News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
That is so "anti Ford" of you. I think we know that the political power is with Council. But in terms of "moral" mandate, it is a different story. Not only did the 47% support Ford, but 36% supported Smitherman - and both campaigned for a subway to Scarborough (albeit sdifferent ones). This means that over 80% of the electorate on the city wide issue of transit did not support the current Transit City Plan. By not finding a way to compromise in any way with the majority of voters, it has simply galvanized the public to NOT want to provide any additional funding for transit and it risks the projects being cancelled again at the next oportunity.

There is no "moral" mandate. These Councilors ran on a platform, got elected and executed it. The sole mandate lies with Council and the councillors were simply doing their jobs as spelled out in the law.

I really hope that next election cycle that the media genuinely reports on how our democracy works. Ideally, "The 2014 Mayoral Election" should be renamed "The 2014 Council Election", with most of the focus being on Council candidates. After all, the mayor has only a few powers more than a regular Council member. The mayors race should be nothing more than a sideshow.
 
We seem to require immigrants to jump through hoops to learn about Canadian values and Canadian democracy - and yet we can't even get our own citizens to understand the rudiments of their own political system. The double standard is appalling.

AoD
 
And re the whole myth that unless we deamalgamate, we'll be doomed to regressive buffoon mayors into infinity because suburbanites are too pathological to know better--let me offer this as a different kind of anti-establishment political figurehead who'd have resonated w/a lot of that horrible horrible suburban Ford demo...

mpp_kormos1.jpg


Yeah, Kormos had that kind of "reach". He had that kind of "common touch"--no namby-pamby Laurentian-elite champagne-socialist, he. But unlike Ford, he was smart. And somebody like he would have cleaned Ford's megacity clock, but good.

Food for thought.
 
We seem to require immigrants to jump through hoops to learn about Canadian values and Canadian democracy - and yet we can't even get our own citizens to understand the rudiments of their own political system. The double standard is appalling.

AoD

Perhaps we should require all citizens to pass a Civics test before voting? :)
 
And re the whole myth that unless we deamalgamate, we'll be doomed to regressive buffoon mayors into infinity...

No, no, we'll eventually get bright progressive people - but they won't be able to serve the city as well as they could if they focused on a more coherent geographical area.
 
Why do you believe the pre-amalgamation borders are ideal for governance? What makes the old City of Toronto sufficiently coherent? Something tells me the people of Parkdale and the people of Rosedale are not exactly politically aligned....
 
What makes the old City of Toronto sufficiently coherent? Something tells me the people of Parkdale and the people of Rosedale are not exactly politically aligned....

And yet the boundaries of the old City of Toronto coincide almost exactly with the area that supported Smitherman rather than Ford (map). So there does seem to be some kind of coherence.
 
Well of course - coherence is generally a function of size (the smaller the region the more coherent). What I'm saying is there is nothing magical or unique about the pre-amalgamation boundaries.

Also, it's not particularly instructive to only look at one election - in the history of the megacity no other election results were nearly as tightly coupled to old municipal boundaries.

Now, if you were to say that anyone who voted for Rob Ford should be automatically disqualified from ever voting again in Toronto, I might not disagree with you! :)
 
Well of course - coherence is generally a function of size (the smaller the region the more coherent). What I'm saying is there is nothing magical or unique about the pre-amalgamation boundaries.

Also, it's not particularly instructive to only look at one election - in the history of the megacity no other election results were nearly as tightly coupled to old municipal boundaries.

Now, if you were to say that anyone who voted for Rob Ford should be automatically disqualified from ever voting again in Toronto, I might not disagree with you! :)

The old City of Toronto is inherently different than its suburbs in that it was all built before we neglected people and designed our cities for cars instead.

This means we have 2 major geographical areas in Toronto, with radically different lifestyles and needs. I believe that if Etobicoke, North York, etc. were by themselves they would be much more likely to elect progressive leaders that work for them, too. As of now many of them feel that municipal progressive politicians are downtown creatures first and foremost.

