Rob Ford - going off the rails!

102 posts / 0 new
Last post
Stockholm
Rob Ford - going off the rails!

Looks like Rob Ford is going off the rails (pardon the pun) already.

He wants to kill all of Transit City eevn though hundreds of millions have already been spent and hundreds of millions worth of cancellation penalties would have to be paid. He says he wants $4 billion worth of subways instead. He is making a good start in finding the money for all this - his proposed cuts to perks for councillors and city hall office budgets will add up to a grand total of $800,000.

During the campaign, when Ford was challenged about how his numbers didn't add up - ehw ould say "My mother always told me that if you watch the pennies, the dollars will take care of themselves".

I think the new line to be used should be "Rob Ford: A penny wise, A pound foolish"

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/899641--war-on-the-ca...

 

remind remind's picture

Reads like he is posturing, and knows that he alone can do nothing, as such, he is setting it up to "blame" others for his inability to follow through with 'his' election promises.

Stockholm

In the end, what will probably happen is the worst of both worlds - no LRTs AND no new subways. Ironically, the people who will suffer won't be people downtown who didn't vote for Ford. We already have subways and streetcars. The people who will be hurt will be the very people in the distant corners of Etobicoke and Scarborough who voted for Ford and who will now see any progress on building more transit to those areas go down the drain.

Cueball Cueball's picture

remind wrote:

Reads like he is posturing, and knows that he alone can do nothing, as such, he is setting it up to "blame" others for his inability to follow through with 'his' election promises.

Right.

farnival

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/sheppard-east-lrt-v...

 

Scarborough LRT:  $1.1 billiion all in (vehicles/maintainance/storage)  12 km and 26 stops.

Our Ford's subway: $3.6 billion (inlcudes vehicles but not potential $500 million yard) 8 km and only 7 stations)

brilliant!  less service for more money!  good thing the gravy train's over!

 

Kloch

Ford's transit "plan" contains plenty of comedy gold.  The best thing about it, is that he actually screws over his own constituents worse than anyone else in the city.  At least North York and Scarborough will get a new subway, such as it is.  Downtown will have service that will get appreciably worse, while Etobicoke is still a public-transit wasteland.

Proving once again: you get the government you deserve.

Cueball Cueball's picture

No one is getting anything. Remind is right. Rob Ford only knows how to do confrontational politics. His aim is to have a show down with McGuinty and make hay for the provincial election in the hope that this fight will continue to depress the Liberal vote. Then when Hudak is in... who cares... they can just sell off the whole transit system.

remind remind's picture

Cue, that is absolutely what I got with all his posturings. He is putting ducks in a row, beyond this municipal win. And he is going to "make hay" while the winter wind blows, setting himself up as McGuinty's 'victim' and by extention selling his electorate that they are 'the victims' as well.

He is keeping them initially lulled with posturings of no tax increase, afterall no tax = wealth creation, in the indoctrinated world. Then he will find no way to reach a consensus with McGuinty, meanwhile Harper will say "no problem", thereby making McGuinty look even worse. In steps Hudak, and promises the world.

Bookish Agrarian

While I don't disagree Cueball, I think this is about more than municipal and provincial politics.  This is also about federal politics and the desire for the Conservatives to win some suburb seats in traditionally Liberal areas.  I would bet we will see some kind of Ford-friendly gift in the next federal budget that targets those areas.

Sineed

It's not a fait accompli.  From Stockholm's link in the o/p:

Quote:
NDP MPP Michael Prue (Beaches-East York) said Queen’s Park should intervene “to ensure Transit City gets built.”

“Allowing Transit City to be scuttled would be a very grave error on this government’s part,” said Prue, who is also a former city councillor.

“Work has started. Yet the McGuinty government appears ready to sit back and watch Transit City be stopped dead in its tracks at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars to the taxpayers of this province,” he said.

“People in parts of Toronto harshly remember the premier (Mike Harris) who killed the Eglinton subway. Does this premier want to go down in history as the one who helped to kill the Eglinton LRT, or will he do the right thing and join with New Democrats to save Transit City?”

At City Hall, some councillors were noting that city council as a whole endorsed Transit City and it will take a council vote, not a decision from the mayor alone, to change course.

Given that council has to vote to kill Transit City, and the mayor is just one vote in council, what are the chances?  How many councillors will vote in favour of Ford's disastrous plan?

