Tax Class

June 5, 2013

OK, kids.

Today, we’re having a lesson on a very, very sensitive subject. teacheratachalkboardEverybody’s given me their signed permission slips from their parents or legal guardians, right? Good.

Today, we’ll be talking about taxes, or taxation. Some of you may’ve heard your parents, legal guardians or older siblings refer to it as taxedtodeath.

For a long time now, probably from before any of you were born, the words ‘taxes’ or ‘taxation’ were what people called ‘dirty words’. Not like the f-word or c-bomb but words many people said through gritted teeth as if they were very, very angry having to say them.

Yes, Sagittarius?

That’s right. Sometimes your daddy might use the f-word just before saying ‘taxes’. But hopefully your mommy washes his mouth out with soap if he does.

Now.

Nobody’s ever really liked taxes or taxation. In fact, there’s been a revolution or two fought over them. washyourmouthoutjpgBut most people, most people who aren’t blinkered ideologues, see taxes and taxation as a necessary part of creating healthy and functioning communities, towns, cities, countries and world. The famous American jurist, Oliver Wendell Holmes Junior, said way back over a hundred years ago that taxes were the price we pay for a civilized society.

Baskin? You have a question?

Yes, it just might be on your midterm.

But recently, many people have started to think of taxes or taxation as a burden, an unnecessary imposition upon them, even outright thievery. Hands up everybody who’s heard their daddy say that he knows how to spend his money better than some stupid politician or bureaucrat? Oh my. That’s a lot of you. Almost everybody.

Well, next time you hear your parents, legal guardians or older siblings say that, ask them, very politely because sometimes being challenged on their negative views on taxes and taxation makes people quite defensive and angry, ask how they would, with their hard-earned money out of their pockets, pave that road outside your house that they use every day. And if you get yelled at and told to go up to your room that just means they don’t really have a good answer to your question. Don’t be mad at them. livinginacaveThey just haven’t learned or they’ve forgotten that without everybody paying taxes, most of us would be still living in dirt houses, pulling our wagons over corduroy roads.

No, Buford. Those aren’t roads made out of pants. What is Mr. Stencil teaching you in history class?

I’m sorry, Slmantha, what was your question again?

Oh. That’s a very good question. Did everyone hear that? No? Slmantha asked about government waste and respect for the taxpayer.

Yes, class. Sometimes governments waste some of the taxpayer money taxpayers pay them. That is bad. The people involved in government who do that kind of thing should be held accountable.

But that doesn’t mean the concept of taxes and taxation is bad or inherently evil, as some non-politician politicians like to say. It just means that governments that rely on taxes and taxation need to take better care of how they spend that money. And ultimately, if they don’t, we can relieve them of that responsibility and vote them out of office.

Now, for every example of waste or fiscal malfeasance that tax critics—

I beg your pardon, Puntilly?

No. Malfeasance is not an insect. It means—well, just Google it on your computer. Malfeasance. M-A-L-F-E-A-S-A-N-C-E… “Intentionally doing something either legally or morally wrong, always involving dishonesty, illegality, or knowingly exceeding authority for improper reasons.” That’s right. taxesareevilAnd for every one of those, there’s 3, 4, 10, 100 examples of government revenue from taxes or taxation doing something positive for our society.

Here’s one, for example.

In Los Angeles County in a state called California in a place called the United States of America, where they have a history of hating taxes and keeping them so low that it’s almost taken them to the brink of bankruptcy, they passed in 2008 what is called Measure R, a proposition to raise their sales tax by ½ a cent over the next 30 years, and dedicate that money to building public transit because Los Angeles realized it was horribly congested. This is what’s happened so far, five years later. Click on the link. On the word ‘this’. Back, back. Three sentences ago. Four now…

Subways! Yes. LRTs! Yes. Dedicated busways! Yes. Cleaner air! Yes. Thousands and thousands of new job! Yes. Less congestion! Yes. More walking and biking! Yes and yes.

