![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldIn an editorial published today, the Toronto Star pointed out that mayor Ford's numerous statements, as city councillor and as mayor, that the bureaucracy of the City of Toronto is overrun by wasteful spending simply isn't correct. 94 to 98% of city spending has been classified as necessary, and the only way to reduce spending without violating provincial laws would be to do things like stop supporting the charming Riverdale Farm, a pleasant little zood downtown specializing in farm environments, and cutting snowplow coverage.
Truth matters in politics, but as Stephen Colbert famously pointed out some time ago, so does truthiness.
The reality may be that the bureaucracy of the City of Toronto is fairly efficient, that its spending priorities are correct, and that Ford's depiction of Toronto is destructive. The perception, however, is of a city run by people who are only accountable to the electorate--or, as Ford says, customers--by mortal threats. A lack of trust exists, is corrosive, and exists far outside the suburban/right-wing demographic so often demonized now by opponents of Mayor Ford.
Take the example of the Toronto Police Service, mysteriously unable to provide evidence identifying which Toronto policemen beat bystanders at last year's misbegotten G20 summit.
Full cooperation, right. Would I feel inclined toward a highly stringent purge of the police? Did I use a question mark in the previous sentence?
Am I being fair, though? Is there a reasonable possibility that, in a very confused time, heavily uniformed policemen might not be able to identify each other? How wrong is it to reject the possibility?
Going outside the left/right paradigm, and into the downtown/suburb paradigm, just look at what the Toronto Star recently reported (and further described by the Globe and Mail, too ). Fairly large fights at the Bathurst TTC station between workers and commuters are unprecedented.
Downtown Torontonians, like left-wingers, constitute one of the core demographics opposed to Ford, and to Ford's demonizing of city services. But as I've often blogged before, there's an increasing amount of frustration with TTC workers and TTC service generally. Would I have taken out my camera and started photographing and videoing everything for broader propagation? (Rhetorical question, this.)
The downtowners and left-wingers aren't so different from the suburbanites and right-wingers in Toronto, it seems. Both sides distrust one group of city agencies or another, both feel entirely justified in doing so, and both--I think--tend to distrust the other side's problems. (I don't think that my anti-police sentiments would necessarily work well in Etobicoke, for instance.)
With such polarization, will it be possible to form coalitions transcending this cleavage? Or will Toronto be stuck alternating between one side's mayor and another, without any enjoying the sort of city-wide popularity one would ideally want?
Truth matters in politics, but as Stephen Colbert famously pointed out some time ago, so does truthiness.
In a radio interview on the John Oakley Show last week Ford made the astonishing claim that salaries and benefits represent 80 per cent of the city’s operating budget. In fact, they represent about 48 per cent. One would think the chief executive of the $9.4 billion enterprise that is the City of Toronto would have at least a basic grasp of the city’s key numbers. In Ford’s case, one would be wrong.
Again and again, Ford’s thinking has been at odds with reality. Unable to find the buckets of bureaucratic “gravy” that he had expected, Ford budgeted $3 million to have outside consultants pore over the city’s books and find easy savings. Few observers, at this point, would deem that a success.
Many of the city’s operations — including 96 per cent of its public works — can’t be cut because they’re deemed mandatory under provincial law, or otherwise essential. Some of the remaining services could be eliminated, but their loss would trigger a public backlash, leaving such options politically impractical. Reduced snow plowing on residential streets? Few councillors want their name attached to that.
Other suggestions, like having Toronto residents bring unwanted pets to a local animal shelter rather than have a city employee collect them, would result in picayune savings — a far cry from the $100 million Ford expects from this review process.
The consultant KPMG has even identified programs that are earning money for Toronto as possible targets for elimination, by way of reducing “red tape.” Cancelling dog and cat licensing, and eliminating certain business licenses, are examples. Dog and cat licences net the city about $600,000 yearly, while the relevant business licensing generates about $6 million. Cutting such services looks more like downsizing government, than plugging holes in the budget.
The reality may be that the bureaucracy of the City of Toronto is fairly efficient, that its spending priorities are correct, and that Ford's depiction of Toronto is destructive. The perception, however, is of a city run by people who are only accountable to the electorate--or, as Ford says, customers--by mortal threats. A lack of trust exists, is corrosive, and exists far outside the suburban/right-wing demographic so often demonized now by opponents of Mayor Ford.
Take the example of the Toronto Police Service, mysteriously unable to provide evidence identifying which Toronto policemen beat bystanders at last year's misbegotten G20 summit.
Three officers investigated in a high-profile case of alleged police brutality at last year's G20 summit will not be charged after several peers, including supervisors, did not or could not say whether the officers had been involved in beating Adam Nobody, the province's police watchdog said Monday.