Stargazer

Considering this asshole (Ford in case anyone doesn't get it) shut out all progressive councillors, it could go one of two ways:

1) the progressives back him in order to get their items through or

2) they defend Transit City

My guess is Transit City will die, and the fools who voted this clown in will suffer the most.

Doug

Progressive politicians could take notes here on getting to the more controversial aspects of the platform you were elected on first.

 

Kloch

Cueball wrote:

No one is getting anything. Remind is right. Rob Ford only knows how to do confrontational politics. His aim is to have a show down with McGuinty and make hay for the provincial election in the hope that this fight will continue to depress the Liberal vote. Then when Hudak is in... who cares... they can just sell off the whole transit system.

i don't doubt it.  Though we should be mindful of how Council votes too.  In order to kill Transit City, he would have to get a vote at Council and, if they don't vote it down, he doesn't get his fight with the Province to begin with. 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Stargazer wrote:

Considering this asshole (Ford in case anyone doesn't get it) shut out all progressive councillors, it could go one of two ways:

1) the progressives back him in order to get their items through or

2) they defend Transit City

My guess is Transit City will die, and the fools who voted this clown in will suffer the most.

He didn't quite shut them all out. The ever pliable Adam Vaughan managed to find a seat on the new gravy train by getting to represent City Hall at the AGO, and he is still lobbying to stay on the TPSB. Neither of these appointments guarantee Vaughan a seat on the executive, but I don't doubt his abilities to find his way on there sooner or later.

Doug Ford said he was "impressed" by Vaughan, and that we could "quote him on that", so I am.

Aristotleded24

Cueball wrote:
Doug Ford said he was "impressed" by Vaughan, and that we could "quote him on that", so I am.

[url=http://live.680news.com/Event/Rob_Ford?Page=0]Rob Ford was also impressed with Joe Pantalone:[/url]

Quote:
I would support Joe Pantalone. He has years of experience, and while we differ on politics, he has never lost $1 billion.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Doug's statement was made as a response to actual negotiations that they had around appointments, not some theoretical "what if" Radio 680 News trivia question. Most people say basically that about Joe.

If given the oppotunity to be a player, I predict that Adam Vaughan will not:

A) Oppose privitization of the curb side garbage pickup.

B) Oppose downsizing City Hall staff through attrition.

Both of these items were on both Ford's and Smitherman's "to do" list, and Vaughan never suggested he would oppose these parts of Smitherman's plan when he endorsed Smitherman.

jrootham

Doing that will open up Adam to a challenge from the union/ndp left.  He may be pliable, but the ward he represents constrains him.

 

Kloch

jrootham wrote:

Doing that will open up Adam to a challenge from the union/ndp left.  He may be pliable, but the ward he represents constrains him.

 

What "union/ndp left" are you talking about?

Cueball Cueball's picture

He already beat the NDP in Trinity Spadina, and Mike Yen proved there is even some wiggle room to move further right, coming in with 3600 votes. The real constraint upon Vaughan is the fact that if his real ambition is to run for mayor against Ford next time around then he had better distance himself from Ford and run clearly in opposition. But, I am begining to doubt the idea tha Vaughan has any intention of running in 2014.

Stockholm

a. I actually don't think Adam Vaughan has any plans to run for mayor. His family is too young and the reality is that the only way anyone remotely progressive can get elected major is if they have credibility in the 'burbs and I think he knows that. The councillor for the downtown core in Ward 20 will never have that. You need a Shelley Carroll

b. I'm not sure what the big deal is about being named the City of Toronto's rep on the board of the Art Gallery of Ontario. Most city councillors get named to one or more "special purpose bodies" and the AGO board is just about the least important one I can think of of. The fact that Vaughan gets to vote on whether or not the AGO should host a travelling exhibition of Monet's water lilies is hardly evidence that he has any influence whatsoever and being on the AGO board means diddly squat in terms of being on the executive of the city of Toronto.

jrootham

Trinity-Spadina has a significant number of leftists living here.  Some of them orient towards working in unions and/or supporting the NDP.  Others are more independent.  If Adam makes anti labour moves the people who are union/NDP oriented will run a candidate against him.  Adam won the first time by running to the left of the NDP on the democracy issue, if he starts making anti union moves he will lose the leftists in the ward, and those are the people who decide municipal elections here.  They come out and vote.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Your assumption is that Vaughan did not defeat those forces when he defeated Helen Kennedy. Kennedy represented those forces, and the NDP core in Trinity Spadina. Alone those forces were not able to defeat Vaughan, so there is no evidence that he could not defeat them again, especially if he manages to capture more of the right wing vote.