Now class, we here in Toronto and the wider region think it might be good to follow Los Angeles’s example and build more transit. Our congestion is pretty bad and we haven’t really built enough to keep up with our growing population. So we’ve been talking about new taxes too. People who don’t mind paying taxes call them ‘revenue tools’.

But there’s some real tax-hating, grumpy Guses out there, girls and boys. You say ‘tax’. They say ‘no’. You say ‘revenue tools’. They say that’s just four syllables for taxes. You say, But we really need to build transit because we’re dying here. They say, SubwaysSubwaysSubwaysPrivateSector.emptypockets2

Now I want you to click the link on the not particularly overly tax-friendly Globe and Mail article and see what they have to say about such stubborn anti-tax attitudes.

I’m sorry, what was that? You can’t get past the paywall? You’ve gone over your monthly article limit? Just go into your control panel and clear your browsing history. That should do it. Yes? Good.

Frenzien? Would you read out the 2nd last paragraph, please? Yes, you. Spit out your gum and read that paragraph, please.

It may be that our household budgets would be better off if we paid a little more now, as opposed to waiting and letting infrastructure and urban congestion get worse. We might also take the long view and say we’re saving our kids from massive tax hikes needed to repair our cities.

You see, children. When your parents or legal guardians complain about paying any more taxes to fund the building of new transit, what they’re really saying is, Screw you, kids. upyoursYou want a liveable city when you grow up? You pay for it.

Yes, Stanton. Teacher did just say ‘screw you’. I’m sorry but I’m a little upset right now.

When your parents or legal guardians complain about taxes, they’re simply being childish and refuse to have an adult conversation. So that’s why we’re talking about this now, in a classroom. Because somebody’s got to start acting like a grown up.

Any questions?

– pedagogically submitted by Cityslikr

1 Comment | Budget, City Building, City Council, Municipal Politics, Newspapers, Press coverage, The Globe and Mail | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by cityslikr

Don’t Confuse Me With Facts

June 4, 2013

“I don’t watch The Agenda, OK?”theagenda

Said Urban Sophisticat, sitting across the desk from me, answering a question no one asked.

“It’s like it works really hard not to be watched by too many people.”

I had no opinion one way or the other about The Agenda, and still wasn’t sure why we were talking about it.

“I don’t even know what the agenda is.”

Said Acaphlegmic, sitting beside Urban Sophisticat, eating from a newspaper cup of fish and chips.

“But I will watch the odd segment when a link catches my attention on Facebook,” Urban Sophisticat continued.

Again, nobody had asked and as far as I could tell nobody cared.

“So yesterday, fishandchipsI scroll past this link, Agenda 21. I’m thinking, I don’t know, some anniversary show or something.”

“And you wanted to watch the anniversary celebrations of a show you seldom watch?”

“I mean, who doesn’t want to see Steve Paikin in one of those birthday hats, blowing out candles on a cake?”

How do you respond to that? Who indeed. Urban Sophisticat’s enthusiasm even drew Acaphlegmic’s attention from his food.

“The point is, Agenda 21 had nothing to do with The Agenda. Do you know what Agenda 21 is?” Urban Sophisticat asked me.

I didn’t. Apparently, this is Agenda 21. And here’s what it’s morphed into.

Huh.

Well there’s 10 minutes of my life I won’t be getting back. But wait, there’s more.

“Glenn Beck’s even aboard the crazy band wagon.”

“Come on! Cut it out!! Why are you showing me this shit?!”

“We’re just awash in conspiracy theories,” Urban Sophisticat tells me as if it’s some sort of news. “How can we properly govern ourselves if half the population believes in wild-eyed nuttery most of the time? One world rule. Public transit as an assault on our personal freedom. The density gulags. They’re not even trying to look sane anymore.”

Yeah, yeah, yeah. These are dark days indeed for those peering too long into the chasm of unreason, driven in part by partisan tribalism. tinfoilhatOur confirmation bias is strong and deep, grasshopper.

