The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Ian Oliver Publisher Robert Glasbey Advertising Director Norman Alexander Editor Geoff Hill Circulation Director Teri Casas Office Manager Tim Coles Production Manager The Oakville Beaver, Kubiuhod every Sunday, Wednesday and Friday, at 467 Speers Rd., Oakville, is one of the Metroland n’nting, Publishing Distributing Ltd. group of suburban newspapers which includes: Ajaxâ€"Pickering News Advertiser, Barrie Advance, Brampton Guardian, Burlington Post, Colli Connection, Etobicoke Guardian, Georgetown Inc lent Acton Free Press, Kingston This Week, Lindsay This Week, Markham Economist and Sun, Stouffville/Uxbridge Tribune, Milton Canadian Champion, Mississauga News, Newmarketâ€"Aurora Eraâ€"Banner, North York Mirror, Oakville Beaver, Orillia Today, Oshawa/Whitby This Week, Peterborough This Week, Richmond HilV Thornhil/Vaughan Liberal, Scarborough Mirror. All material published in the Oakville Beaver is protected by copyright. Any reproduction in whole or in part of this material is strictly forbidden without the consent of the publisher. Advertising is accepted on the condition that, in the event of a typographical error, that portion of the advertising space occupied by the erroneous item, together with a reasonable allowance for signature, will not be charged for, but the balance of the advertisement will be paid for at the applicable rate. The publisher reserves the right to categorize and reject advertising. in the event of typographical error, advertising goods or services at the wrong price, goods or services may not be sold. Advertising is merely an offer i time. Parizeau will then have to try and deal with the real, grassroots issues of a heavilyâ€"indebted province. As finance minister in an early PQ government, Parizeau was found wanting for sound fiscal policies and there is nothing to sugâ€" gest his record will change. Unfortunately, should Parizeau be victorious tomorrow, he will take the win as a sign that Quebec wants to go its own way in the world with its main ties to Canada being geographic. If that is the case, the 64 yearâ€"old PQ boss will have made a mistake that other politicians have made before. He will hold his referenâ€" dum, it will be defeated by a very pragmatic populace and Parizeau, like Levesque before him, will be a footnote, albeit a large one, in the political history of Canada. What Quebec wants and needs are jobs along with some kind of economic and political stability. That‘s what most voters there want and polls have verified that fact. They want a change of provincial government, just like Ontarians wanted a change when they ousted the Liberals and took a chance on the NDP. The campaign this time has been very quiet by Quebec standards. There wasn‘t the excitement generated that preceded the PQ victory under Rene Levesque and little in the way of overwhelming support for Parizeau. The response this time has been more pensive and introspective. Not the usual Quebec style and for that reason alone, the contest tomorrow will be very interesting. Right now it appears as though Parizeau will win and immediately throw the province into another year of political turmoil as he gears up his separation referâ€" endum to the detriment of the average Quebecker. It was this same group, you‘ll recall, that saw a Liberal victory during the last federal election but not the complete decimation of the governing Progressive Conservatives. Political polls are for polisters and political scientists, not the public at large, especially in Quebec. ing to the polls with two thoughts in mind. If they send the Daniel Johnson Liberals back into power, will they be forever abandoning the vision of an independent Quebec? And if they elect the Parti Quebecois under Jacques Parizeau, will it be a sign that the majority of Quebec voters want an independent nation? Tmomw is the day of decision for the people of Quebec. They‘ll be headâ€" Political pundits in English Canada have been filling the Opinion pages for weeks trying to figure out what might happen and how Quebec voters are viewing this provincial election. After the dust settles Monday night, we predict that the vast majority of these navelâ€"gazers will have completely misunderstood the mood of the electorate. Editorial Day of decision 467 Speers Road, Oakville, Ont. L6K 354 Classified Advertising: 845â€"2809 Circulation: 845â€"9742 or 845â€"9743 Clothing is not the only area in which I believe the MSPC underestimated the colossal cost of kids. Which made it all the more painful when we had to pick up that unenviable, unlucky sevâ€" enth mortgage on our humble home just to get decent clothes to cover our kids. Hell, to put sneakers on the boys‘ feet, we actually had to make a deal with the devil; ironic â€" having to sell our souls to shoe their soles. We‘re not spendthrifts â€" when it comes to kids‘ clothing â€" which tends to wear, tear, and become ridiculously small ridiculously fast; we don‘t buy bigâ€"buck brand names. We don‘t go for the cool, popular logo looks. We buy basic, noâ€" name clothes from stores with fitting names like GhettoLand and, our favorite, Bottom Of The Barrel Apparel. In the calculations, the counâ€" cil earmarked $8,047 for clothâ€" ing (and remember, that figure is supposed to see one child through to age 18). We blew that bundle in one shot on socks and underwear alone. And while that base figure seems staggering, my wife and I, having recently run out and purchased backâ€"toâ€"school duds for our dynamic duo, figure the figure is hopelessly low. he _ Metro â€" Social Planning Council estiâ€" mates â€" and it‘s a basw ‘noâ€"frills" estimate â€" that the cost of raising an only child to age 18 is a whopping $160,741..We‘ve got two tykes. I guess we‘re anted into the tune of $321,482. Tales of a trip along the way to the poorhouse For "personal care" the council set aside $3,104, which doesn‘t leave much money Recreation costs seem to increase drastically each year. And each year, there seems to be more "out there" on which parents can gleefully blow their bucks. How many households today are without a pair or two of those everâ€"essential inâ€"line skates? The council allotted $8,674 for "recreation". Which sounds like a hefty hunk of cash until you consider that $8,674 barely gets a puny puckster one year of Rep hockey; barely buys a figure skater an hour of ice time, coach and choreographer included; barely constitutes a down payment for a piano lesâ€" son; barely... Seriously, to wrestle our food bill down to $77,600, we‘d have to quell our boys‘ costly cravings for yummy and hopeâ€" lessly wholesome foods such as Batman Fruit Snacks and Gummy Worms. Have to give up the donuts. Have to forget the fast foods. Heck, we‘d probâ€" ably have to eliminate three or four of the basic food groups. The council estimates food costs per child to be $38,800, which gives our alwaysâ€"hungry twoâ€"tykes team some $77,600 to toy with, or eat. Great for this year, but what about all the other years? My wife and I are cruising in the fast lane to the poor house. But, hey, what the heck; we‘ve got two terrific tykes and a pup whose poop is perfect. We know...we‘ve got test results to prove it. Since bringing her home, we‘ve had to take her to a vetâ€" erinarian (Latin term for: "charge ‘em blind!"), who has given the poor pooch about oneâ€"thousand shots, at $50 bucks a pop and who, every month or so, suggests we have her poop examined. For 16 bucks a pop. Or, er, per poop. Recently, we purchased a pet â€" a puppy dog. To make the iniâ€" tial purchase, to secure the cute canine, we had to take out an unenviable, unlucky eighth mortgage. Finally, housing estimates are $22,116 and health and home maintenance ring in at $10,463. Bangâ€"on on both counts. If your kids are perfectâ€" ly healthy. And living under a bridge. One major area of expense not noted by the Metro Social Planning Council is "pets" â€" which children beg and beg and beg to have. Pets alone, I believe, could top the counâ€" cil‘s entire $160,741 figure for raising an only child to age 18. Close to $12,000 is budgeted for "babysitting" and about $54,000 for "day care". All of which almost makes parents wish that they never had to go out. Or that they were a part of the lucrative babysitting and daycare industries. when you figure bad haircuts alone over 18 years come to more than $1,000.