I really don't think there are more than the 5500 people who voted for Helen who will stick fast to those labour issues on principle. The NDP needs that PLUS something else to make the seat winnable for them.

I am not sure what being left on the "democracy" issue means, or how that relates to bedrock collective bargaining rights.

Stockholm

Adam Vaughan has a voting record that is to the left of many councillors who are NDP members in the first place - so why would anyone run against him? Now, if he did some sort of a 180 degree "volte-face" and became a total cheerleader for Ford and joined his executive committee and voted to scrap Transit City, voted to get rid of all bike paths and voted for a budget that was a total assault on basic services etc... it would be a different story and he would face opposition from someone and there would be ISSUES to oppose him on. But I think the chances of any of that happening are nil.

Vaughan beat Helen Kennedy because it was clear to people that they had exactly the same policies and so it became a matter of who is a bigger name and more of a big shot. The Labour Council didn't even endorse anyone in 2006 because Vaughan and Kennedy were seen to be so equally pro-labour.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Stockholm wrote:

Adam Vaughan has a voting record that is to the left of many councillors who are NDP members in the first place - so why would anyone run against him? Now, if he did some sort of a 180 degree "volte-face" and became a total cheerleader for Ford and joined his executive committee and voted to scrap Transit City, voted to get rid of all bike paths and voted for a budget that was a total assault on basic services etc... it would be a different story and he would face opposition from someone and there would be ISSUES to oppose him on. But I think the chances of any of that happening are nil.

Vaughan beat Helen Kennedy because it was clear to people that they had exactly the same policies and so it became a matter of who is a bigger name and more of a big shot. The Labour Council didn't even endorse anyone in 2006 because Vaughan and Kennedy were seen to be so equally pro-labour.

And there is the rub Stockholm, the only equivocal statement in your list is the one referring to the two points I just mentioned about reducing the work force at city hall and privatizing garbage collection. You recognize implicitly that Vaughan is flexible on these issues, and not only that if cutbacks and privatization were handled in terms that you think are "reasonable" you would likely vote for him again. And this is coming from the heart and soul of the Trinity Spadina NDP riding association.

We can just imagine what Liberals in Trintiy Spadina think, and with the soft liberal vote in the NDP and the Liberals to count on, as long as he doesn't scrap bike lanes (something that Ford is unlikely to insist on in Ward 20, since he proposes that such issues be handled at the community level) then everything will be fine with you.

In other words all that Vaughan has to do is convince you that these cuts were not a "total assault" (however that is defined) or perhaps merely "the best deal that could be hoped under the Ford regime" and you would be trotting out your excuses for him next time round.

Indeed, you have already started.

Stockholm

Thank you for putting words in my mouth with your usual witche's brew of needling, manipulative innuendo.

I'l be surprised if Adam Vaughan and Mike Layton don't vote the same way 100% of the time over the life of this council.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Come now Stockholm, surely you aren't trying to convince me that you have a 100% hard line pro-union stand, are you? You don't think some of those overpaid CUPE managers might not be extraneous to the functioning of city hall, or that privatization of some garbage collection might not be acceptable?

You have shown no qualms about defending Smitherman and Smitherman councillors who overlooked these two points of Smitherman's agenda and defended Smitherman as the "least worst" viable option on numerous occasions. Its ok to admit that you are flexible on these issues.

As long as someone comes to pick up you garbage it doesn't really matter much to you what they are paid, does it? At least city services are being maintained. These are not make or break issues for you.

A serious answer here...

Cueball Cueball's picture

... honestly...

adma

The way things are framed now, someone claiming to represent the labour/union/NDP constituency vs Vaughan would be lucky to do much better than Mike Yen did.  I mean, we're getting to the point where "sticking up for labour" is a little like provincially vouching for Joe Flexer or Amani Oakley in 1995...

Cueball Cueball's picture

Reinforcing that framing doesn't help.

Sineed

Salient article in the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/councillors-insist-...