Acaphelgmic balled up his dinner newspaper and tossed it onto my desk and leaned back in his chair, poised to put in his two cents worth. No. It’d be worth more than that. He’d been hard at work recently on his non-fiction opus, Confession of a Former Conspiracy Theorist, after having spent much of his adult life running in those circles. ‘Undercover investigative work’, he claimed of his time wearing a tinfoil hat.

“The French New Wavers and David Lynch aside,” he began, “people need a coherent narrative. Especially in times of big change. Change is scary. Who knows what it might bring? People are much more leery of losing something than they are excited about gaining something.”

“Fine. But—“

Urban Sophisticat was stopped by Acaphlegmic’s raised hand. He wasn’t finished speaking yet.

“Any story, no matter how out there, with a clear arc of a beginning, middle and end is preferred to something filled with false starts, a lot of ifs and no certain ending. mannixWho doesn’t watch the Streets of San Francisco or Mannix and not know who the killer is by the first commercial?”

He leaned back in his chair, his views thusly expressed.

Urban Sophisticat slumped down into his chair, clearly not satisfied with the answer, and I couldn’t blame him. It’s all well and good to try and explain those inclined to believing conspiracy theories but it doesn’t really help trying to figure out how to contend them and still keep our democracy functioning. Our city right now is swirling in them. A media conspiracy. A conspiracy of social elites. A downtown conspiring to overturn the democratic will of the suburbs.

“I blame it on social media and the internet,” says Urban Sophisticat. “It’s allowed the crazies out of their cages.”conspiracy1

He’s not helping matters.

At which point, Acaphlegmic begins to laugh. A big, disturbing belly laugh. Disturbing enough that I start to worry that he’s choking on a piece of his dinner.

But no. He gains control of himself and lets us in on the joke.

“The places of worship I’ve been thrown out of, saying that organized religion is the original, daddy of `em all conspiracy theory. I can’t tell you.”

OK. So he’s going to be of no help to sorting through this political and social conundrum.

“I’m mean, think about it! Some guy, up in the sky, bepatientall knowing, all seeing, controlling every aspect of our lives. How crazy is that?”

As he flew off into another grating crescendo of laughter, we knew there’d be no more making sense of Acaphlegmic today. He came. He ate. He opined. He found himself funny.

We have to hope that over the course of time at least some of those embracing wild ideas and theories, will return to their senses. Let’s call it a temporary craziness. Maybe if we construct compelling and easy to follow narratives ourselves, it will draw enough people back into the fold so that we can start having a more rational conversation again. Get back to actual facts and figures instead of wild conjecture and empty chanting.

– sunnily submitted by Cityslikr

3 Comments | Newspapers, Philosophical Musings, Press coverage | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by cityslikr

What Was That Again, Mr. Flaherty?

June 3, 2013

I wonder if there was a moment, even the slightest of one, where the federal finance minister, throwcoldwaterJim Flaherty, regretted wading into the Metrolinx/The Big Move/revenue tools/damned taxes debate now going on throughout the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area. Last week he fired off a letter to his counterpart at Queen’s Park, Charles Sousa, informing him that any idea the province had of raising the HST at a regional level was a no-no according to HST agreement thingie the two levels of government signed to harmonize their respective sales taxes.

“As you are well aware,” Mr. Flaherty writes in his letter, “the Comprehensive Integrated Tax Co-ordination Agreement signed by the Government of Ontario does not allow for the provincial component of the HST to vary between regions of the province.”

Flaherty then issued a Fordian sounding statement to the Globe and Mail.

“As you all know, I do not believe in tax increases. Ontarians pay too much tax as it is.”whatwasthat

Well, hello Mr. Federal Finance Minister. Glad to see you showed up for this debate. Can we have a little chat about your contributions to transit in these parts?

