nothing to me? People like you and David want to cut, but I doubt either of you would want your particular pet project cut, would you? Maybe the solution is a flat percentage reduction in ALL budgets, but I can see things like police, hospitals and fire saying they couldn’t cut because they were too important. Others may say welfare is too important while others would feel the military shouldn’t be reduced. Again, its a case of whose ox is being gored. Generalities won’t work, the only choice is real specifics.

  14. David Oldham   March 14, 2014 at 9:28 PM

    @Furtz…I agree with your take on the Libs. The Cons due lack leadership and direction and being a benefactor of free enterprise how could I support a socialist party ? So that leaves me learning towards a revitalized Rhino Party vote. Although some might suggest that a vote for the Rhino’s is more of a statement than an actual vote. At least I will get some fresh air, the polling station is a short walk from home.

  15. David Oldham   March 14, 2014 at 10:08 PM

    @Marc Pilote…”all programs are important to some people”…very true. Go big or go home so let’s start with welfare. Not enough space here to be specific so here is the extremely condensed version which hopefully any reasonable person would be able to fill in the blanks. Welfare like unemployment insurance (what it is) was conceived to be for a defined temporary term. A hand up, not a hand out. If an individual has not been able to become self sufficient by the end of the temporary term I do not advocate cutting them loose. I do favour that any recipients that find themselves in this situation that are capable be required to report daily before 8:30 a.m. to a neighbourhood location to receive a work assignment to assist a struggling senior in their neighbourhood. Money for something to fuel a sense of self worth. Welfare is the tough one to revamp because the system much like health care has become administratively top heavy, providing well paying government jobs but at a cost to the less fortunate. My plan would deliver a much larger benefit for a short duration, a true hand up. Health care is the easy one, I have been pondering that one for a long time.

  16. Marc Pilote   March 15, 2014 at 7:16 AM

    David: Thank you for your opinion on welfare and ironically, it matches my own feelings. However, you and I both know that if such a plan were put to the voters it would be voted down. You certainly addressed a left wing file but what about right wing files such as military, health care, protection to life and property. Would they be left alone or should they be cut?

    I still would love to see specifics in some party’s platform but we all know that will never happen because we all have “favourites” when it comes to spending or spending cuts. Because of that, specifics won’t be spelled out…..Unfortunately. Therefore we are back to politicians buying votes with our own money instead of determining priorities and setting a budget reflecting those priorities. I feel that will never change. Of course, maybe discussions such as these will put the thought in someone’s mind who will do something about it in future. One can always hope.

  17. Furtz   March 15, 2014 at 8:06 AM

    @ Marc Pilote. I have no “pet project”. I do believe adequate food and shelter for all is a basic requirement for any civilized society. Invading foreign countries, sliding down hills or flitting about gracefully on figure skates, not so much.

  18. Bill. Parisien   March 15, 2014 at 8:31 AM

    Hi Marc,,,,I really enjoy reading your political comments & thoughts ! Many memories of your days at the station. Keep up the commentary…..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.