Quote:
Stephen Harper’s Conservative government, which invested $333-million in the Sheppard East LRT, is treading cautiously. “We have not received a formal request from Ontario or Toronto to cancel our commitment to the Sheppard East Light Rail Transit Project,” a federal spokesperson said.

TTC general manager Gary Webster also said that city council will have to approve any change in direction, as will Metrolinx, the provincial agency that has been given the responsibility to build the LRT lines along Eglinton, Finch and Sheppard. “Certainly we would seek the approval of our board. Metrolinx has a similar responsibility. They have a board of directors that they report to.”

Several councillors expressed concerns about the potential penalties associated with cancelling existing contracts for equipment and light-rail vehicles purchases. “I need to have more information” about the financial impact, said Gary Crawford, a new Scarborough councillor, who said he favours subways.

Metrolinx is a big player - Rob Ford would not be able to carry forward with his plan without Metrolinx' buy-in.  And stopping Transit City is potentially very expensive.

I urge Toronto babblers to contact the mayor's office or your councillor to show your support for transit city.

Wilf Day

When a certain activist got back to Toronto today after a very productive stay in Dauphin, a friend welcomed him back as follows:

Quote:
Things are great here now! They're building subways all over the place, the war on the car is over so we can finally run down cyclists with impunity, the gravy train has been replaced by a fiscal responsibility train (think Thomas the Tank Engine but with a calculator and cute little reading glasses), we've now reduced the number of City Councillors to one, and that one Councillor's office budget is so low THEY have to pay the City just for the privilege of being an elected official, we've replaced all affordable housing and community service programs with football programs (users of the elderly drop-in centres took a while to master the blitz, but at least they seem to like the all-you-can-drink Gatorade (note: it's actually off-brand electrolyte drink, as per Fiscal Responsibility Train's new city beverage policy), the City now REQUIRES all homes to have a three-level concrete parking garage on their front lawn, we've replaced the municipal tree policy with the 'Ford Tree Bounty' ("Bring us a tree, we'll permit you to build a fourth level on your parking garage!"), we've frozen property taxes FOR ALL ETERNITY, EVEN AFTER THE SUN BURNS OUT (Ford had Parker, Del Grande and Nunziata meet with a team of astrophysicists and metaphysicians to discuss the very nature of time itself - they're working on a more comprehensive definition for the tax freeze and will report back to Ultra City Councillor in Spring 2011), and finally, most importantly, there will finally be an endless supply of rice crispy squares in the City Hall cafeteria.

Doug wrote:

Progressive politicians could take notes here on getting to the more controversial aspects of the platform you were elected on first.

It still doesn't always work. When Jean Charest was elected Premier in 2003, he moved very promptly to introduce proportional representation (which Quebec provincial Liberals actually need, and the PQ had promised but stalled on for 30 years because it would hurt them.) He appointed a Minister and told him to move quickly, which the Minister began to do within a few months. Didn't help. The details got debated and re-debated for a year in the Liberal Caucus, and when the plan emerged it was so partisan (little five-MNA districts, three local MNAs plus two district "top-up" MNAs, calculated district-by-district) as to help no one but the Liberals. So the public tore it apart, and it's stilll adrift at the design level. 

Le T Le T's picture

Oh thank god the war on cars is over! Does this mean that Michael Bryant the Murderer can go free? He is free? But didn't he...?

edmundoconnor

Sineed wrote:

I urge Toronto babblers to contact the mayor's office or your councillor to show your support for transit city.

E-mail: mayor_ford@toronto.ca

Mail:
Toronto City Hall,
2nd Floor,
100 Queen St. West,
Toronto ON
M5H 2N2

Phone:
416-397-CITY (2489)

 

edmundoconnor

Dear Mr. Ford,

I strongly urge you to not cancel Transit City. It is the only viable solution on the table to help get Toronto moving again, to reach tens of thousands of commuters, to make for a more productive and wealthier city

Money has been committed by the city, province and federal government to the project, money that cannot be taken back. Cancelling Transit City will cost the city hundreds of millions in cancellation fees, and that is before even a shovel goes into the ground for your subway plan. What is your plan for convincing the province to back your plan for a new Sheppard subway? Also, where is the money going to come from to fund the Sheppard line? The province has already indicated that the cupboard is bare.