Which, more or less, was the provincial finance minister’s response. Mr. Sousa fired a letter back to his counterpart in Ottawa, asking for a meeting. “Let’s sit down and talk about the funding,” Sousa suggests, “and what it is the federal government is going to do to support Ontario.”

Sadly, this request is not anything new. As has been pointed out, ad nauseum, our federal government has never really been that interested in matters to do with public transit. There was that slight uptick during Paul Martin’s brief stint as Prime Minister but, generally speaking, Liberals and Conservatives (both of the progressive and less so kind) in Ottawa have pretty much kept their hands clean of the file.

There is the jurisdictional matter, of course. Not wanting to step on political toes although, Flaherty’s HST intrusion doesn’t seem overly concerned with that. Historically, the feds dealt with air travel, seaports and rail. Modes of transportation than often operated across provincial borders. The rest was left up to the provinces. giveagiftRoads and public transit basically.

But… but the gas tax! What about the gas tax? Introduced by the federal Liberals, the Conservatives have now made it a permanent transfer. We’re doing our part!

Not to sniff at the gesture or anything but $13 billion in total between 2005-2014? Spread out over the entire country? And to cover a whole host of infrastructure needs, public transit being a very small portion of that?

OK, yeah. I do sniff at it. It’s a pittance. Shameful. A disgrace.

And don’t get me started on what an infinitesimal fraction it is of the money sent up the chain to Ottawa from a region the size and containing the wealth of the GTHA in order that it trickle back down in dribs and drabs in gestures of political magnanimity by our federal politicians. What’s that line from The Sopranos again? They shit on our heads and expect us to thank them for the hat.

But here’s the thing.

After a while, your arm grows tired beating the drum for a national transit strategy, some sort of positive, significant involvement in the area of public transit from the federal government. Like almost every other developed country in the world has. We get it. You don’t want to be involved. statlerandwaldorfNot Your Job.

Fine.

So just shut the fuck up then when we’re trying to get along in your absence. You can’t have it both ways. Standing on the sidelines, cracking wise and pooh-poohing efforts to deal with the situation you want no part of. We’ve got plenty of armchair quarterbacks already. In fact, Toronto elected one as mayor.

You want to express an opinion, Mr. Finance Minister? Fine. Belly up to the table and put some real skin in the game. Then we might start listening to what you have to say.

– fed-uply submitted by Cityslikr

1 Comment | City Building, Metrolinx, Municipal Politics, Newspapers, Press coverage, Provincial Politics, The Big Move, The Globe and Mail | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by cityslikr

A Message From A Fellow Disbeliefer

June 2, 2013

So, you finally got fed up enough with our mayor’s antics that you took to the streets yesterday. Made a sign and headed off to Nathan Phillips Square to demand his resignation. tumbleweedFour thousand strong according to Facebook.

Ooops.

But a fraction of that. Four hundred? Three hundred? A hundred? Seventy-five?

Right-wing supporters of the mayor mocked you via the same social media that promised you droves of people out to protest. Don’t let that discourage you. If four thousand people had turned out, those same voices would’ve brushed it off as nothing more than ‘the usual suspects’ and then given you the number of people who voted for Rob Ford in 2010, doubled it and added a couple zeros. Six hundred million. The largest mandate in the history of democracy.

There is a more essential take away lesson from this, however.mockery

As much as it pains me to say this, the importance of social media, Facebook, Twitter, blogging, remains only a small fraction of our democratic process. I’d like to think a valuable and growing component but a minor one nonetheless. Currently, it punches below its weight.

Speaking from personal experience, exclusive reliance on social media makes us lazy participants in our own democracy. It’s virtual engagement. So far, virtual engagement has won no elections.

It is about boots on the ground and getting people interested and out to vote. Not for nothing was former mayoral candidate and political something something, John Nunziata, on Twitter earlier today, taunting the efforts of those at Nathan Phillips Square. “Majority of those clammering for the Mayor’s resignation,” he opined, “didn’t even vote in the last election and are unlikely to vote in the next.”

