• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Mike Harris ranked as Canada’s best premier: Report

Status
Not open for further replies.

211RadOp

Sr. Member
Reaction score
15
Points
230
VANCOUVER -- A new Vancouver-based think-tank says it has conducted a performance review of 80 premiers since 1981 and former Ontario premier Mike Harris, a Tory, was rated the best while Quebec's PQ premier Pauline Marois was the worst.

Aha! Insights Inc. has produced its inaugural report, called "Premier Class: Canada's Best and Worst Leaders."

The study only assesses four current premiers but concludes that of those, Saskatchewan's Brad Wall of the right-wing Saskatchewan Party is at the top while Ontario's Kathleen Wynne, a Liberal, takes last place.

Co-author Mark Mullins, CEO of Aha!, says the study used 11 fiscal and economic outcomes, such as job growth, balanced budgets, and business investment.

He says the conclusion is that "leadership and fiscal and economic policies really do matter."

Overall, the study suggests Alberta has had the best set of premiers since 1981, followed by British Columbia and Ontario; Quebec's premiers as a group were in last place.
.....snip

http://www.thewhig.com/2015/10/01/mike-harris-ranked-as-canadas-best-premier-report

Here is the link to the report.  Leaders rankings start on page 17.

http://aha.world/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Premier-Class-Report-from-Aha.pdf
 
LOL!

All those nay sayers who have been going on for years on how bad Mike Harris was. 
 
I'm disappointed that Harris was ranked as number one. While the black and white numbers reflect positive-looking leadership, the routes taken in order to achieve and/or maintain those numbers were painful for many, many residents of Ontario. Hospital closures, massive layoffs of much-needed medical staff, several school closures, large-scale strikes (legal or not), failed plans of municipal amalgamation with promises of cost savings, (many of which have proved that costs and services are still the same, if not more--Toronto is a good example...) etc, etc.
'All about the bottom line no matter the costs.
 
BeyondTheNow said:
I'm disappointed that Harris was ranked as number one. While the black and white numbers reflect positive-looking leadership, the routes taken in order to achieve and/or maintain those numbers were painful for many, many residents of Ontario. Hospital closures, massive layoffs of much-needed medical staff, several school closures, large-scale strikes (legal or not), failed plans of municipal amalgamation with promises of cost savings, (many of which have proved that costs and services are still the same, if not more--Toronto is a good example...) etc, etc.
'All about the bottom line no matter the costs.

Toronto is never a good example. Unless you want to talk about the largesse of the McWynnty government. ;)
 
BeyondTheNow said:
I'm disappointed that Harris was ranked as number one. While the black and white numbers reflect positive-looking leadership, the routes taken in order to achieve and/or maintain those numbers were painful for many, many residents of Ontario. Hospital closures, massive layoffs of much-needed medical staff, several school closures, large-scale strikes (legal or not), failed plans of municipal amalgamation with promises of cost savings, (many of which have proved that costs and services are still the same, if not more--Toronto is a good example...) etc, etc.
'All about the bottom line no matter the costs.

If the bottom line isn't sustainable none of the decisions built on it are.
 
I stopped reading once I saw Allison Redford at number 4.

Her goverment was a burning tire fire and she, more than Prentice was responsible for the death of the PC party in Alberta.
 
See, also, here as a question about can you tell which federal party deserves your vote by its provincial counterparts' fiscal/economic records over the past 30ish years?
 
E.R. Campbell said:
See, also, here as a question about can you tell which federal party deserves your vote by its provincial counterparts' fiscal/economic records over the past 30ish years?

Link to the study is dead.
 
recceguy said:
Link to the study is dead.


Worked for me  :dunno: ... Go here and then click on the Read The Study link just below the picture ~ a PDF file downloads.
 
BeyondTheNow said:
I'm disappointed that Harris was ranked as number one. While the black and white numbers reflect positive-looking leadership, the routes taken in order to achieve and/or maintain those numbers were painful for many, many residents of Ontario. Hospital closures, massive layoffs of much-needed medical staff, several school closures, large-scale strikes (legal or not), failed plans of municipal amalgamation with promises of cost savings, (many of which have proved that costs and services are still the same, if not more--Toronto is a good example...) etc, etc.
'All about the bottom line no matter the costs.
Fact of the matter the liberals didn't fix any of this ... It takes forever to find a doctor, see a specialist or have selective surgery still. Teachers go on strike every chance they get too and the cost of everything the liberals could touch has gone up well above inflation rate. It's well past sustainable and I honestly have no clue how we'll ever get out if this (financial) mess.
 
LCIS227 said:
Fact of the matter the liberals didn't fix any of this ... It takes forever to find a doctor, see a specialist or have selective surgery still. Teachers go on strike every chance they get too and the cost of everything the liberals could touch has gone up well above inflation rate. It's well past sustainable and I honestly have no clue how we'll ever get out if this (financial) mess.

My comment has nothing to do with party affiliation. It's simply a matter of an individual who did a ton of damage, but managed to make a top-whatever list based on black and white figures. He could've belonged to any party, I wouldn't have cared. I have no desire to argue which party/which leader could've/would've/should've done whatever, and whose job it is to fix it.

Ontario never recovered. I suppose that could be said about a few provincial leaders in this province though...
 
BeyondTheNow said:
My comment has nothing to do with party affiliation. It's simply a matter of an individual who did a ton of damage, but managed to make a top-whatever list based on black and white figures. He could've belonged to any party, I wouldn't have cared. I have no desire to argue which party/which leader could've/would've/should've done whatever, and whose job it is to fix it.

Ontario never recovered. I suppose that could be said about a few provincial leaders in this province though...
That's my mistake, I thought you were inferring that the party that followed was somehow more effective.

And you're right, its amazing how very few people can damage an entire province so dramatically and there somehow be no repercussions or accountability for those individuals.

 
LCIS227 said:
That's my mistake, I thought you were inferring that the party that followed was somehow more effective.

And you're right, its amazing how very few people can damage an entire province so dramatically and there somehow be no repercussions or accountability for those individuals.


You mean people like Bob Rae, Dalton McGuinty and Kathleen Wynne, right?  ;)
 
Altair said:
I stopped reading once I saw Allison Redford at number 4.

Her goverment was a burning tire fire and she, more than Prentice was responsible for the death of the PC party in Alberta.

And Ed Stelmach was 9th?  Running big deficits in prosperous times is good management?  Not so sure about that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top