Is it not illegal? | GTAMotorcycle.com

Is it not illegal?

JTR

Well-known member
Sorry if I'm mistaken, but I was under the impression that it's illegal to use public funds for campaigning.

If so, why am I seeing so many advertisements about the many (debatably)wonderful things that the current government has done against... sorry, for us?

I'm seeing a lot of ads about the minimum wage increase, seeing ads about the wasteful, I mean thoughtful spending on metrolynx projects, etc. These ads ofcourse coming up in an election year. How is this not raising ALOT of eyebrows? It seems it's not even on the conservative party's radar. But they're so busy with their leadership race, they haven't even noticed that Wynne is already in full campaign mode, and she's using our money to do it. I don't have cable, and I'm sure if I did I would see a more varied, less directed set of ads on a daily basis. However I mainly use youtube for visual media, and their ads are more directed based on my region, and then my viewing habits(I see alot of car ads too). So I see many political ads from the province and even my municipality.

When I had my PC connected to my TV, I was able to block the ads, it was glorious. However I do most of my viewing on an xbox and can't block the ads on that. But I'm noticing the campaign ads and as a taxpaying conservative, seeing liberal campaigning on public dollars is pissing me right the fk off. Nobody else?
 

Mad Mike

Well-known member
This is a fine line, are they 'communicating programs' or horn blowing. Liberals have perfected this, it's part of their election year strategy, has been for decades. They depend on the heavy appetite and short memory of the electorate.

1) Dump a bunch of hugely expensive election promises on us the year before an election (like now).
2) Purse open bargaining with public service unions.

This sweetens their appeal to the masses. If they fail to win the election, the promises are a huge stinkbomb for the incoming party who have two unpopular choices: pay for them or repeal them.
 

FLSTC

Well-known member
I suspect that the government-funded advertising is a significant percentage of broadcast media's revenues. Possibly a cause for favorable reporting just like motorcycle reviews.

I do admit that with significant changes to employment regulations there should be a communication campaign with some TV ads an appropriate part. But I consider the other ad campaigns (including electricity bill re-arrangements and inserts) to be improper.

This pales in comparison to willful destruction of government records to avoid a scandal and bribery of an election candidate. Not to mention the improper accounting to make the hydro one sale look good...

I'm not sure if it's true, but I've heard that many public-sector collective agreements (government unions) have minimum-wage indexing language, so wages have an offset-to-min-wage factor and when the min wage increases, everyone else's salary is increased accordingly. So the min wage increase was not really meant for the min-wage earners who will just get their hours cut, rather another technique to keep the union folk happy with the Libs instead of the NDP. Fake news?
 

J_F

gringo diablo
Site Supporter
OP. It's the Russians.
Manipulating you with YouTube.

But seriously. YT being a Google Co
will shape the ads based on your history

and it should be illegal to use
public money for these obvious promotions

but they all do it
regardless of party
and claim it's about public awareness

there will be no mention or insignia
of a political party in the ads
 

Wingboy

Well-known member
Moderator
Site Supporter
Wynn will blind the voters and stay in power.People are that stupid.
 

nobbie48

Well-known member
Site Supporter
The ads show what the government has done for you but the face is Wynne and people think Wynne has done the good deeds. The stupidity is that no one is pointing out that the government hasn't got one plug nickel to it's name. Every nickel they spend is a taxpayer's nickel.

Wynne says "We are going to increase spending on XXXXX" and people think Wynne is opening her own purse. The statement should be that "We are going to spend more of your money on XXXXX".

The reality is that the bill for the bridge to nowhere is being sent to your children and grandchildren.

It will take more than four years to correct the blunders of the present party. If a new party was to win, the correction would be painful and results wouldn't be seen for at least four years. By that time the forgetful public would be fed up and elect the old party because the missed the cake and cookies. The old party comes in on the coattails of the efforts of the one that did the work.
 

