One step forward

It takes courageous actions like this for officials to earn the respect of residents. Bravo to the school board for putting a hold on school closures in Jane and Finch!

Your confidence in the democratic process and in the goodwill of residents will reap great rewards for the community.

And to all the courageous residents who have stepped out of your comfort zone and stood up for what you believed in despite the challenges to your personal and professional integrity, keep up the struggle, there is still hope.

About Rosemarie Powell

Can city candidates campaign on an empty stomach?

Last week, the second part of an innovative campaign to draw attention to poverty and hunger concluded. Do the Math, an advocacy initiative of The Stop Community Food Centre (full disclosure: I’m on the board) asked 10 prominent Torontonians to live off a food bank hamper for one week.

Others have commented in the Star on the campaign and reported on the experiences of those who participated. Not surprisingly, it was an eye-opening and (literally) gut-wrenching experience for those involved.

Stemming from this campaign, I believe all city candidates should Do the Math. Although the campaign’s message is targeted primarily at provincial policymakers and officials – to draw attention to inadequate social assistance rates – there is much to be learned by city candidates by living the Do the Math experience. These are the representatives who are closest to us, their constituents. With that in mind, it’s essential for civic politicians to know fully the circumstances of how many Torontonians actually eat ... or don’t.

It would be fascinating to learn how city council candidates manage their punishing campaign schedule with so little fuel. My hope is the experience would be enlightening, making all candidates more informed advocates for Torontonians struggling to get by, and even more caring and understanding citizens in the process.

For anyone interested in Do the Math, please check out the campaign at http://www.dothemath.thestop.org/. This is an interactive website where visitors are asked to add up the monthly expenses they think necessary for a single person on social assistance. This budgetary exercise illustrates that, after housing, clothing and transportation, most people have no money left over for food and must rely on food banks and drop-in meals to survive.

About Gillian Hewitt Smith

Let's stop bickering over TTC

Here we go again.It seems some days as if we need a fight card to keep track of what's going on in politics, not just city politics. Transit is unfortunately no exception.

I have been on the record for years, as a mayoralty candidate and as Opposition Leader in Ontario that our cities, especially Toronto, need committed, sustainable, reliable, annual funding for transit from BOTH provincial and federal governments. The year to year, handout to handout, election to election way of doing it just doesn't work and in fact encourages poor planning and a lack of commitment to transit.

I have also been a consistent advocate of better management of our public finances. All governments at all levels have failed to really pursue good value for each dollar spent in a methodical business like way, and so when Dalton McGuinty's government finally takes a few baby steps to get its affairs in order I can't be completely critical. It's always easy to say they should have picked the "other file".

Indeed, had they started earlier, they probably could have picked a file other than the much promised transit money, and Mayor David Miller has reason to be upset, but the province has its problems too.

I want to see a firm and final agreement to fund the Transit City initiatives (I would be happier if there were more subways included) and I want to see it now.

If, due to changing and dire financial circumstances that involves an iron-clad commitment to ALL of the promised money over a SLIGHTLY extended time, I am reluctantly prepared to live with that. It's just the reality of the times. As they say, a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush. I want the whole bird, not part of it, but I would reluctantly take the whole bird over a slightly longer period of time if it meant we got it all and got a FIRM commitment NOW.

I happen to believe Mayor Miller is taking the wrong approach by campaigning aggressively against the province, and in a very political way at that, before he has canvassed the possibility of this slightly amended timetable which gets us the same money and projects in the end.

I believe this approach will antagonize the province not win them over. It won't change their decision in my view and could even jeopardize the money we think we have.

I am also informed that Mayor Miller and his followers have adopted an "I'm not speaking to you" posture on this file when it comes to anyone associated with the provincial government so when people reach out to him and the municipal transit experts to see if we can find some middle ground, get some money flowing and get some transit built, our Mayor won't even take their calls. That will accomplish a lot.

I don't really care much if Mayor Miller makes announcements on the subway public address. I find any announcement other than explanations for train delays intrusive, but i don't get wound up about whether it is illegal or immoral.

