News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure what's wrong with a huge Ferris Wheel. Apparently the smaller one in London is the most popular paid tourist attraction in London, with over 3.5 million people a year riding it.

There's a lot of things wrong with Ford's plans. But something like this, that takes up virtually no space, doesn't seem like something in itself to complain about.

Who's paying for the Ferris Wheel? Who's paying for the stadium? What government-guaranteed loans will be taken out? The Ferris Wheel, like the monorail and everything else about this brain fart, is virtual lipstick on a 'sale of land' sow. If the Fords all of a sudden start talking about RFPs, approving a land use change by council, then maybe I believe this is not just a pastie with a tassel.
 
Some more evidence that privatization of government services isn't all it's cracked up to be, from Government Pays More in Contracts, Study Finds (via NY Times):

The study found that in 33 of 35 occupations, the government actually paid billions of dollars more to hire contractors than it would have cost government employees to perform comparable services. On average, the study found that contractors charged the federal government more than twice the amount it pays federal workers.

and

The Heritage Foundation, a conservative research group in Washington, released a report last year that found that federal employees earn 22 percent more in hourly wages than the private sector. The Heritage study also found that if federal employee compensation were adjusted to match that of their private sector counterparts, federal spending would be reduced by $47 billion in 2011 alone.

But POGO said its study did not just compare the salaries of the two sectors; instead it focused on what the government actually pays contractors to perform services versus how much it would cost to have that work done by in-house staff members.

“That’s a big difference,” said Scott Amey, POGO’s general counsel. “We compared the full compensation paid to federal government and private sector employees to the billable rates in federal service contracts. Across the board you see that it cost government more to pay for contractors.”

Is anybody surprised by this? It's always claimed the private sector can get things done cheaper but that never turns out to be the case. Yet some people still buy into this right wing BS.
 
Who's paying for the Ferris Wheel? Who's paying for the stadium? What government-guaranteed loans will be taken out? The Ferris Wheel, like the monorail and everything else about this brain fart, is virtual lipstick on a 'sale of land' sow. If the Fords all of a sudden start talking about RFPs, approving a land use change by council, then maybe I believe this is not just a pastie with a tassel.

And if the city is in such a financial crisis, why are we planning to build a subway few people will use and there is no demand for? It makes no sense at all. Shouldn't our resources and our energy be put towards transit projects that are already in great demand? (like a downtown relief line) The Sheppard subway is a Ford pet project that will help nobody but a few local land owners.
 
http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/0...r-toronto-still-on-the-hook-for-transit-city/

Peter Kuitenbrouwer: Toronto still on the hook for Transit City

Mayor Rob Ford says he is pinching pennies, but he has failed to mention a whopping bill that the Province of Ontario is still preparing to send to the City of Toronto, related to Mr. Ford’s cancellation last fall of Mayor David Miller’s Transit City program.

On Monday I reminded readers that, in cancelling the Sheppard East LRT, Mr. Ford had left $333-million in federal money on the table. In addition, the Post has confirmed, the City of Toronto also still must repay the province the “sunk costs,” at minimum $49-million, that the province had already spent on light rail lines later scrapped by Mr. Ford.

Here is an emailed response from Metrolinx spokeswoman Vanessa Thomas to questions about these sunk costs.

Q Has Metrolinx sent the City a bill yet for the sunk costs associated with the cancellation of Transit City?
A “At this time, an invoice for the sunk costs related to changes to the original 5 in 10 plan, also known as Transit City, has not been submitted to the City of Toronto. As part of the Memorandum of Agreement between the City and Metrolinx, the City will be absorbing the costs related to changing the original 5 in 10 plan, which included the four LRT lines in Toronto.

“Currently, we are still reviewing the costs with the TTC and our suppliers. It is important for us to be as accurate as possible and it will take some time to determine the exact impacts of the changes to the transit plan.

“As of April 2011, we estimated the sunk costs would be at least $49 million, which is mainly for work associated with the environmental assessments and design/engineering and project management associated with the Finch and Sheppard LRTs.”
 
