Category Archives: Tim Hudak
A most interesting letter of legal opinion written on Nov. 20, 2012, by former Supreme Court Justice, Ian Binnie, popped up with the latest regurgitation of Gas Plant e-mails. Justice Binnie replies to David Livingston, McGuinty’s former chief of staff asked about the possibility of suing opposition members citing outrageous allegations made by PC leader Tim Hudak and MPP Todd Smith in Question Period in October of 2012.
Hmmm this sounds familiar – like The Nexterror SLAPP lawsuit against Esther Wrightman where she is accused of unfairly competing with NextEra by referring to the company as Nexterror. McGuinty got good advice and, unlike Nexterror, he followed that advice. The letter of opinion is a reality lecture wherein Justice Binnie, with rather dry humour, paints out the possible scenarios and why for Dalton, this notion of suing his enemies is not a good notion at all.
Justice Binnie begins, “Many of the allegations…are in our view clearly defamatory…the law provides a low threshold. It is protective of reputations.” That sounds promising. He further states, “Mr. Hudak’s statement is also defamatory”
Hudak had said: “Not only did Dalton McGuinty misuse a billion dollars of taxpayer’s money, he tried to paper over it, cover it up (and) keep the details from the public.” Remember, this was written on Nov.29, 2012. As it turns out, what Hudak said isn’t too far off the mark. Read the rest of this entry
London Free Press (video)
Q: You’ve talked about putting a moratorium on new wind-farm developments. Would that extend to projects already approved and not yet built? Where would the line be?
They’ve got about 10,000 contracts that are somewhere in the pipeline today and there are different stages of contracts. So you have to be practical. What is going to have the least impact on the taxpayer? So, the contracts that have not been signed, you don’t sign any more. Those that are up and producing power, you respect those. Those that are in-between, the energy minister needs to have a system to make the call: Is it better to follow the contract all the way through and add on the power and build the transmission and the risk of having to export (unneeded power) to the States and pay them to take our power, versus using the termination clause in the contract? You’ve got be thoughtful, practical.
Q: What about local control over where these things go?
Re-establish that. Lambton County, Chatham, Middlesex — you should have a say on these projects.
Q: Final say?
Yes. This is not something new. This is the traditional way of doing it. Just like it exists for a Tim Hortons or a hot-dog stand or a new Walmart coming into town.
Q: Would a Progressive Conservative government support wind farms in the Great Lakes?
You point out an important irony. You had the (Liberal) government that did a moratorium in the lakes (on wind turbines) to protect the fish and the birds. What about people? Why didn’t we take a similar approach to land-based wind turbines? I don’t see adding on wind farms in the lakes, in our provincial parks, on the Niagara Escarpment. Read article