I would rather he was announcing that he was going to declare a ceasefire in this war of words for, say, two weeks and ask for a meeting with Premier McGuinty to hammer something out. It is a meeting which the Premier should agree to immediately.

Then we should see that most novel of all scenes: two elected leaders actually sitting at a table together, determined to work something out for the good of the people they serve. And there is NO excuse for them leaving that table without a deal.

Former Bank of Canada Governor David Dodge recently referred to the need for some "adult conversations" in our country on the many big issues our leaders would prefer to ignore. He was so right.

Transit for Toronto is one of those issues. It's time for an adult conversation between the Mayor and the Premier but the Mayor will have to postpone hostilities for that to happen.

If it happens and produces nothing (a result for which both will have to share blame) then he can get those announcements on the subway platform fired up again. In the meantime, even the peace and quiet during the ceasefire would be welcome.

About John Tory

Talk is cheap - why should we trust the TTC?

I watched the second round of town hall meetings held by the Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113. I came away unimpressed with the meeting. 

My hope was that these meetings would create a constructive dialogue. It did not materialize. 

A number of issues came up during the meeting (transit funding, economy, general transit issues) but they all seem to centre around one very telling and important issue: the union, apparently, isn’t to blame for anything. This is very troubling for a system looking to improve its image.

At one point Bob Kinnear seemed to suggest that 905ers are to blame for parking lot fees even though they contribute to the system by purchasing Metropasses and paying parking lot fees to use the system. 

While I commend the union for scheduling these town hall meetings, as the famous quote goes, “talk is cheap”. If the TTC really cares, they need to show us.

Here are some suggestions I would recommend to help smooth over relations with the union, management, and the public:

Stop focusing on this miracle that somehow, some way, the provincial and federal governments will bring sustainable funding back to the system. I know the TTC is the only system in the world that does not receive any sustainable funding from other levels of government. This is a shame, it really is, but it’s time the TTC and the City look at generating money for transit on its own. 

This can be done by leasing air rights over the lucrative land most stations sit on. These spaces could be used to create condos and other development that would generate cash for the system. Perhaps it may even generate enough money to help save the Transit City expansion? 

Here’s an idea to save money, the TTC has been slow to place TVs in all stations with crucial system updates and information. This is an opportunity for a company such as Samsung or Sony to furnish each and every station by donating HDTVs in exchange for  exclusive advertising opportunities in between messages. Up-to-date information goes a long way to establish credibility that the system is currently lacking.

Kinnear acknowledged in the meeting that transit funding is tough to achieve with governments experiencing tough times with regards to budgets and the economy. The union should give back by giving up a few perks that have been negotiated while also taking a pay cut. Being paid a fair wage, in the case of the TTC union, is a foreign concept now because everyone is paid so well.

Also, the clause that allows for automatic raises based on what other transit authorities pay their workers should be eliminated. To tackle the important issues, the perception of greed needs to disappear before residents will start taking the union seriously.

The TTC is screaming for change. Perceptions need to be repaired. The word “public” in public transit seems to be a concept both sides don’t understand. It’s our system, not the union’s or management’s. Actions speak louder than words. The time for talk has come to an end and the time for action has arrived. It’s your move TTC.

About Robert Kirsic

It’s all about respect for human dignity

Joey Edwardh.

Blogging does not come naturally to me, so it has not been easy to start on this journey.

My thoughts and comments come from the periphery of our urban region. I live and work in Halton, that geography squeezed between Peel and Hamilton. It is an interesting vantage point from which to observe our urban region.

My lens does not allow me to celebrate our region, for its magic does not work for everyone; too many are left outside its opportunities, excluded. Disability, poverty, gender, old age, racism and homophobia interact to create a city region where many live their lives in quiet desperation. I ask why we condemn so many of our neighbours to live in hardship, excluded? I ask what is necessary to make this city region a place where all belong and prosper?

I conclude that the answer lies in our understanding of and respect for human dignity. Strong public services are essential building blocks of human dignity and we must be vigilant in supporting and sustaining these services.

One institution that is failing us is our social assistance system that denies dignity to those we purport to help. In fact, the system is punitive. Not only are people expected to live far below, that is thousands of dollars below, our low income cut off (poverty line) but in the recent provincial budget we eliminated the special diet allowance for those requiring nutritious food due to disease such as diabetes.