I don’t know how exactly Mr. Nunziata knows that. apathyHe certainly didn’t back up the assertion anywhere but he is on to something. Turnout is key in any election. While 2010 was unusually high for a municipal election, it was barely over 50%. Anger has to result in action. Otherwise, it’s just anger.

Let’s assume that, barring any further damaging revelations (and that’s not a bet I would make), Mayor Ford gets through this term and runs for re-election in 2014. It will do no good for anyone not wanting to see him get another kick at the can to stand around in disbelief at the possibility, to rail against those who are still in his corner, thinking he’s the greatest mayor ever. To cross your fingers and pray to god a plurality of Torontonians come to their senses.

Yesterday at Nathan Phillips Square has to be viewed as just the beginning. Anger into action. civicengagement2The boots on the ground have to be our boots on the ground. Getting out there to convince people what’s at stake, why it’s important for them to pay attention to what’s been going on and why they have to vote. We must connect to those who didn’t take the time to get involved last time out, and those who thought the city needed someone like Rob Ford to be mayor and now aren’t so convinced that was a good idea.

Most importantly, we need to connect to them and with them, face-to-face and not just on Facebook.

– hopefully helpfully submitted by Cityslikr

7 Comments | City Building, City Council, Municipal Politics, Press coverage | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by cityslikr

Taking Care Of Business

June 1, 2013

Here was my first reaction:

City council must act with blazing fury… Actually, the first reaction was:ptahasdisbanded

City council must act with blazing furry. Funnier, but didn’t take me in the direction I wanted to go.

City council must act with blazing fury to counter the growing perception that Toronto is on political fire, gridlocked, mismanaged and manhandled. It isn’t true. People shouldn’t think it is.

The mayor’s office is clearly dysfunctional. Order has broken down. Despite their best attempts to give off the air of business as usual, with his daily press conferences – in themselves unusual for the normally media averse mayor – touting policy initiatives from 2011, there’s a manic desperation to the show. As you were. Nothing to see here, folks. Folks.

Unfortunately, the disarray is being extrapolated on to the wider council. Civic governance has broken down. The premier of the province has expressed concern and is monitoring the situation. Dark talk of dissolving council and control being taken by Queen’s Park.

nothingtoseehere

“Quite honestly,” Councillor John Parker told the Toronto Sun’s Don Peat on Friday, “as I said all along, one person in this building has a problem but that doesn’t translate to the rest of us.”

“My work goes on, the work of my colleagues goes on, the work of the city goes on and whether the mayor is part of it or not should be a matter of concern to him but frankly it is not a matter of concern to me.”

While that may be overly sanguine of Councillor Parker, the mayor’s office does possess enough procedural oomph to throw up roadblocks and drag the governance process out, the business of city running is being conducted even in the dark shadow cast by the mayoral tumult. That’s the way it is, how our system works. Everything’s fine.

But it’s doesn’t seem that way to the wider public. It’s not just the mayor who’s looking like a bumbling, country bumpkin. takincareofbusinessThe ability to govern ourselves is being held up to question.

Maybe I’m allowing myself to get caught up in the frenzy but I’d like to see the council step up with a flagrant display of authority. Go all Alexander Haig on the mayor’s ass by declaring who exactly is in control here. Make a point of very visibly pushing Mayor Ford to the sidelines. Officially state what is already the de facto situation at City Hall.

How exactly to do that?

Remove the chairs of a couple of the big committees like Budget and Public Works and Infrastructure. Re-configure the committee membership to better reflect the wider will of the council. Erase any stamp the mayor now has on them.

And next council meeting put forth a motion to remove Speaker Frances Nunziata from her position. Aside from the mayor and his brother, no one exemplifies the aggressively partisan and divisive nature of city council more than the speaker. Dumping her and elevating Deputy Speaker Parker to the position would set a much more civil, productive tone than we’ve been witness to for the past two and a half years.

It would go a long way to establishing a post-Ford era that in many ways has already happened.