A subway in Scarborough will do nothing to help the taxpayers on Finch and Eglinton Avenues to get to work more quickly. It will do nothing to help the taxpayers in Etobicoke. It will do almost nothing to help people conduct business in the city, as the overcrowding on buses and trains will continue. Have you taken a 32 or 34 bus recently? It's jam-packed, with people left behind at every other stop. Those people will be late for work, for school, for doctor's appointments. How do these things help Toronto and its economy?

Yours sincerely,

Edmund O'Connor

 

Kloch

Perhaps I am naively optimistic here, but if Ford's strategy is to cry that the province and/or council is deliberately thwarting his agenda, I'm not certain how well this will play over all.

If he starts asking the province and Metrolinx for money to build subways, the province can just say, "you said there are inefficiencies that can be removed from the budget.  Go find 'em."  That leaves both Transit City and Ford's plan both dead.  Now presumably, he'd gamble that he could use such a crisis in order to deliberately engineer the privatization of the transit system at that point. 

That's the hypothetical scenario I could see unfolding at this point.  That said, he'd be gambling that he wouldn't wear the blame for the city not having any transit strategy of any kind, and that involves a lot of blaming everyone but himself.  It's worked for him so far in his career, but can he make it work on this level?

Stockholm

I suggest everyone PHONE Mayor Ford's office. I understand that he has committed himself to personally returning ALL phone cals to his office. Let's hit the phones!!

edmundoconnor wrote:

Sineed wrote:

I urge Toronto babblers to contact the mayor's office or your councillor to show your support for transit city.

E-mail: mayor_ford@toronto.ca

Mail:
Toronto City Hall,
2nd Floor,
100 Queen St. West,
Toronto ON
M5H 2N2

Phone:
416-397-CITY (2489)

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Kloch wrote:

Perhaps I am naively optimistic here, but if Ford's strategy is to cry that the province and/or council is deliberately thwarting his agenda, I'm not certain how well this will play over all.

If he starts asking the province and Metrolinx for money to build subways, the province can just say, "you said there are inefficiencies that can be removed from the budget.  Go find 'em."  That leaves both Transit City and Ford's plan both dead.  Now presumably, he'd gamble that he could use such a crisis in order to deliberately engineer the privatization of the transit system at that point. 

That's the hypothetical scenario I could see unfolding at this point.  That said, he'd be gambling that he wouldn't wear the blame for the city not having any transit strategy of any kind, and that involves a lot of blaming everyone but himself.  It's worked for him so far in his career, but can he make it work on this level?

I predict the whole issue will disappear into the planning department of the TTC until after the provincial election. McGuinty and Metrolinx will simply say they are open to all suggestions, but that they need a comprehensive plan.

"POOF"

Problem solved.

jrootham

Cueball wrote:

Your assumption is that Vaughan did not defeat those forces when he defeated Helen Kennedy. Kennedy represented those forces, and the NDP core in Trinity Spadina. Alone those forces were not able to defeat Vaughan, so there is no evidence that he could not defeat them again, especially if he manages to capture more of the right wing vote.

I really don't think there are more than the 5500 people who voted for Helen who will stick fast to those labour issues on principle. The NDP needs that PLUS something else to make the seat winnable for them.

I am not sure what being left on the "democracy" issue means, or how that relates to bedrock collective bargaining rights.

The NDP/left has about 8,000-9,000 votes in the ward.  Some of those people are from the John Sewell-Alan Sparrow orientation that focuses on planning and transportation issues but does support collective bargaining.  Those people fully expect to see Adam supporting collective bargaining and fair wage policies (probably even more of the latter).  Those people are why Adam won.  If he loses them, he loses the election.

It is also true that those people look askance at party politics.  In particular, since the capture of the local riding associations by the apparatchiks many of them have reduced their connection to the NDP.  The democracy issue amongst the local leftists is significantly about the internal democracy issues in the NDP.

 

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Thanks for answering that query about the "democracy". Issue, as you can see, I don't agree with your analysis of Vaughan's positioning in the Ward. I was at an all candidates meeting where Vaughan was asked about those collective bargaining issues and he was less that forthright, pointing out that half of garbage collection in TS is already handled by private subcontractors. There was nothing that he said the ensured me that he had a clear no-go line on any of these things.

His support for Smitherman coincides with this view.

Stockholm

If half the garbage collection in TS actually is already handled by private sub-contractors - why don't i recall anyone (least of all Pantalone) demanding that this arrangement be stopped immediately and that all of the work be "contracted in"?

jrootham

I think he may need reminding of where his ward is.

