[PHOTO] A TTC map on a subway car

A TTC map on a subway car
Originally uploaded by rfmcdpei

This is a snapshot of one of the TTC's old maps of the different stops and lines of the Toronto subway system, mounted--naturally enough--in a subway car.

[META] Blogroll Addition

I've added Jamais Cascio's blog Open the Future to my blogroll.

Go, read!

[URBAN NOTE] Jarvis Street Changes

Toronto's Jarvis Street is a bit shabby, with plenty of elegant old houses but plenty of poverty, too; lower Jarvis is somewhat famous as a hangout for street prostitutes, badly off somewhat on the -pattern of Queen Street West in the Parkdale area. There's a movement afoot, led by city cvouncillor Kyle Rae and neighbourhood activists, to bring Jarvis Street back to its previous glory, with a narrowed street and extensive reconstruction. Shawn Micallef at Spacing Toronto has an extensive photo post with a link to his Eye column on Jarvis Street. In his blog post, he concludes that Jarvis Street has the potential to change radically.

The two things I found most interesting about Jarvis were the sheer amount of people that live on or near the street, and how many of those old, wonderful details (and new ones) remain. This means there are both historic and present day reasons why Jarvis should be made more pedestrian friendly and tame the planning crimes that were committed in the 1960s when the car was king.

Nicki Thomas in The Globe and Mail is more skeptical, arguing that vested interests among people who use Jarvis Street to commute and a lack of city funding threaten the project.

Developers and politicians have turned their attention back to Jarvis in recent years, looking to restore the street to its former glory. Councillor Kyle Rae (Ward 27, Toronto Centre - Rosedale), who represents the area, said the once magnificent street has been allowed to turn into a freeway. As a remedy, Mr. Rae is pushing a proposal that would see the street narrowed to four lanes, reducing traffic volumes and making it more pedestrian- and bike-friendly.

"It's a shame what's happened to it. I think it's time, in the 21st century, that the street catches up with its history," Mr. Rae said.

While the concept goes before city hall's works committee next week, it appears to be a long way from reality. The $6-million project is not fully funded, and would only go ahead once Jarvis is scheduled for a full road reconstruction - something not even included in the city's 10-year plan.

Plus, residents in affluent neighbourhoods to the north - North Rosedale and Moore Park - who use Jarvis to drive downtown, have complained loudly about the possibility of increased traffic congestion.

"They still think it's their personal driveway," Mr. Rae said. Susan Prince, a member of the Moore Park Residents Association launching a campaign against the plan, says those who use the road haven't been consulted.

"Kyle Rae is supposed to represent me as well," Ms. Prince said. "... It's interesting that Kyle Rae has chosen to stereotype some of his constituents as greedy, wealthy, North Toronto people." She and other members leafleted cars on Mount Pleasant north of Jarvis this week, and plan to show up at the works committee meeting next week wearing "Don't Jam Jarvis" T-shirts.

[BRIEF NOTE] Americanada, not North America

What I called Canamerica, The globe and Mail's American affairs columnist John Ibbitson calls Americanada. Dismissing fears that closer integration would threaten Canadian identity, he calls for thorough military and economic integration.

Offering to move from co-operation to integration on security would afford Canada the opportunity to ask for the same on the economy. As the final tranche of this comprehensive continental agreement, Canada should propose a customs union.

This would be the biggest, boldest move Canada could make: a joint tariff, based on bilateral consent, that would allow both countries to erase the border completely, permitting the free flow of goods, services and people between our two countries, no passport or work visa required — a freedom those in the European Union already enjoy. As part of the union, both countries would drop all remaining protections in agriculture, cultural industries and financial services. After all, our supply management boards are anachronisms, promoting inefficient farming and expensive milk in the nostalgic desire to preserve family farms that mostly no longer exist.

If there's no passport union, though, or none without significant changes to Canadian immigration policy, he's against it. Also, he's against including Mexico.

If I'm wrong, if the Americans would not agree to any further substantial easing of the border without significant restrictions on Canadian immigration, then Canada should walk away from the discussions. The only thing more important than promoting increased access to American markets is preserving Canada's robust multicultural identity. That identity is based on the world's most enlightened immigration policy, which encourages more people to move to our country, per capita, than any other nation, and which ensures that they come from all parts of the world, preventing the emergence of a race-based underclass such as the United States already created through slavery and is recreating through Latino immigration and which Europe is duplicating by allowing the vast majority of its immigrants to come from former colonies, which in many cases means northern Africa and the Middle East. Immigration is who we are. It is our future. It is the one thing we must never bargain away.

For the foreseeable future, any conversations we have with the United States over the border should not include Mexico. In this respect, NAFTA may actually have harmed the Canada-U.S. relationship. Every time Canada brings a border proposal to the United States, the Americans shake their head. "We'd be interested," they say, "but if we did it for you, we'd have to do it for the Mexicans." The truth is, Canada and the United States are developed nations, winners in the global lottery of wealth. Mexico, sadly, is not.

As the frightening violence surrounding the drug cartels illustrates, the country is still far distant from becoming a modern, liberal democracy with a developed economy and adherence to the rule of law. Canada and the United States need to talk about the problems at our border.

Can my American readers tell me--and us--how they'd react to a tight union of the United States and Canada, exclusive of Mexico, on these terms?