Some more evidence that privatization of government services isn't all it's cracked up to be, from Government Pays More in Contracts, Study Finds (via NY Times):

The study found that in 33 of 35 occupations, the government actually paid billions of dollars more to hire contractors than it would have cost government employees to perform comparable services. On average, the study found that contractors charged the federal government more than twice the amount it pays federal workers.

and

The Heritage Foundation, a conservative research group in Washington, released a report last year that found that federal employees earn 22 percent more in hourly wages than the private sector. The Heritage study also found that if federal employee compensation were adjusted to match that of their private sector counterparts, federal spending would be reduced by $47 billion in 2011 alone.

But POGO said its study did not just compare the salaries of the two sectors; instead it focused on what the government actually pays contractors to perform services versus how much it would cost to have that work done by in-house staff members.

“That’s a big difference,” said Scott Amey, POGO’s general counsel. “We compared the full compensation paid to federal government and private sector employees to the billable rates in federal service contracts. Across the board you see that it cost government more to pay for contractors.”

I'm glad someone has been studying this. Anecdotally, being in planning that's been my experience as well. Costs a hell of a lot more in time, money, grief to get a consultant than simply to hire someone to be in-house with the same competence and start them at the bottom of the wage scale for their position. And if a consultant doesn't deliver on the product (which a worrying number seem to do) you wind up having to pay them more to deliver again because there's only so many to go around. And on that point, another challenge with getting external consultants is that there are only so many of them to go around when they're in demand, quotes can skyrocket. I digress. Back to the point, if your internal person doesn't deliver, well, you can sanction them, and I suppose train them up to the standard, or let them go and find someone else. There's generally very little room to advance in the public sector, so the costs are pretty fixed outside of wage settlements which are fairly predictable, unless I suppose, you are in the police services . . ..
 
Last edited:
Not sure what's wrong with a huge Ferris Wheel. Apparently the smaller one in London is the most popular paid tourist attraction in London, with over 3.5 million people a year riding it.

There's a lot of things wrong with Ford's plans. But something like this, that takes up virtually no space, doesn't seem like something in itself to complain about.

Would you honestly want to be reminded of the Fords every time you look at the waterfront and see the ferris wheel? Yuck.
 
So, this is news?

From today's Star (front page)

I've been waiting for something like this, and here it is. Of course, the news release involves a poll, but who needed a poll. If you sit in any restaurant downtown these days you'll hear the dissent.

And it's going to get even tougher for Ford. He may be in an impossible position in about one more year. Heck, if I were Rob Ford I'd invent a personal crisis and quit now. Ford is quite capable at inventing crises.


http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1053210--ford-support-plummeting-poll-suggests?bn=1


Ford support plummeting, poll suggests

Mayor Rob Ford’s handling of the 2012 budget has badly shaken Torontonians’ faith in him, according to a new opinion poll that finds his popular support dropping like a rock across the city.

The Forum Research survey of 1,046 Torontonians conducted Monday after the release of city manager Joe Pennachetti’s recommended budget cuts, pegs Ford’s support at 42 per cent — a big drop from 57 per cent on June 1, and 60 per cent in late February.

Lorne Bozinoff, the Forum president independently tracking Ford’s support each quarter, said the mayor’s “very low” numbers are only likely to sink.

“This drop in support has come without any cutbacks actually coming into effect, we’re only at the idea stage,” Bozinoff said. “This is a ceiling — I think it’s going to get a lot worse for him before it gets better.

“He campaigned on a gravy train, none was found and the reality of cuts to services that residents rely on, often daily, is setting in. That has shaken public confidence in his ability to handle the job of mayor.”

The poll also found no public appetite for the major KPMG-suggested cuts Pennachetti is forwarding to the executive committee Monday as part of Ford’s solution to fix Toronto’s finances.

“It’s one thing to say, ‘look at this, look at that,’” Bozinoff said. “Now, when people see cuts in black and white, all of these things are extremely unpopular.

“It’s also the process, I think — the mayor’s people haven’t been very good at building public support. It’s all, ‘My way or the highway.’”

Ford dismissed Pennachetti’s suggested cuts as “just scraping the surface.”