It is entirely possible that his analysis matches yours and not mine.  If he acts on that assumption the next election will demonstrate who's right.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Stockholm wrote:

If half the garbage collection in TS actually is already handled by private sub-contractors - why don't i recall anyone (least of all Pantalone) demanding that this arrangement be stopped immediately and that all of the work be "contracted in"?

Pantalone was quite explicit about not supporting further privitization. He certainly didn't imply that just because some garbage collection was contracted out that all of it might be, and there was no objection on principle. Pantalone was quite clear on opposing further privitization, on the issue.

You however are not, which brings me back to the point I was making. Adam Vaughan could easily vote for further privitization, and cut backs of city hall staff, and NDP'rs such as yourself would still vote for him, as long as he doesn't act like a suburban rube.

Missy

Wow! It boggles my mind that ppl actually believe that the already spent monies on City Transit, is a justifiable reason to continue with the WORST PLAN ever!

Those monies did NOT go up in smoke, they went into the pockets of ppl like you & me that work for a living. Those salaries have already made their full circle BACK into the community coffers! As for the penalties, better to take a smaller penalty loss than a expensive long term permanent disaster!

 

*** Do you ppl have any idea just how advanced the entire GTA public transit would have been today if no one interfered with the plans to expand our subway lines in all directions since the 60′s? We would not have this crisis today, if ppl did not stop subway progress in lieu of the so called iconic streetcar, which in many ppl’s opinion belongs in the Smithsonian’s Institute rather than on the roads of 21st Century living.

We progressed out of medieval times, out of the pioneer era, yet we are continuously being forced to maintain and support the crudest mode of transportation that is only capable of providing rides equal to that of Canada’s Wonderland’s touring trains, bcos of the whims of the few.

 

It’s a BAD IDEA to spend good monies after bad! Think about it….if Transit City was such a great idea, why would it take 7 yrs. in the planning? Great ideas take no time at all. Bad ideas are dragged out in the hopes of finding something good about them.

 

*** Way to go Mayor Rob Ford! Way to go! Keep those subways coming!

 

I am sick and tired of politicians making expensive decisions that benefit the few, (the few that came out for elections) just to get their vote.

 

I am sick of politicians that have no long term vision or accountability of their inept, costly short term decisions.

 

I am sick of politicians that have NO BUSINESS SAVVY!!! These guys would not survive in the private sector running a personal business the way they run our city coffers.

 

I am sick of City Planners that also lacked vision, handing out condo construction permits left right and center, without the forth-sight to high density congestion.

 

I am sick of City Planners not looking for ways to encourage employment growth outside of the downtown core of Toronto…..heck, that would solve the high density commuter congestion over night and at no cost to the city coffers, meaning Taxes would not have to be continuously raised to support a War on Cars, Archaic Transit City plan!

 

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford and Mississauga Mayor Hazel Mccallion have business savvy along with common sense and long term successful and profitable visions!

 

Yes, I agree, Toronto did get what it deserves…….a Mayor that can think his way out of a paper bag!
Canada needs more politicians like Rob and Hazel……period!

Polunatic2

Yes, that's what Toronto needs. To look like Mississauga. 

And by the way, it was the business savvy Mike Harris government that canceled the Eglinton subway. Ford's father was part of Harris' caucus and undoubtedly supported canceling a subway that had already been started. Harris was at Ford's victory party. 

Aristotleded24

Missy wrote:
*** Do you ppl have any idea just how advanced the entire GTA public transit would have been today if no one interfered with the plans to expand our subway lines in all directions since the 60′s? We would not have this crisis today, if ppl did not stop subway progress in lieu of the so called iconic streetcar, which in many ppl’s opinion belongs in the Smithsonian’s Institute rather than on the roads of 21st Century living.

We progressed out of medieval times, out of the pioneer era, yet we are continuously being forced to maintain and support the crudest mode of transportation that is only capable of providing rides equal to that of Canada’s Wonderland’s touring trains, bcos of the whims of the few.

 

It’s a BAD IDEA to spend good monies after bad! Think about it….if Transit City was such a great idea, why would it take 7 yrs. in the planning? Great ideas take no time at all. Bad ideas are dragged out in the hopes of finding something good about them.