To be mean spirited is one thing; to be uninformed and not recognize the cost downloaded to the health care system in future years is ignorant. Whether mean spirited or ignorant, both destroy lives.

There is no short cut if human dignity is to be respected. The greater we allow the gap to grow between the "haves" and the "have nots," the greater the divisions across our city region.

The poor are growing and so are the rich but they live in different neighbourhoods and social worlds. Their lived experiences are totally separate, making it difficult to understanding each other.

I fear these divisions mean that there is little respect and solidarity on which to build a common political, economic, social and cultural agenda for a city region where all belong, where all are respected.

This is my challenge to those who would seek to represent us in the next municipal elections.

About Joey Edwardh

Note to boomers: The future belong to us

Today’s post is not directly related to Toronto, but can have some serious implications for this city. I joined fellow bloggers, Pat Capponi and Rev. Jim Parker to learn about a province wide movement so compelling that the former president of Ireland and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, decided to participate in the discussion. (Aside: Toronto, who would come to our table if we called them?)

The discussion began as many do, chronologically. However, I wasn’t interested in that. I wanted to hear ideas.

While there were a few good ones, there was one really bad idea that even now I still can’t shake out of my head; no caps on tuition fees. As in, no limits on how much a university or college would charge a student to be ordained by the ivory tower. As in debt for 40+ years. As in your child will live in your basement until the ripe old age of 50.

Who would propose such a ludicrous idea? Apparently it was Roger Martin, dean of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto.

When I first heard it, I wrote it down to ensure that I heard it correctly. Then I read it to myself. Then I read it again. And again. As everyone else continued to speak in what suddenly sounded like muffled sounds, I wrote to myself in my notebook, “Did Roger Martin really say that there should be no cap on tuition?”

As a student of both U of T and Ryerson, I couldn't help but feel a fiery mix of anger and confusion welling up inside of me. Why do our city’s decision makers and key influencers continue to throw stones at the millennial glass house? Have any of these old people ever been stoned (and by stoned I mean hit by rocks)? Do they not realize that they are setting up a younger generation to collapse under the pressure of the bad decisions of the past?

Like many other questionable ideas I’ve heard before, Mr. Martin, a Baby Boomer, seems to live in alternative reality. So I’ve taken it upon myself to write a letter to Baby Boomers to shed some light on what its like to be a millennial today:

Dear Baby Boomers,

This is just a short note to say that you are not the life of the party -- we are. Your future relies on how well we do in the present. To that end, this letter is a request to stop making silly sweeping judgments and rash decisions about our future without truly thinking about the future implications on our precious lives.

When we entered this world, we had no choice but to trust you. We believed that with time, you would mentor us to become the leaders that we thought you were. That is until you decided to squash any chance of us enjoying the fruits of our collective labour.

Speaking of labour, thank you for everything that you’ve done with the labour movement. You’ve managed to create stable jobs with benefits in a number of sectors to benefit yourselves and us. When you retire at, oh wait, no cap on retirement. Well, at least we can rely on one-year contracts.

I guess there is no time like the present.

Thanks for creating world-class institutions. While economies across the world wallow in their own recession-induced self-pity Canada has become a model for excellence in avoiding financial meltdown. In fact, many of you are at the helm of leadership in organizations that are shaping the way my friends and I live. And by live I meant, at the mercy of OSAP.

But at least mortgage rates are under control, right?

Don’t get us wrong, you have done a tremendous amount for our generation. But at what cost? In 2020, our world will look different as many of you hit retirement age. I can’t help but imagine you in the getaway car, while we hold the baggage of the last 20-30 years; a deteriorated social safety net, “free market” universities with tuition equivalent to the cost of a house in Rosedale, and education and training that is irrelevant for a changing economy. A heavy load indeed.

These ideas are not unfounded. In fact, some of your peers are addressing similar issues and others. In fact 250 of them (and a few millennials) got together last month to address these very issues. If someone had told me in February that a group of leaders from the financial sector, labour movement, academia, government and the community sector were getting together for a generative conversation about the future of our state (and the state of our future), I would have keeled over laughing in anxious denial.

