Change for the sake of change.
That, roughly, is Tim Hudak's estimate of what Ontarians want in this year's provincial election. So on Sunday, the Progressive Conservative Leader unveiled a platform - "changebook" - that gives voters the option of keeping most of Dalton McGuinty's priorities, without keeping Dalton McGuinty.
Mr. Hudak is pressing various hot buttons, including putting provincial prisoners into chain gangs and cracking down on newcomers allegedly taking advantage of the health and welfare systems. But while they may drive votes, these issues are around the margins of what the province does. They offer the prospect of "change," without having any impact on how most citizens interact with their government.
As for substantive, wide-ranging proposals, there are two that really stand out from the status quo. One would introduce income-sharing - a way to lessen the tax burden for families in which one spouse makes significantly more money than the other, which is more thoughtful than the broad sales-tax cut many expected. The other would scale back the push toward green energy, while lowering homeowners' hydro bills.
But on other fundamentals, Mr. Hudak has all but endorsed Mr. McGuinty's agenda. For health and education, the biggest ministries, he's adopted the Premier's spending plans. Like Mr. McGuinty, he claims he'll be able to find enough efficiencies elsewhere - without affecting services - to gradually eliminate a $16.3-billion deficit. He's even adopted the same timetable for that return to budgetary balance, in 2017-18.
If Mr. Hudak is nostalgic for Mike Harris's Common Sense Revolution, as his Liberal critics keep insinuating, it's not readily apparent.
In 1995, Mr. Harris stormed to office on explicit promises to move the province rightward. Total spending, outside health care, was to be cut 20 per cent; 13,000 civil servants would be laid off; welfare payments would be reduced; tuition fees would rise; various programs would be slashed. And there would be massive tax cuts, including dropping income tax by 30 per cent.
Mr. Hudak, alongside an income-tax cut of up to 5 per cent, promises to find 2-per-cent savings each year outside health and education - less than 1 per cent of overall spending. The annual nature of this exercise is questionable, since governments typically have more trouble downsizing the longer they're in power. And Mr. Hudak's explanations of where he would find savings (other than eliminating high-profile but relatively low-cost agencies such as Local Health Integration Networks, and shrinking cabinet) are vague.
The Liberals will seize on the ambiguity as evidence that he's keeping secret his sinister plans to cut core services. And given that he's essentially presenting the same fiscal model as Mr. McGuinty, minus several billion dollars of tax and rate cuts, he could be vulnerable to that attack.
Mr. Hudak will counter that his promises to focus on core priorities can be taken more seriously than those of the Liberals, pointing to his pledge to dock ministers' pay if they can't find savings. It bears noting that Mr. McGuinty has established a government-services review - headed by former bank economist Don Drummond - that the Tories would leave in place. But it's reasonable enough that, when it comes to changing the culture of government, a party in its first year of power would be better positioned than a party in its ninth.
Still, there's some irony here.
In the past provincial election, when he wasn't on the defensive over his disastrous pledge to expand religious-school funding, former PC leader John Tory claimed he believed in the things Mr. McGuinty only said he believed in - or, put less awkwardly, that he would deliver the government's expressed priorities more effectively.
When Mr. Hudak succeeded Mr. Tory, he was expected to shift his party back toward Mr. Harris's turf. Now, he's making almost the same argument Mr. Tory did - albeit with sharper messaging, more populist trinkets, and no mention under any circumstances of religious schools.
Deep down, he might prefer something more transformative. And maybe, as the Liberals claim, that's what he'll try if elected.
But the Tories have concluded that, unlike in 1995, there's no strong public desire for an overhaul of government. After eight years of Mr. McGuinty, they figure, Ontarians are just ready for a fresh face. So that's the kind of change they're offering.
Adam Radwanski