1) Light Rail is a viable transportation system. You can just go to Calgary, Edmonton, or several cities in the US or Europe to see the successes. It can carry large numbers of people, and the lead time to construct an LRT line is far less than what it would take to construct a subway.

2) "Good plans" do not come out of thin air. You don't just snap your fingers and voila, I have a good subway/LRT route map. You have to take into consideration a variety of things, such as traffic pattern flows, population density, neighbourhood characteristics, all of those things. It's a time consuming, detailed process. Additionally, the best plan in the world will not make it anywhere without funds to back it up, and it took some time for the City of Toronto to secure funding for those projects.

3) Beware when a politician decides to scrap an existing plan for one that (s)he thinks is better. It has ramifications in dealing with higher orders of government as to how reliable a partner you are. There's termination costs, plus what do you do if some work has already started? You can look to the City of Ottawa being sued over tearing up its contracts to built light rail, or the City of Winnipeg still struggling to build some form of rapid transit after the current mayor basically tore up the plan he was later dragged into implementing.

Stockholm

Cueball wrote:

You however are not, which brings me back to the point I was making. Adam Vaughan could easily vote for further privitization, and cut backs of city hall staff, and NDP'rs such as yourself would still vote for him, as long as he doesn't act like a suburban rube.

I wasn't even talking about who I would vote for personally. If someone who was a loyal New Democrat ran against Vaughan because on a whole host of issues - he had swung wildly to the right - I would probably vote for that person. But I wasn't talking about what I would do personally. My point was that as long as Vaughan continues to oppose the vast, vast majority of (if not all of) Ford's policies - I would be surprised if anyone on the left would get any traction running against him.

Cueball Cueball's picture

 People voted to stop the gravy train, not stop the train entirely.

Polunatic2

The problem was that "the gravy train" was never defined. It's whatever Rob Ford wants it to be. And it won't be lucrative city contracts to provide services that could be provided more cost effectively in house. When there are cost overruns on large projects, like the St. Clair right of way, where do people think the money goes? Right into the hands of building and trades contractors. But who gets blamed? Civil servants. 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Stockholm wrote:

Cueball wrote:

You however are not, which brings me back to the point I was making. Adam Vaughan could easily vote for further privitization, and cut backs of city hall staff, and NDP'rs such as yourself would still vote for him, as long as he doesn't act like a suburban rube.

I wasn't even talking about who I would vote for personally. If someone who was a loyal New Democrat ran against Vaughan because on a whole host of issues - he had swung wildly to the right - I would probably vote for that person. But I wasn't talking about what I would do personally. My point was that as long as Vaughan continues to oppose the vast, vast majority of (if not all of) Ford's policies - I would be surprised if anyone on the left would get any traction running against him.

I was using you as an example of an NDP'r who was soft on these issues revolving around collective bargaining. You are my sample set. There are a large number of NDP'rs who are soft on these issues, and, as JRootham has been pointing out, many NDP'rs voted for Vaughan regardless of party loyalty. And when it came down to it, party loyalty was not an issue for NDP'rs.

Therefore, if party loyalty is not really an issue for TS NDP'rs and they are soft on the collective bargaining issues, as well, Vaughan should have good chance of success over the combined NDP/Labour vote in TS, regardless of who runs against him from the left, especially if he can pick up some votes on the right.

Stockholm

Cueball wrote:

 

I was using you as an example of an NDP'r who was soft on these issues revolving around collective bargaining.

I assumed you were referring to Joe Pantalone since he was 100% supportive of the city's attack on CUPE during the strike last summer.

Cueball Cueball's picture

I am assuming that you mean to say that unless someone supports a labour union on each and every bargaining issue that this means they support privitization of curb side garbage, pickup, turning the TTC into an essential serviceand laying off city workers. Am I right?

Don't make the mistake of thinking that I would equate your views with those of Joe Pantalone. For one thing Joe knows what collective bargaining is all about.

Joe knows for example that entering into a collective bargaining negotiation and disagreeing with the union is an affirmation of the collective bargaining process even if it means that there is a legal strike, whereas privitization, banning the right to strike for workers and reducing the size of the bargaining unit is an attack upon collective bargaining itself.

Collective bargaining being something that Peter Kormos calls "the hallmark of a democratic society". Democratic being the word indicated by the second letter in the acronym NDP.

Pages

Topic locked