News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.2K     0 

G

ganjavih

Guest
Election is a turning point for Toronto

By Ken Warn reports
Published: November 7 2003 21:11 | Last Updated: November 7 2003 21:11

Toronto mayoral candidate Barbara Hall recently summed up how many of her fellow citizens feel about the city: "I want to get back to the scenario where New York film crews have to put garbage on the [Toronto] streets to make it look like New York."


Canada's largest and richest urban centre goes to the polls on Monday to elect a mayor amid a pervasive sense of decline. Once lauded across North America as a beacon of intelligent urban development, US academics and civic leaders would come and gaze in wonder at "the city that works".

But rising crime, traffic gridlock and growing homelessness have quashed that sense of easy superiority.

"In the past decade or so there has been a slow wearing down of the infrastructure. The level of dynamism on the cultural and economic front is also not what it was," says Nelson Wiseman, a politics professor at the University of Toronto.

The city is also still recovering from the Sars epidemic earlier this year, which battered tourism. Then came the August power blackout, which brought industry to a standstill for several days.

More than 40 candidates are running for the post of mayor. But the contest appears a two-horse race between David Miller, a Harvard-educated Toronto councillor, and businessman and community activist John Tory.

Mayoral candidates do not run under party banners. But Mr Miller is closely identified with the leftwing New Democratic party, while Mr Tory is a long-time Conservative insider.

Former front-runner Ms Hall has fallen to a distant third place as voters appear to have shunned her centrist pitch.

Both Mr Tory and Mr Miller are presenting themselves as "can-do" types with the ability to bring a more energetic management style to the city. Mr Miller has found a compelling campaign issue with his pledge to stop expansion of the small Toronto City Airport, on an island opposite the downtown area.

The airport has both passionate defenders and opponents. But Mr Miller's claim that expanding the facility will blight the downtown area and hold back regeneration of the long-neglected waterfront has been gaining traction with voters.

Mr Tory, a former chief executive of Rogers Cable, Canada's biggest cable company, is basing his appeal largely on his successful managerial record. He has also cast himself as the law-and-order candidate.

Much of the debate revolves around issues familiar to any city dweller, such as garbage collection and disposal. But the winner's main challenge will be to reverse the sense of political drift and increase the mayor's limited powers into a forceful role, analysts say.

Much of the blame for the city's malaise has been laid at the door of Mel Lastman, the colourful outgoing mayor.

The accident-prone and populist Mr Lastman frequently appeared out of his depth on the national and international stage.

When the city was desperately seeking leadership in the Sars crisis, Mr Lastman horrified Torontonians by saying on CNN that he had "never heard of" the World Health Organisation.

Dogged by illness and increasingly out of touch with the day-to-day running of the city, Mr Lastman leaves behind an administration beset by financial scandals and an air of cronyism. "There has been very poor municipal stewardship and leadership," says Myer Siemiatycki, a politics professor at Ryerson University.

But Mr Lastman's successor will come to power at a time when things could be looking up for urban Canada. Mayors of big cities across the country are demanding greater autonomy from the provincial governments and a bigger slice of the tax cake.

Former finance minister Paul Martin, who is set to take over as Canada's prime minister before the end of February, partly shares that agenda. He has promised a "new deal" for the cities, including more predictable funding.

The province of Ontario's new Liberal government also professes to be more "city-friendly" than its Conservative predecessor, which was frequently at loggerheads with Toronto.

"The election is shaping up as a turning point for the future of the city," says Mr Siemiatycki.
 
Nelson Wiseman, a politics professor at the University of Toronto

Thats my Political Science professor! Thats so cool!

But the contest appears a two-horse race between David Miller, a Harvard-educated Toronto councillor, and businessman and community activist John Tory.

They make it sound as if Miller is the stuck up rich guy, when everyone knows its the other way around.

BTW my mom watches Cityline on Saturdays and she told me that John Tory came on the show (on the Home Day episode BTW) and said that he wants to remind everyone to vote, and, just by chance of course, he happened to bring sandwiches for everyone in the audience! This guy is a bigger sleazeball than I thought.
 
business men, just like Tory, are known for breaking their rules

Wow...knowing 'facts' like that, how could anyone with a conscience vote for Tory?

My point is that people have no problem ascribing things to Tory that he never actually said (putting an incinerator on the portlands, allowing jets on the island airport as a Miller ad showed), but let the Tory campaign create a website regarding something that Miller actually did say (a website so obviously over-the-top that it couldn't be meant as anything but humour) and he's vilified for it. Perhaps creating the website wasn't the smartest idea in the world, but I'm still amazed that people could call him sleazy because of it.