Half of Etobicoke-York respondents approve of “the job Ford is doing,” down from 58 per cent in June. In Scarborough, his support is 49 per cent (down from 59 per cent); 43 per cent in North York (down from 69 per cent) and only 30 per cent in Toronto-East York (down from 44).

Ford took office Dec. 1 on a wave of popularity fuelled by his “Stop the gravy train” mantra. By comparison, former mayor David Miller enjoyed an 82 per cent approval rating in May 2004, six months into his first term.

Ford remains more popular with older Torontonians than young, while his disproportionately weak appeal for women is eroding further, the poll suggests.

But the budget isn’t Ford’s only problem. Since the last poll, Bozinoff said, Ford and his brother Doug have “squandered a lot of political capital” with controversies over refusing to attend Pride celebrations, a public feud with author Margaret Atwood over the fate of libraries, and the like.

The automated telephone poll’s margin of error is plus or minus 3 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

Here are respondents’ reactions to proposed budget cuts “in order to have a smaller increase in property taxes next year”:

• Some 84 per cent disapprove of cutting late-night TTC buses, ranging from 79 per cent in Scarborough to 88 per cent in the city’s core. “And that’s before the news broke Tuesday morning of major proposed transit cuts,” Bozinoff said.

• “Reducing the number of child care spaces” was opposed by 76 per cent. Pennachetti is recommending 2,000 subsidized spaces expire next year unless the province agrees to fund them.

• 73 per cent disapproved of closing or selling Toronto Zoo. Pennachetti suggests gauging interest for the “sale, lease, operation or other arrangement.”

• There is less opposition — 66 per cent — to selling or closing Riverdale Farm and/or the zoos at High Park and Centre Island.

• 70 per cent oppose reducing public library services and hours. Disapproval is highest in Toronto-East York (76 per cent) and lowest in Etobicoke-York (64 per cent). Some 79 per cent oppose closing branches.

• Selling some of the city’s 10 long-term care homes was opposed by 68 per cent. Pennachetti said that option requires further study.

• A halt to clearing snow left by plows across driveways got a thumb’s-down from 61 per cent. Opposition ranged from 50 per cent in the core — where residents don’t get the service — to 71 per cent in North York.

• 77 per cent disapprove of eliminating or reducing dental care to the poor.

• Some 61 per cent oppose selling the city’s three performing arts theatres — the St. Lawrence Centre, the Sony Centre, and the Toronto Centre for the Performing Arts. Pennachetti recommended soliciting interest in their “sale, lease, operation or other arrangement.”

• Selling “green P” and TTC parking lots was also rejected by 61 per cent. Pennachetti calls for a review of the sale or lease of the facilities.
 
And, as the article points out, these poll numbers are prior to any actual service cuts. He's become unpopular by merely suggesting these cuts -- if he actually implements them, who knows how low his polling numbers could go.

Gee, it turns out that governance is hard, after all. Who knew?
 
I wonder who paid for the Poll, usually this information is part of the report?
If it was the Star, to whom Ford won't speak, the results may less news than temper.
 
I wonder who paid for the Poll, usually this information is part of the report?
If it was the Star, to whom Ford won't speak, the results may less news than temper.

According to the article, Forum Research President Lone Bozinoff is 'independently tracking Ford's support each quarter.' The Star, and other papers, tend to be scrupulous about revealing if they paid for a poll.
 
I wonder who paid for the Poll, usually this information is part of the report?
If it was the Star, to whom Ford won't speak, the results may less news than temper.
The poll should results shouldn't change based on the paper that requested or paid for it, but the questions asked certainly would, as would other details such as whether it was a random poll by phone, on the street, online, etc.. as this can also sway the results or if nothing else, give the end user more context with which to absorb the results presented. Any media outlet should post the entire set of questions and results, rather than picking and choosing what they present to their readers or viewers, since any particular outlet may have a slant or narrative they're pushing.

For the sake of comparison, here is another poll from July regarding support, with comparison to earlier results.
http://www.stratcom.ca/assets/TorontoMayorApprovalRatingSince2010Election.pdf

There is still more support 'for' among decided respondents, but it is trending the other way.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top