"Trillium Party of Ontario' ???

An opinion:

I received the following flier in my mail on Thursday February 15 :

Front and Rear (click for full size)

Inner (click for full size)

In light of what has occurred in the United States of America - and especially with recent appearances that a similar political movement was gathering in Canada, I was unsettled by this handout. In some cases it was how things (unstated) were phrased. In some cases it was *exactly* was was stated.

So I took the trouble of going to the Trillium Party web site : www.trilliumpartyontario.ca
I then sent an email to the indicated contact address :
(highlights added for this article)

Ms Marshall

(duplicate to main party e-mail : the hot link on the party web site that should auto load your direct email was not functioning just now when attempted- fyi)


I received a one page handout from you, as Trillium Party candidate in my riding area, in the mail yesterday.
I am a long term resident in lower Grey, south east of Flesherton, just shy 30 years.

I find a number of things troubling as listed on this handout. I did take 15 minutes to go over the party web site (www.trilliumpartyontario.ca) in the hopes of better understanding. Not with better details, I am afraid.

To refer to the pieces:

1) 'Private Property'
Much reference is made to 'property rights'.
- What of those who do not have the financial ability to purchase private property?
- Do individual private property owners have rights that would surpass those of the overall community in general?

2) 'No Carbon Tax'
- if Ontario residents, who demonstrably consume substantially more energy via fossil fuels, do not take any responsibility for their personal consumption - who would be expected to?
- I state this as someone who personally requires the use of both propane and coal in my daily business operations.

3) 'Repeal Green Energy Act'
- see above
- it is clearly the case that without some kind of significant monetary penalty, individuals most certainly rarely cut back on their personal consumption. (The vast number of massive, over equipped, 'sport toy' pickup trucks seen on Ontario roads is certainly proof of this.)
- the NIMBY approach by what is observed locally as 'seasonal' property owners towards wind turbines is also clear evidence of how those with economic power are not mindful of the environment into the future.

4) Reference to current Minimum Wage increase
- As an individual who economically has lived very far below the defined 'poverty line' for my entire life, I find the suggestion that their is some kind of core problem with paying people something that can only remotely reflect an actual 'living wage' to be offensive.
What is your party's plan to support the 'working poor'??

Policy

 "provide...TRUE FACTS.."
- In light of the use of this exact term by the American Right Wing - and specifically Mr Trump, it is hard to believe this was not intentionally stated as a direct reference.

Guiding Principles

"All voting Citizens"
- This can easily viewed as excluding some large segments of the Ontario population.
- As the term 'voting Citizen' is repeated several times, I find it hard NOT to see this as an appeal directly to a core group who would consider themselves 'real' Ontario.

" family will be prioritized"
- As someone without children - where does that leave those who have NOT decided raise children?
- there is continual reference to 'family'. I note that I did not find the term ' return to family values' specifically. I suggest that any reader would be hard pressed NOT to make that connection.


Looking over the published materials of the Trillium Party, it is my distinct impression that the overall approach is intended to appeal to a hard core, right wing, solidly middle class -  dare I suggest Christian Fundamentalist, and White, membership.
Hoping that somehow the clocks can be reversed so to make 'Ontario Great Again'.


I am hoping you will be able to take some time to explain how the elements detailed above *should* have been interpreted, and that my initial impressions are wrong.

Darrell Markewitz

This is what I received in return :

Hello Mr. Markewitz
It would seem you have made up your own mind about the Trillium Party of Ontario.  There will nothing I can say to detract from your opinion,  As a blacksmith, though, I find it curious that you would not be concerned that there are policies being created to ban all use of coal and the cost of your production with increase with the carbon tax when using alternative types of fuel.  This increases the cost of living on those who can least afford it.  That being said as you had said you have taken 15 minutes to read over our polices - these policies include upholding the Constitutional rights of the people.  These rights include private property rights and the democratic rights of the people, which, Mr. Markewitz, has not been done in decades.  I hope this information is of assistance, but again you didn't seem to have any questions you merely wanted to express your opinion, which I have noted, as that is your constitutional right.  Have a good day.


Elizabeth MarshallCandidate, Trillium Party of Ontario
Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound
B.G.O.S. Trillium R.A.
P.O. Box 4
Singhampton, ON
N0C 1M0
1-519-377-6129
elizabethmarshall@trilliumpartyontario.ca

Ok - I know I got a bit heavy near the end of the letter.

Count the highlighted sections from my letter.
I make that FIVE specific questions.
All are points referred to in the original handout. NONE have any details indicated. NO further details are given on the web site.
See the response? "didn't seem to have any questions" ??

So I sent a follow up:

without discussion - there is no understanding

I am old enough to remember a time when Civil Rights were lacking - and being fought for.
I'm afraid you have decided not to explain, which does not in my mind, represent true flexibility.
The lack of *detail* on your Party web site does not allow for any accurate assessment.

As to my own use of fossil fuels:
I have done through several exercises in the past in an attempt to accurately assess exactly what my personal impact might be.
I freely admit that any ability to determine 'source to my door' costs and impacts remains almost impossible to determine.
In my case, there is no realistic, technically feasible alternative to burning coal or propane. So I am prepared to accept the upcoming increased costs related to a carbon tax.
I consider this only ethical, rather than further dumping that loading on to future generations.

I did find the portion of the Party web site about 'carbon tax' did not appear to be much more than a photo op for your leader - image of him in a large farm tractor. Yes, a statement was made that 'carbon tax would (unfairly) impact farmers'
No numbers, no details.
I certainly will not be convinced without statements of actual fact, actual numbers.

You stated below "you didn't seem to have any questions"
I count a total of FIVE question marks within my original.
?????


Good luck
You can expect me (especially after your decision NOT to inform or clarify) to actively work AGAINST the Trillium Party.

What I have seen so far too closely resembles Donald Trump for my personal comfort.

Darrell

And this was the reply:

I expected as much.  Seems you neither know or understand the Constitution nor your moral obligation not to place burden you future generations.  That is your option and prerogative and I respect your choice.  Have a good day.

Elizabeth Marshall

Dumfounded!

"...nor your moral obligation not to place burden you future generation."

What?

Do remember, as is clearly seen, that it was * I * who stated that:

" I consider this only ethical, rather than further dumping that loading on to future generations."

"Seems you neither know or understand the Constitution.."

MY Canada does not hold "voting Citizens" as somehow worthy of special privileges.


This is someone who is attempting to gather votes for an upcoming election?
At the initial introduction does not attempt to actually answer questions?
Or provide any actual details beyond vague generalities?
Intentionally uses the phase 'True Facts'?

I leave it to the reader to draw their own conclusions...