I guess the theory is that Tory's website shows his lack of ethics, but Miller's campaign ad showing all the jets flying over the island airport shows what, smart campaigning? I personally don't really have a problem with either Tory's website or Miller's ad; what I do have a problem with is when people get up in arms over the former, while turning a blind eye to the latter.
 
Tory wouldn't deny that he would consider putting an incinerator on the portlands...saw it on TV. Had ample opportunity to just say no, but he didn't, because he is considering it. This has happened more than once.

Making a website with Miller in a cowboy/bandit outfit, while kind of funny isn't very classy. It also can't be compared to a Miller ad showing lots of airplanes flying around the island - that IS smart campaigning! He isn't taking a personal shot at someone.
 
Whats wrong with bringing sandwiches for people in the audience?
 
I just think its sleazy for him to come on to a TV show that has nothing to do with him, barg in, say "I want everyone to vote" and then hand out sandwiches. At that point I wouldnt have found it surprising if he would have said "Vote for me and youll get another one". Its sleazy because hes trying to get people to vote for him through bribes, and not based on his platform. If hes an honest candidate he should pursue his platform and understand that if people dont vote for him that means they dont agree with his platform, not that he didnt hand out enough free food.
 
Myer Siemiatycki, a politics professor at Ryerson University.

I had this professor twice so far. During the election campaign, you just can't escape this guy (his classes are great, he is very enthuastic, but very disorganized).
 
"I just think its sleazy for him to come on to a TV show that has nothing to do with him, barg in, say "I want everyone to vote" and then hand out sandwiches. At that point I wouldnt have found it surprising if he would have said "Vote for me and youll get another one". Its sleazy because hes trying to get people to vote for him through bribes, and not based on his platform. If hes an honest candidate he should pursue his platform and understand that if people dont vote for him that means they dont agree with his platform, not that he didnt hand out enough free food."


You can't just barge in on the CityTV shows, as they have security people preventing unauthorized access. He would need to get clearance first from CityTV [even if it seems like he just walked on in] Anyways, it's ludicrous to suggest that he could 'buy' a vote with the sandwiches. Even if he could [the people would have to be complete morons to be swayed with a free sandwich] the couple dozen votes in the audience would be completely insignificant.

If it was Miller who had passed out the sandwiches, I'm almost certain that you would have found it to be very thoughtful of him.

I've noticed a pattern on this forum. Those who are firm Miller supporters, are very much against Tory. Those who are Tory supporters don't seem to have any problem with Miller.

I like both Miller and Tory [I like some of Tory's ideas, and some of Miller's] The ideal candidate for me would be a combination of the two.
 
I've noticed a pattern on this forum. Those who are firm Miller supporters, are very much against Tory. Those who are Tory supporters don't seem to have any problem with Miller.

I agree...people don't seem to have a problem making statements like 'Tory wants to put an incinerator on the portlands', and making ridiculous suggestions that he's trying to buy the election by giving sandwiches (!) to a few dozen people, but when Tory created that millerhighwayrobbery.com website (which couldn't have been more obviously meant as a humourous commentary on a Miller policy) people jumped all over him.

Other than some comments he's made about wanting to keep development south of bloor, and his pledge to hire 400 police officers, as far as I can see he hasn't really done anything that people here should hate him for, but people seem to hate him nonetheless. It's sort of strange.

Anyway, put me down in the camp of Tory supporters who will be almost as happy if Miller gets elected. I don't think Miller's as strong as Tory on the financial side (which I think is important enough that I'm voting for Tory), but I like a lot of his other policies, so really I'll be happy either way.
 
I agree...people don't seem to have a problem making statements like 'Tory wants to put an incinerator on the portlands', and making ridiculous suggestions that he's trying to buy the election by giving sandwiches (!) to a few dozen people, but when Tory created that millerhighwayrobbery.com website (which couldn't have been more obviously meant as a humourous commentary on a Miller policy) people jumped all over him.