Look at the 1997 election:

800px-1997_election_resutls.png


Or the 2003 election:

800px-2003Millervotebypoll_small.png


Or the 2006 election:

800px-2006voteby_poll-small.png


It's so silly because it limits us so much in our political choice. Imagine a competent urban conservative candidate ala Bloomberg. Or a progressive suburban candidate committed to first and foremost create retail under post-war residential towers, etc. These important influences are currently shut out because we have to compete for resources with the other half of the city first and foremost.

Everyone who comes to Toronto from abroad can sense that something is broken in this city just by taking a stroll around. It's obvious looking at our transit, public realm, lack of cycling infrastructure, lack of trees, etc.
 
Last edited:
Toronto Star: Mayor Rob Ford says he will try to kill City Hall bike station with showers

“I’m going to try to kill it at council, but that’s a complete waste of taxpayers’ money,” Mayor Rob Ford told the media Tuesday, when asked about the station during an announcement about summer road construction.

The $1.2 million bike station was approved by the government management committee Monday and will go to council for approval next month. The plan includes four showers.

When constructed, the station would be one of the biggest in North America, with room to secure 380 bikes. Chicago’s Millennium Park bike station – called the McDonald’s Cycle Center — has 300 indoor secure spaces and was the biggest in the country when it opened in 2006.

In Europe, bike stations have an even greater capacity. The Amsterdam train station has two bike stations with room for 5,000 bikes each, says Dan Egan, Toronto's cycling infrastructure manager.

Councillor Doug Ford issued similar comments against the project Monday.

The station will be in the Toronto Parking Authority garage below City Hall, which will lose 24 spaces to accommodate it. At capacity, the spaces would generate $70,000 annually in parking revenue.

“We’re taking away parking space down here at City Hall that is creating $70,000 worth of revenue, and — ready for this, folks? — they’re putting in showers for the bike riders to come down here, to a tune of $1.2 million,” Doug Ford said Monday. “That’s the gravy train. That is reckless spending — to put showers here at City Hall at $1.2 million. It’s disgusting.”
 
The old City of Toronto is inherently different than its suburbs in that it was all built before we neglected people and designed our cities for cars instead.

Regardless of when different parts of the city were built, most cities of sufficient size have a dense, pedestrian oriented core and a more car-oriented outer region. Toronto is not unique in this aspect.


Imagine a competent urban conservative candidate ala Bloomberg. Or a progressive suburban candidate committed to first and foremost create retail under post-war residential towers, etc.

Some would say Tory fit this mold and he certainly had a serious chance to win the election. Some would say that we will see someone like this in the next election to counter Rob Ford. I don't believe this kind of candidate has no chance to win in Toronto.
 
Regardless of when different parts of the city were built, most cities of sufficient size have a dense, pedestrian oriented core and a more car-oriented outer region. Toronto is not unique in this aspect.

... and in most cities that work that pedestrian oriented core is a separate municipality(ies) than its more car-oriented outer region(s).

Some would say Tory fit this mold and he certainly had a serious chance to win the election. Some would say that we will see someone like this in the next election to counter Rob Ford. I don't believe this kind of candidate has no chance to win in Toronto.

The same John Tory who called for licensing cyclists? Right...

You said that "in the history of the megacity no other election results were nearly as tightly coupled to old municipal boundaries". The maps I posted show that in 4 out of 5 elections, voting patterns are not a matter of left vs right or of policy a vs policy b, but rather a matter of geographic priorities. This is an unacceptable system that doesn't provide Toronto or its suburbs with adequate democracy and effective government.

Let's not forget that people voted against amalgamation in the first place.

The fact is that 10% of people in downtown Toronto commute primarily by bicycle, and we have a mayor who opposes cycling infrastructure because he is representing the interests of someone else. Miller's vehicle registration tax, meanwhile, would have likely stood the test of time had it only applied to the old city - he didn't consider suburban sensitivities then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top