News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

TheTigerMaster said:
This Keesmatt situation has really pissed me off.

Public servants are free to do and say what they want. They aren't lap dogs for the mayor. If Tory has a problem with Keesmatt not agreeing with her, then he can ask Council to fire her.
Click to expand...

Senior city employees have far more latitude than their provincial or federal counterparts, but it is still very poor form to directly contradict an elected official. She is treading on very thin ice here; you do not want to be seen as a loose cannon.

Contrast her with Andy Byford - he will provide his opinion when asked, but is always very careful not to contradict official policy and generally sticks to the facts.
 
DarnDirtyApe said:
Senior city employees have far more latitude than their provincial or federal counterparts, but it is still very poor form to directly contradict an elected official. She is treading on very thin ice here; you do not want to be seen as a loose cannon.

Contrast her with Andy Byford - he will provide his opinion when asked, but is always very careful not to contradict official policy and generally sticks to the facts.
Click to expand...
i expect the difference comes from future employability.

Byford will likely always be working in the public sector, where it might make it more difficult to get a job, if he ended up with a spat with management.

The chief planner would likely be making more money in private practice, and I'd think would be less willing to compromise their beliefs, with lots of other options option to them.
 
There isn't official policy on this issue yet. There are two options, and council is clearly undecided and divided. If the head of planning can't express an opinion or otherwise speak to this issue without deferring to the office a person who has one vote on the issue, then I guess it's Stephen Harper's Toronto now.
 
Why should she voice her concerns in private? It's not John Tory paying her, it's the people of Toronto. If a bureaucrat has concerns, I want to hear them.

Furthermore, John Tory isn't her boss, council is. This idea that the bureaucrats can't voice concerns unless they agree with the mayor is a little ridiculous, since it Council that calls the shots.

Now if Council doesn't want bureaucrats expressing opinions, that's fine. Just have Council pass a motion to do that.
 
Last edited:
Rainforest said:
No he did not.

The authors of that paper are biased against Tory (I will give more details below). However, your statement is much more biased than the original paper.

The authors counted 22 statements in Tory's speech that they consider "straight-up falsehoods", marked red; and 14 statements that "may be disingenuous or questionable", marked yellow. The latter 14 are certainly not "lies".

My own analysis of the 22 statements in red:

- 8 are, indeed, falsehoods, and are relevant for the current debate

- 2 are falsehoods but apply to historical events and have little relevance for the current debate; most likely, they are not "lies" but rather results of ignorance

- 12 statements are debatable to various degrees, but not necessarily wrong

I will not give full list here, just one example: the authors counted a "lie" when Tory "cherry-picks one statistic from a U of T report commissioned by pro-hybrid lobbyists". IMO, it is a highly questionable practice to dismiss scientists by calling them "lobbyists"; that way one can dismiss any scientific results. And in any case, Tory cannot know who is a lobbyist and who is not. It is not surprising that he has some trust in U of T researchers.

Bottom line, you can't fight misinformation with much greater misinformation on your own.
Click to expand...
These men/women are professional journalists. You're an anonymous internet poster. John Tory wants the hybrid option which is fine. But he's stretching the truth to achieve his objective, at beast. All John Tory cares about is being reelected. End of Story.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
These men/women are professional journalists. You're an anonymous internet poster. John Tory wants the hybrid option which is fine. But he's stretching the truth to achieve his objective, at beast. All politicians care about is being reelected. End of Story.
Click to expand...

I fixed that for you. Every politician is the same regardless of political stripe. Once they're in office, the only goal is to stay in office.
 
arcum said:
Nick Kouvalis puts Jen Keesmatt in her place: https://imgur.com/a/JNQWx
Click to expand...
Kouvalis - that man is such an idiot.

And in this case, seems to have missed the point that council hasn't made a decision ... so how can she follow it? He talk's about respecting council, and democratic process, and the city manager. But staff have not taken a position, nor have council.

Surely she's simply doing her job by expressing her professional opinion. No one who believes in democratic process should want anything else.
 
Christ, first Cho, then Karygiannis and now Mammo are asking staff about tunneling. These morons shouldn't be allowed to cast a ballot let alone be elected officials.
 
Last edited:
arcum said:
Nick Kouvalis puts Jen Keesmatt in her place: https://imgur.com/a/JNQWx
Click to expand...
Wow that is just shockingly rude and unprofessional on his part. The role of city staff is to make a recommendation based on their professional judgment. Then it's up to council and the mayor to weight that input along with political concerns. It seems Tory is making quite the effort to keep her from loudly expressing her judgment.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
These men/women are professional journalists. You're an anonymous internet poster. John Tory wants the hybrid option which is fine. But he's stretching the truth to achieve his objective, at beast. All John Tory cares about is being reelected. End of Story.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call web bloggers professional journalists. The article nitpicking Tory's speech is particularly snarky.

Here's another article from a "professional" with a counter viewpoint that picks apart the the misleading 5,200 commuter number: http://www.torontolife.com/informer/columns/2015/06/09/gardiner-evidence-philip-preville/
 
Napoleon said:
The role of city staff is to make a recommendation based on their professional judgment. Then it's up to council and the mayor to weight that input along with political concerns. It seems Tory is making quite the effort to keep her from loudly expressing her judgment.
Click to expand...

She shouldn't be expressing it publicly. She should be expressing it to the mayor or whoever she serves. Then it's up to ELECTED politicians to decide.

Unless city politics is vastly different model/code of conduct than provincial and federal politics.

My father was a senior policy advisor to the attorney general. He would never have voiced his personal opinion on what the AG should or shouldn't do regarding his policy recommendations to him. You keep that between you and the minister, not the general public.

Can you imagine if bureaucrats were constantly going to the press openly disagreeing with the ministers they reported too? It would be a circus.

Very unprofessional.
 
Good to see Ainsle take the side of boulevard.

Hopefully Campbell, de Baeremaeker, Fillion and Perruzza follow suit.

Ford voting for 'status quo' is a good thing at the moment as well.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top