Yeah anyway, turns out such machinations are much harder in reality than they are in my ever hopeful (and not a little bit spiteful) imagination.

Reading through the Toronto Municipal Code Council Procedures, it seems what little extra power the office of the mayor has is pretty ironclad. Even a super-majority of councillors (30) cannot simply undo what a mayor has done in terms of appointments. takeanaxetotheplaceThere doesn’t seem to be a mechanism to replace committee chairs or members once they are in place. (Although I am curious to know how the TTC commission putsch took place and all the Ford allies removed last year. Perhaps because it’s a commission and not a committee, and the rules are slightly different.)

The one intriguing possibility is in removing the council speaker. A two-thirds majority can vote to replace the speaker and nominate someone else but the mayor has ultimate veto power. So I envisioned this scenario where council turfs Councillor Nunziata from the speaker’s chair but Mayor Ford refuses to sign off on any replacement. This continues until council meets where, in an official speaker’s absence, the mayor would have to chair the meeting.

Oh, the possibilities. Mayor Ford stuck in the speaker’s chair for an entire meeting unless he wanted to hand over the duties to Deputy Speaker Parker. A backdoor triumph for the council rebellion.

On the other hand, such a state of affairs could simply heighten a sense of inoperable gridlock. A sager sage than I also pointed out the favourable optics for the mayor in this case. Once more under siege by those ignoring the democratic will of the people of Toronto, it would feed into the already ample persecution complex of the mayor and his supporters. farceHis outsider status further accentuated.

Better to just carry on and conduct business as usual. “…the work of the city goes on,” as Councillor Parker said, “and whether the mayor is part of it or not should be a matter of concern to him but frankly it is not a matter of concern to me.” When all is said and done, Mayor Ford is just one vote and if he fails to use what power he’s been granted to marshal a majority of council behind him, well, that’s all on him. He’ll have to explain his failure to the voters in 2014.

But might I suggest city council recognize the extraordinary circumstances it’s found itself in and go a little further than simply ‘business as usual’? Be bold in the power that it has to go beyond the mayor’s obstructionist intent. Craven votes like last month’s transit funding debacle only help feed into the growing sense that nothing productive is being done. Mayor Ford brought council down to his level on that.

It’s time for council to step up and distinguish itself from the mess that is the mayor’s office now. Lead don’t simply react. Accept the fact the mayor no longer commands the authority to lead the city (and view with suspicion any councillor pretending that he still does) and assume the leadership void.

keepcalmandstepforward

That can be done simply, one vote at a time.

– BTOly submitted by Cityslikr

2 Comments | City Building, City Council, Municipal Politics, Newspapers, Press coverage, Provincial Politics, The Toronto Sun | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by cityslikr

Designed For Power Not To Rule

May 31, 2013

As the blood continues to ooze from under the door of Mayor Ford’s office at City Hall, bloodtheshingand the already small circle gets even smaller, it’s still difficult to get your head around the notion of a post-Ford Toronto. All those trees being on fire makes it really hard to see the forest. One can hope and one can dream but visualizing it takes a lot of effort.

There’s no telling how this latest… I don’t have the necessary vocabulary to describe the state of mayoral politics in Toronto at the moment… something something … will play out. An early exit? Certainly not by his own volition, it seems. Stay the course! Everything’s fine! First name on the ballot in the next election!

Removal by ‘external forces’, let’s call them. Your guess is as good as mine. They would have to be extraordinary circumstances, even by these already extraordinary circumstances, to turf the mayor before the next scheduled election. Around these parts mayors appear to be immoveable objects once installed into office.

Thing is, though, time marches on regardless of Mayor Ford’s status. The business of the city is being tended to whether he thinks he’s at the helm or not. handofgodTry and look away from the ongoing political wreckage and focus on the bigger picture. Stop squirming while the international audience looks on at us in wide eyed amazement. We all saw that coming, didn’t we? It’s only surprising it took this long.