FLSTC

Well-known member
Wynn will blind the voters and stay in power.People are that stupid.
we all want to keep on spending despite the deficit/debt. Let the future generations pay for it. I personally don't like this but if the majority vote so that's our direction isn't it. Just have to figure out how to get some of the pork-barrel for myself.
 

TwistedKestrel

King of GTAM
Site Supporter
I suspect that the government-funded advertising is a significant percentage of broadcast media's revenues. Possibly a cause for favorable reporting just like motorcycle reviews.
It is not. They basically have a right to have their stuff aired, but they pay a pretty penny for it. In the long run though it's a drop in the bucket
 

backmarkerducati

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Same as the Federal Tories did with their Action Plan advertising?
THIS, they ALL do it and it should be against the rules! It gives the party in power an advantage and it is tax money that could be spent elsewhere. In the case of the Tories, they were running the ads years after the plan was done...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/federal-ad-spending-exceeds-projections/article16503725/

Of course we know here that the above does not fit the narrative that one colour pig is different than the others... they are all the same BTW.
 
Last edited:

Mad Mike

Well-known member
It will take more than four years to correct the blunders of the present party. If a new party was to win, the correction would be painful and results wouldn't be seen for at least four years. By that time the forgetful public would be fed up and elect the old party because the missed the cake and cookies. The old party comes in on the coattails of the efforts of the one that did the work.
This is entirely the Liberal strategy, has been since the beginning of time. About 8 months before an election, Liberal leaders hand out goodies in the form of big promises, they don't really have any intention of keeping. Change the definition: promise to 'stretch goal' or 'priority change', Taxes to 'premiums'.

Wynn's main 2014 Election promises:


The Ontario Pension Plan - fail
Ring of Fire highway funding - fail
24-7 access to primary health care for all Ontario - fail
15% cut to auto insurance rates by August, 2015 - fail, Ontario drivers still safest in Canada with highest premiums
Link minimum wage hikes to inflation to be fair to employees and employers - fail - 35% election gift
Balanced provincial budget by the fiscal year 2017/18 - fail Auditor General reports $4.5B deficit




For the 2003 election, Wynne’s predecessor, McGuinty, promised a taxpayer protection pledge not to raise taxes or implement any new ones. He changed the term 'taxes' to 'premiums' post-election, then brought in the largest single tax hikes in Ontario history.
 

Mad Mike

Well-known member
THIS, they ALL do it and it should be against the rules! It gives the party in power an advantage and it is tax money that could be spent elsewhere. In the case of the Tories, they were running the ads years after the plan was done...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/federal-ad-spending-exceeds-projections/article16503725/

Of course we know here that the above does not fit the narrative that one colour pig is different than the others... they are all the same BTW.
The pigs might be the same color, but the Wynn pigs are a lot fatter. The Federal PC's spent $14.5 million on their Action Plan ads in 2014, a successful program that actually helped Canada sail through a global recession unscathed.

Compare that to Wynn's spends. $58M+ last year, 30% considered partisan and/or self congratulatory. Included in this is $8M on her failed Ontario Pension Plan. Under current rules, there are no restrictions on partisan advertising on social media sites -- she spent $5M in this area -- just try to watch YouTube without getting bombarded an Ontario Govt self congratulatory ad.
 

Baggsy

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Slightly or perhaps majorly off topic, but do John Napier Wyndham Turner, Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien, and Paul Edgar Philippe Martin not have an airport named after them yet?
 

RockerGuy

Banned
Site Supporter
Google & YouTube, which is one & the same is "left" leaning. No surprise
 

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
The pigs might be the same color, but the Wynn pigs are a lot fatter. The Federal PC's spent $14.5 million on their Action Plan ads in 2014, a successful program that actually helped Canada sail through a global recession unscathed.

Compare that to Wynn's spends. $58M+ last year, 30% considered partisan and/or self congratulatory. Included in this is $8M on her failed Ontario Pension Plan. Under current rules, there are no restrictions on partisan advertising on social media sites -- she spent $5M in this area -- just try to watch YouTube without getting bombarded an Ontario Govt self congratulatory ad.
Ad blocker
 

Top Bottom