However today, sitting in front of Frances Lankin, CEO of United Way, Warren “Smokey” Thomas, president of OPSEU, Mitzie Hunter, CAO of the Toronto Community Housing Corporation and Len Crispino, CEO of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce I learned about the 2020 Steering Committee and saw with my very own eyes that Boomers do care.

As the story goes, a group of usual and unusual suspects came together to discuss what Ontario would be like in 2020. Radical ideas from the left and the right were put up for discussion, and apparently everyone lived to tell the tale. Actually, many agreed to meet again for another conversation. Whowouldathunkit?

So Baby Boomer, with your wealth and your privileged experience, it’s not too late for you. You had your time in the '60s and '70s. While you are no longer the life of the party, you can still be an amazing party planner. Embrace that. But what good is a party if you keep throwing stones at our glass houses?

Sincerely,

A Mellennial

Am I being dramatic? Maybe. But the point is that today’s political/institutional agenda continues to be driven by a Baby Boomer’s self-interest. Doing this would allow us to have difficult conversations about the state of our future, much like the folks at the 2020 conference did. Toronto prides itself so much on inclusivity and diversity that it's taken for granted and consequently excluded from very important conversations about where our city is headed in the next 10 years.

If I learned anything from the recent presentation from the 2020 Steering Committee, it’s that a lot can be accomplished when we remove self-interest and start thinking about each other.

As much as we want to believe it, I'm not sure if Toronto is ready for that.

About Tonika Morgan

A lesson learned from the Bloor Street Viaduct

The thought came to me: “Back in 1913, at great cost and with great foresight, the leaders and the people of the time prepared for the future.”

It was a privilege to be part of the Toronto Star meeting with the Steering Committee of the 2020 Group. “What do we want this city, this province, to look like in the 2020?” they ask. I travel to the meeting via our much-maligned subway. I travel over the Don Valley on the Bloor Street Viaduct, built in the second decade of the 20th century.

However, the subway wasn’t built for another 50 years. Back in 1913, at great cost and with great foresight, the leaders and the people of the time prepared for the future.

The 2020 Group is a collection of labour, business, government, and community members that have started talking to each other. I personally don’t know if anything will come of the discussions, but of one thing I am sure: we need a long-term approach to leadership.

Good things happen if we courageously envision the future we want, and THEN, and only then, work to actualize it. What kind of health care do we want? Education? What’s the next wave of jobs for which we should be preparing? What initiatives for community organizations do we support?

A century after the Bloor Street Viaduct was built, our time is now to show courageous leadership. I commend the 2020 Group and wish them well. They want to hear from us about what kind of city and province we want in ten years time ... let’s help them out!

About Rev. Jim Parker

Visions? Much ado about not much

I don't often find myself in the Star boardroom, but I was there recently for an editorial board meeting with some of the members of the Steering Committee of 2020, an OPSEU-inspired undertaking bringing together business, union, education and political leaders to brainstorm on what Ontario might look like a decade from now.

This meeting was perhaps premature, as there wasn't much in the way of a substantive presentation by the group: a lot of grand talk about a conference that had taken place in early March, self-congratulatory comments on risk-taking and "forward lookingness" and "cross-sectoral pollination," you get the drift 

The notion that this is so bold a move when the differences are less evident than the similarities left me a trifle bemused.  These are all economically comfortable individuals, who closely resemble one another in social strata, income, education, and expectations.

It is encouraging to see that people can move beyond party and ideological lines when needed.The steering committee includes  powerhouse liberals such as Kathleen Wynne and Dwight Duncan as well as Francis Lankin,  who is soon to retire from the United Way. The idea of looking ahead, of having a vision of where Ontario needs to be in a decade is a worthwhile exercise.

But in order to do so, its really important to have visionaries at the table, people with proven ability to tackle the issues of today as well as define those of the future, so I find it jarring that TCHC has been included, when it can't preserve the present life of its tenants. And OPSEU as well has much work to do in the present, especially at the community level, to understand that the clients they work with must have a stronger voice and equal opportunity for employment in the services staffed by their members and funded by government and charities.

