I’ll spell it out for you because you don’t seem to understand anything that you “read”:

Dalton McGuinty has a record that he should be apologizing for. He’s been lying to voters since the day he took office.

That’s the polar opposite of ignorance, it’s called being informed.

Do you find the term “foreign worker” offensive somehow? This is another example of the Liberals being incapable of responding to criticism of their policies without accusations of racism.

If Hudak’s private members bill was the same thing, why didn’t the Liberals adopt it then? If it’s good policy now, why wasn’t it good policy then? Doesn’t this make McGuinty the Xenophobic racist, since the only value he sees in the bill is pandering to ethnic minorities during election time?

I’d also suggest there is a huge difference between tabling a private members bill, and putting the policy front and center in your election campaign. I’d even go so far as to suggest that McGuinty is lying when he says he’d implement this bill. He didn’t the last time the same policy was debated, so believing he would after an election defies logic.

But McGuinty has built his political career around strategically lying to voters, so I guess more of the same shouldn’t come as much of a surprise.

Hudak’s bill is a pretty familiar tactic.

It’s introduced, in the leader’s name, but not actually advanced. When asked how he supports immigrants, Hudak can point to his Bill. Assuming he only gets asked by those who actually support this kind of thing, it works as part of an outreach strategy.

The Liberals one upped him by not only endorsing the idea – but increasing the scale and making it part of their platform. Now it’s out there in the open and the now publicly known Bill becomes an albatross for Hudak. He can no longer whisper it to some select groups and it undermines his credibility when he opposes the Liberal proposal. The fact that his opposition has been couched in such xenophobia is just gravy.

As for why the Liberals opposed the Bill – the short answer is that they didn’t. Hudak introduced it, spoke a few words at the time, but it never came up for debate. This is likely by Hudak’s own design.

LKO,

2 things:

1) As I understand the PMB you linked to, Hudak’s credit was specifically to cover language training paid by the employer. It was not a blanket $10K gift as I understand McGuinty’s proposal to be. Hudak’s bill did not create an incentive for an employer to hire one person of a different race or ethnic background over another to get a tax windfall; the tax credit is to cover money they pay to give language training, so no net benefit; whereas I believe McGuinty’s does (please correct me if I’m mistaken).

2) Forgetting point 1 above for a minute…if we accept the argument that Hudak’s bill was the same in spirit, and he was trying to accomplish the same thing as McGuinty, isn’t it fair to say then that these reports keying on the words “foreign workers” to try to paint Hudak as some sort of racist are complete bullsh!t and just more of the usual “Conservatives=racist” garbage narrative that we’ve come to expect from our useless pool of journalists?

Workers who are A) citizens of Canada, and B) have been here for five
years or less.

This was a quick change McGuinty made to his policy.
Let’s take a look at this change, shall we?

You can’t apply for citizenship until you’ve lived in Canada for 3
years…then once you do, the current
processing time for citizenship application processing is 19
months.

This leaves a maximum of 5 month applicability window…basically open
to people who have lived here between 4yrs 7mos, and 5 years (assuming
you submit your citizenship application on the day you become eligible).

So what exactly is the point of this program again?

If that’s your purpose, then target the money and the effort at the actual obstacle; the governing bodies of the various professions. Throwing money around in a flurry only rewards those with the quickest hands and, not incidentally, those closest to the source.