The officers were suspected of being part of a group that arrested Mr. Nobody at Queen's Park during a protest. Another officer, Constable Babak Andalib-Goortani, was charged nearly seven months ago with assault for allegedly hitting Mr. Nobody with his baton while other officers held him down.
After Constable Andalib-Goortani was charged, Toronto police turned over the names of the three other officers suspected of involvement to the Special Investigations Unit. The SIU interviewed several witnesses, including 17 officers believed to have been in the area during Mr. Nobody's arrest and four supervisors of one of the suspect officers, but none could identify any of the officers as having taken part in the alleged assault.
Furthermore, the SIU ruled that evidence amassed by the Toronto Police Service's own professional standards investigators and which the TPS used to identify the three officers for the SIU was not enough to use in a court case.
“While they both provided some circumstantial evidence of identity of the subject officers in question, I am of the view that it is so weak that it fails to meet the test of probable grounds to believe an identified officer committed a criminal offence,” said SIU director Ian Scott in a statement.
The inability or unwillingness of police officers to identify their peers or confirm whether they had been involved in G20 assaults has been a common theme in SIU probes in the wake of the June 2010 summit. While protesters and human rights advocates accuse officers of deliberately thwarting the SIU by protecting each other from scrutiny, Toronto police have maintained that they are co-operating fully with the civilian watchdog.
Full cooperation, right. Would I feel inclined toward a highly stringent purge of the police? Did I use a question mark in the previous sentence?
Am I being fair, though? Is there a reasonable possibility that, in a very confused time, heavily uniformed policemen might not be able to identify each other? How wrong is it to reject the possibility?
Going outside the left/right paradigm, and into the downtown/suburb paradigm, just look at what the Toronto Star recently reported (and further described by the Globe and Mail, too ). Fairly large fights at the Bathurst TTC station between workers and commuters are unprecedented.
It started with a simple question: “Why are you late?”
It ended with a standoff between passengers and TTC officials on a crowded streetcar at Bathurst station at the height of rush hour that was only resolved by police intervention.
The melee started around 5 p.m. Monday when a middle-aged woman, who didn’t want to be named on advice from her lawyer, was waiting for streetcar at Bathurst station. One finally arrived 40 minutes later.
“Why are you late?” she recalls asking the operator. “We’ve been waiting for almost 40 minutes now.”
“I don’t like your attitude and you are not getting into my car,” she remembers the operator saying, before he left the streetcar for a short break.
Having none of it, the woman hopped on and sat near the front. When the operator returned five minutes later, he spotted her and yelled at her to “get out of his car,” she said.
“I said no, I have a subway pass and paid my fare.”
The driver told her to get off and take the next one, but the woman refused to budge.
[. . .]
“The driver was so angry and out of his mind,” said Julio Erhart, who sat at the front.
Other passengers piped up, telling the operator everyone has a right to free speech.
The operator then called his supervisor, following TTC protocol, because he apparently felt threatened.
Then it got ugly. One woman, known only as Shari, filmed part of the fracas, which Citytv obtained.
“We can all sit here forever, or you can come out, let the streetcar go and then I’ll get you on another streetcar,” a supervisor who arrived on scene told the woman. She refused.
Nearby passengers argued back. Then the supervisor noticed Shari’s camera, marched up the stairs and placed his hand over it.
It isn’t clear what happened next. TTC spokesman Brad Ross said the supervisor didn’t take the camera, but pushed it down “in an attempt to defuse the situation.”
[. . .]
That’s when the standoff began. Many of the passengers refused to disembark, but TTC officials weren’t moving the streetcar, which created a convoy of other streetcars behind it. About 50 passengers waited another 30 minutes while TTC officials stood on the platform awaiting police. They arrived and the situation was resolved without any charges being laid.
Downtown Torontonians, like left-wingers, constitute one of the core demographics opposed to Ford, and to Ford's demonizing of city services. But as I've often blogged before, there's an increasing amount of frustration with TTC workers and TTC service generally. Would I have taken out my camera and started photographing and videoing everything for broader propagation? (Rhetorical question, this.)
The downtowners and left-wingers aren't so different from the suburbanites and right-wingers in Toronto, it seems. Both sides distrust one group of city agencies or another, both feel entirely justified in doing so, and both--I think--tend to distrust the other side's problems. (I don't think that my anti-police sentiments would necessarily work well in Etobicoke, for instance.)
With such polarization, will it be possible to form coalitions transcending this cleavage? Or will Toronto be stuck alternating between one side's mayor and another, without any enjoying the sort of city-wide popularity one would ideally want?