At street level -- and that doesn't mean front line agencies -- it means senior citizens being devoured by rapacious bedbugs, women lost to back alleyways and crack cocaine, children running from CAS foster homes, couples faced with empty fridges and cupboards earlier and earlier in the month.

At street level there was nothing on offer. Nothing about Ontario's reneging on its promises to adhere to the Poverty Reduction Strategy, nothing about creating opportunity for those on social assistance. Nothing about the poor except when discussing the needs of NGO's, those agencies who feel as starved for funding as those who really starve on Ontario's streets. 

We need ideas, we need examples that work, we need to show that Ontario has a vision that is inclusive and meaningful.  Smokey Thomas, the head of OPSEU, said there is a profound and pervasive sense of fear and dread out there.  I'm certain there is, because the consequence of losing your job is to become insignificant, invisible, to become a statistic, to fall off the radar, to have no one looking after your interests.

This is not 2020 vision, this is simply more of the same.

About Pat Capponi

Cutting transit can be hazardous to your health

Toronto has the third most heavily used transit system in North America after Mexico City and New York City. Yet we rank the lowest for commuting times compared to other major cities. This points to the fact that we have a long way to go in transit investment for an urban region of our size.

A delay in spending on public transit is not just a delay, it puts the entire system in jeopardy. We’ve seen this before when the Mike Harris government stopped the Eglinton line and here we are so many years later delaying it again. The budget freeze may appear to be saving us money in the short term, but it will end up costing us more later, when new transit lines will become improbable to afford and simply won’t happen.

But this delay is not only a setback for commuters, it is a setback for our economy, environment and even our public health. Ironically, as the province was announcing the cuts to transit in one breath, they were setting off alarm bells on the rising cost in public health in the other. I would suggest that there is a direct correlation between the two.

Delaying transit is like delaying a health initiative. Since transit begins and ends on foot, where there’s transit, there are people walking. Walking and transit use is the easiest way to begin to chip away at our sedentary lifestyles brought about by our car-dependent cities. In the end transit helps makes cities more socially, economically and environmentally viable and healthier places to live. Investing in transit is an investment in our public health.

About Dan Leeming

Elect the best and the rest will come

Do we want the best of the best to run our city or do we just want to make sure that we have the appropriate number of people from the appropriate diverse backgrounds in City Hall?

Recently, there was an entry into the Your City, My City blog that focused on the lack of diversity among politicians and how our population isn’t being reflected in the political class.

I think this is pure bunk, with all due respect to my fellow blog colleague, and I’ll tell you why.

The focus shouldn’t be to ensure diversity is reflected properly in the makeup of city council for the sake of diversity and political correctness.

Political correctness has become so hypersensitive that we’ve gone away from the original focus and intent to run for political office which is to elect the best, most competent, people possible to do the job of running the city in a responsible manner, regardless of background, sexual orientation, skin colour, country of birth, etc.

And, to be fair, who is to say that people of diverse backgrounds, and more women, won’t run because they think they are the best for the job, that is what we want.

More importantly, if we do not look to attract the best people to run for office, we suffer as a result. We limit the ideas and the potential of our city council and the city in general.

What I would rather see are two people fighting hard to reenergize the local population into believing that Toronto can be better than it is and inspiring us to be the best we can be.

Back in 2003 when David Miller proudly held that broom up high in his victory speech, he was able to reenergize the city in a way I had never seen. People believed things would be different. I even thought things would be different. Ideas ruled the day, not ideology. This is how politics used to be and this is how politics should be.

Lost opportunities, in my opinion, hurt our city more than bad policies. Bad policies can be fixed and amended; lost opportunities never come back.

Having said this, I believe everyone should have an equal opportunity to feel represented and to have a voice. As Canadians, and Torontonians, we earned the right to express our views through our vote, I just don’t want to see the process deliberately weakened.

I want to live in a Toronto that encourages people to express their ideas in a constructive way to build this city and make it the great city it is and can be. This is what this blog tries to do. This is what our candidates should be doing. If we elect the best, the rest will follow.

About Robert Kirsic