One way or the other, this will pass. We must be ready to move on. In preparation, it’s good to remind ourselves of two important points that were brought up earlier this week.

Matt Elliott’s Challenge Accepted and Edward Keenan’s The trouble with Dougie’s people taking over. If you haven’t already read them yet, do it right now. I can wait. In fact, I’ll just switch over to my Twitter feed and see if the mayor’s staff has shrunk any further.

Go ahead. We’ll meet back here when you’re done.

wait

 

OK. First, Mr. Elliott.

“False. Absolutely, definitely false.”

We’ve seen it happening already. What’s left of this administration is trying to shrug off accusations about alleged personal failings by pumping up its governance cred. We said we’d stop the gravy train, and we have. We’ve kept your taxes low. We’ve cut wasteful spending. We’ve turned this fiscal ship of state around in the right direction.

Forgive us our trespasses, folks. But we’ve rocked our campaign promises. pickanumber1Boo-yeah!

“False. Absolutely, definitely false.”

They make up magic numbers. They claim credit for things they really had no hand in. What little policy initiatives they have managed to implement don’t amount to much more than a hill of beans in the scheme of things and have only truly accomplished making things just a little bit worse around the city. Fewer buses running more infrequently and more crowded. Park grass cut and streets cleaned a little less often. Smaller selection of books to borrow from the libraries.

And with no noticeable savings of tax dollars in our pockets. As Mr. Elliott shows, despite flatlining our gross operating budget, our property taxes have still gone up. So have user fees like transit fares. We’re paying more than we did in 2010 but are getting less.

Pretty much the exact opposite of Team Ford’s primary campaign pledge.

Pretty much the exact opposite of what any politician who steps into the fray and attempts to champion those very policy ideas and sideline the mayor. Beware any candidate trying to convince you that the message was sound. It was just delivered by the wrong messenger. pinocchio1The direction city council took early on in this term was misguided, no matter who was leading it.

“Confront. Attack. Repeat.”

This is the second point I want to make, cherry-picked from Edward Keenan’s post in The Grid on Wednesday.

The Ford Administration doesn’t have a leg to stand on at this point. Its very legitimacy is being questioned, and not just by the usual suspects who’ve been skeptical of it from the outset. Once obedient councillors are outspoken in their criticism. James Pasternak. John Parker. Jaye Robinson. The loyalist of the loyal simply keep their heads low.

Staff are jumping ship at a dizzying rate. Two yesterday. Five since the crack allegations surfaced. Some now sit on the sidelines, playfully sniping at the administration they once dutifully served.

How does the mayor and his dwindling number of defenders react?

“Confront. Attack. Repeat.”

inyourfaceI might add Deny to that list of Mr. Keenan’s. Deny. Confront. Attack. Repeat.

It goes something like this:

None of this situation – if there was a situation and there’s definitely not a situation – is our fault. It’s all just lies and rumours spread by our enemies. Enemies like the Toronto Star and all the social elite subscribers to that rag who’ve been out to get us since day one. Put up or shut up, folks. Where’s the video? Do you know the kind of pain you’re causing our families? How would you like it if we went after you like you’re going after us? Huh? Maybe I’ll just follow your wife and kids all around the place. How would you like that, huh? Get your own house in order before sticking your nose in our business. Disgruntled ex-employees. Put up or shut up. Put up or shut up.

They are the words of those who are never willing to accept responsibility for any negative consequences of their actions. It’s always someone else’s fault. Question them and their motives and the response is always to push back, to challenge, never to answer or explain. Accuse me? Accuse you.

It’s worked for them so far because up until now the other side has blinked. Turned away and moved on to try and work around them. playingchickenjpgBacking down is an understandable instinct when confronted with such aggressive certainty. Nobody can be that sure of themselves and be so willfully wrong, can they?

Yes they can.

We’ve saved the taxpayers a billion dollars, folks.