What in the hell are you talking about? A statement like 'Tory wants to put an incinerator on the portlands is bad' is completely different from putting up a website with Miller photoshopped as a cowboy or Zoro. Its called ethics, and business men, just like Tory, are known for breaking their rules.
Politicians are accountable to the public, they arent used to buying people off, business men are, thats how they get contracts. This clearly shows how Tory is going to work in the mayors office, if thats not obvious by now, I dont know what else could make it
 
The other day during a debate when Barbara Hall condemned Miller's ad "Looks like a Mayor" for having an underlying racial message [she claimed that it conveyed the message that one needs to be a white, blond, Anglo-Saxon in order to qualify as a good mayor] It was Tory who jumped to Miller's defence during the debate. And he jumped to Miller's defence again the next day during questions from the press on the topic.

If anyone has been messing around with ethics lately, it's Barbara Hall.
 
I agree that Tory hasn't denied putting it on the port lands, but he certainly hasn't said that that's where it's going to go. From the way people here talk, you'd think that part of his platform was to put it at the foot of yonge.

I also like Miller's airplane ad...I agree that it was good campaigning. However, while it wasn't a direct personal attack on Tory in the way that Tory's website was a direct attack on Miller, it's still an attack on anyone that says there will be no jets at the island airport. Since both Hall and Tory have said categorically that there will be no jets, he's essentially saying that they're lying.

The other option, I suppose, is that he's saying that they won't be able to control it...jets are inevitable whether they want them or not. However, if that's the case, and he's saying that the mayor may not have the power to stop something like that once it's already in progress, why should we believe his promise to cancel the bridge?

Ahhhh whatever...I'm tired. Tomorrow when Miller wins, I think we'll all win.
 
I agree that Tory hasn't denied putting it on the port lands, but he certainly hasn't said that that's where it's going to go. From the way people here talk, you'd think that part of his platform was to put it at the foot of yonge.

But that's exactly why people are pissed! Putting an incinerator on the Portlands shouldn't even be an option!


I also like Miller's airplane ad...I agree that it was good campaigning. However, while it wasn't a direct personal attack on Tory in the way that Tory's website was a direct attack on Miller, it's still an attack on anyone that says there will be no jets at the island airport. Since both Hall and Tory have said categorically that there will be no jets, he's essentially saying that they're lying.


Well in that case no one should run a campaign. Disagreeing on issues and advertising what you're for isn't wrong. If Tory had made an ad with hundreds of garbage trucks on the highway to Michigan or anothe landfill no one would have a problem with it...the reason Tory's site was bad is because it was a directed personal attack, and pretty childish.
 
I've noticed a pattern on this forum. Those who are firm Miller supporters, are very much against Tory. Those who are Tory supporters don't seem to have any problem with Miller.
Nicetommy

Remember, many people are convinced that a vote for Tory is a vote for business, and thus, a vote against the people. 'It's time to stand up and be counted.'
It' time we showed big business who's in charge. They don't have the guts to relocate head offices or to invest their money elsewhere!
People need a leader who can share their pain. An 'average Joe" and someone who is not from the business or banking class. This is why so many Miller supporters will vote for Paul 'Canada Steam Ship Lines" Martin: a billionaire industrial capitalist that shares the same concerns as the average Canadian.
 
If Tory had made an ad with hundreds of garbage trucks on the highway to Michigan or anothe landfill no one would have a problem with it...the reason Tory's site was bad is because it was a directed personal attack, and pretty childish.

Well...no kidding nobody would have a problem with it, because there are hundreds of garbage trucks on the highway to Michigan. Just as Miller did say that he would consider imposing road tolls. These are true statements. The difference is, there are not jets at the island airport now, and the other candidates have publicly said that there will not be jets there in the future.

Disagreeing on issues and advertising what you're for isn't wrong.

Miller wasn't saying what he was for, he was implying what the other candidates were for...a position which just isn't true. The bottom line is that Tory is getting pilloried for simply repeating something that Miller did say, but when Miller runs an ad implying that the other candidates are lying, nobody bats an eyelash.

Also, candidates make personal attacks all the time...if you think it's a particularly childish personal attack then fine (I tend to see it as more humourous than otherwise), but candidates make statements about other candidates' positions on various issues constantly...as you said, what else is the point of a campaign? All of the candidates publicly criticized Miller's toll plan, but when Tory made a website out of it, suddenly it's some sort of underhanded personal attack? It's not like he tried to hide the fact that the website came from his camp...it says right at the bottom 'This site authorized by the John Tory For Mayor Campaign'.

I can accept that you think it's a childish website. That's a matter of personal opinion, and you're entitled to your opinion. But for people to say that it's sleazy or shows a lack of ethics is ridiculous.
 

Back
Top