An entirely fictitious number Team Ford has picked out of thin air to repeat over and over in response to any and all allegations that are fired at it. Part of an incantation of nebulous claims invoked to help ward of the inevitable reality of it all. A billion dollars. The unelected premier. Social elites who’ve run this city for 50 years. Stir in an eye of newt, click your heels twice and poof, everything’s fine, everything’s good, the wolves are no longer at the door.

“False. Absolutely, definitely false.” “Confront. Attack. Repeat.”

It’s the political calculus that has worked like a charm. It’s transformed a fringe city councillor into an unlikely mayor, and his even fringier brother into a bullying power broker. Unfortunately, it’s also ground the wheels of governance of a big, vibrant, progressive city to a near halt.

Mayor Ford and those choosing to remain defiantly in his camp can continue believing that everything’s fine, everything’s hunky dory, and that all the problems that exist are because of other people. Why wouldn’t they? It’s got them this far.

therewillbeblood

But everybody else at City Hall needs to start operating outside of the mayor’s crank circle. Leave them to burn their little playhouse down. It was inevitable they would anyway. Ford Nation was built for little else.

–  exasperatedly submitted by Cityslikr

4 Comments | City Building, City Council, Municipal Politics, Newspapers, Press coverage, Toronto Star | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by cityslikr

A Mess Of Our Own Making

May 29, 2013

boss

Holy hell, Toronto. Go away for 10 days and it’s like returning to the set of Kelsey Grammer’s Boss. Fuck.

The crack video story broke the day before I left and blossomed into a full blown tale of intrigue of drug dealing, murder, mass staff resignations and one dramatic haircut, all before my return. That’s some serious narrative escalation. Highly improbable even coming from such a highly improbable administration.

At this juncture nothing should surprise us yet it continues to do just that.

A few scandals back, I honestly can’t remember which one, I became convinced that Mayor Ford’s political demise would be a quiet one. insurmountableodds(And take this with a full grain of salt, coming as it does from someone who refused to accept the possibility of Rob Ford victory as late as October of 2010.) Supporters keep touting, even as recently as today, how the mayor’s approval numbers barely nudge much regardless of the shit he gets accused, convicted and acquitted of. But it seemed to me that an appearance of a reasonable right-of-centre candidate would immediately deflate those numbers to non-recoverable levels. Only some mad scrabble on the left from a host of candidates could possibly reconfigure the race into a winnable one for Mayor Ford.

In my mind, despite his apparent stubbornness, the mayor would recognize the almost hopeless chances he had at securing re-election in 2014 and fold up his campaign tent early, citing health or family concerns. No fuss, no bother. With a whimper not a bang.

If this continues along its current trajectory, however, we’re looking at some Cody Jarrett White Heat/DePalma Scarface flameout. Look at me, ma! On top of the world!! dyepackThe mayor’s exit even more spectacularly implausible than his entrance. They said it couldn’t be done, but he did it.

As appealing as that might be to the writer in me – you don’t have to do anything more than transcribe, really – the fallout from such a dizzying end would have negative repercussions far beyond just the mayor’s office. It already has, with questions about the proper functioning of the city coming from Queen’s Park and investors. “People are literally re-examining their stability projections of Toronto,” tweets James Aldersley. “Let that sink in.” (h/t to Edward Keenan for pointing that one out in his article today in The Grid.)

A quiet renunciation of our 2010 mayoral choice might bestow upon us as a city a certain air of somber reflection. Yup. We made a bad decision. Who hasn’t? Time to turn the page on that sorry chapter.

The way this is going, though, we all end up with egg on our faces, a little bit of the Ford on our collective sleeves. A mad experiment in self-loathing that blew up in our hands like a concealed red ink dye pack in a bag full of stolen cash. That kind of stain takes a long time to wipe clean.

– dirtily submitted by Cityslikr

5 Comments | City Building, Municipal Politics, Newspapers, On The Road, Press coverage | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by cityslikr

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 156 other followers