# New Ontario Government 2018



## MARS (17 Jul 2018)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> One _*guess*_, and that's all it is, is that the Liberal's polling says that the NDP's momentum has stalled, even slipped away and the Conservatives are headed towards a comfortable majority ... that will spell trouble for the Liberals because the PCPO will, very likely, want to open two or three judicial inquiries into various things that were done by both the McGuinty and Wynne administrations ... a Horwath government that depends upon LPO support might be willing to overlook the past 15 years.
> 
> Maybe she's making a 'Hail Mary' play to try to stave off something worse than just losing the election.



https://nationalpost.com/news/world/doug-ford-to-announce-inquiry-into-previous-liberal-governments-spending


----------



## pbi (17 Jul 2018)

I certainly agree that there are probably things in the Liberal closet that need to be dragged out into the daylight. In Canada, this is likely true of any Govt, Provincial or Federal, that has done at least two terms. I just don't think that the present Ontario Govt should put any energy or horsepower into that, until it has come to grips with some far more important and pressing issues. 

Vengeance is not really important right now, no matter how good it might feel.


----------



## FJAG (17 Jul 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I certainly agree that there are probably things in the Liberal closet that need to be dragged out into the daylight. In Canada, this is likely true of any Govt, Provincial or Federal, that has done at least two terms. I just don't think that the present Ontario Govt should put any energy or horsepower into that, until it has come to grips with some far more important and pressing issues.
> 
> Vengeance is not really important right now, no matter how good it might feel.



True enough but there is always room for concurrent activity. If the backroom story behind these money wasting activities aren't brought to light in the near future, they'll be forgotten.

 :cheers:


----------



## Remius (17 Jul 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> True enough but there is always room for concurrent activity. If the backroom story behind these money wasting activities aren't brought to light in the near future, they'll be forgotten.
> 
> :cheers:



Agreed.  And if the province wants to move forward it needs a full picture.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Jul 2018)

This is not about vengeance or payback. It's about getting things in order before the next election. Its going to take a lot of time to do a line search and connect the dots. It has to be completed and actioned before a new campaign starts. We won't get that unless we start now. The books are wrong. We can't spend or move forward until we know what the socialists left in the bank. If anything. I think it's going to be worse news than better. The previous government was dishonest. Thĺey simply cannot be taken at their word. I hope Scheer does the same to Trudeau and his bunch.


edit for spelling


----------



## Altair (17 Jul 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> This is not about vengeance or payback. It's about getting things in order before the next election. Its going to take a lot of time to do a line search and connect the dots. It has to be completed and auctioned before a new campaign starts. We won't get that unless we start now. The books are wrong. We can't spend or move forward until we know what the socialists left in the bank. If anything. I think it's going to be worse news than better. The previous government was dishonest. Thĺey simply cannot be taken at their word. I hope Scheer does the same to Trudeau and his bunch.


Scheer still going to be the leader in 2023?

Figured it would be MacKay by then

 ;D


----------



## YZT580 (17 Jul 2018)

ordinarily I would agree with you Altair but at the rate he is going Justin could end up as a one-term wonder.  His government is rapidly approaching its best-before date unless the coming cabinet shuffle succeeds in pushing the re-start button.


----------



## Altair (17 Jul 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> ordinarily I would agree with you Altair but at the rate he is going Justin could end up as a one-term wonder.  His government is rapidly approaching its best-before date unless the coming cabinet shuffle succeeds in pushing the re-start button.



He campaigns pretty well, and he's currently running against himself.

And Scheer is out doing stuff like this right now, which is flying under the radar

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-globe-editorial-andrew-scheers-cheesy-trade-war-politics/



> Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer did his part on Tuesday when he released a statement criticizing not U.S. President Donald Trump, who capriciously imposed levies on Canadian steel and aluminum last week, but Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for the crime of announcing “flexibility” in his position on access to the Canadian dairy market.
> 
> Mr. Scheer called any weakening of the tariffs that shield Canadian milk, eggs and poultry from foreign competition “totally unacceptable” and accused the PM of being duplicitous for saying otherwise to an American audience.
> 
> ...



Boots Bernier out of shadow cabinet, check.

Criticizes PM about failing to stand up for supply management, check.

You see where this is going.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Jul 2018)

Liberal slush fund aka cap and trade is gone.

Ontario Hydro mafia is out. 

Liberals lost party status. 

Things are looking up.


----------



## Remius (17 Jul 2018)

So far so good for Ontario.


----------



## pbi (17 Jul 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> True enough but there is always room for concurrent activity. If the backroom story behind these money wasting activities aren't brought to light in the near future, they'll be forgotten.
> 
> :cheers:


Perhaps. But in my opinion, that isn't the nearest, or even the second nearest, crocodile right now. And Canadian governments, of all stripes and persuasions, have a nasty historical habit of of blaming their inability to deliver XYZ because The Previous Govt robbed the piggy bank, or cooked the books. I would have thought that any normal handover process of Govt would include a full audit of books as an SOP: nothing to trumpet about.

Just saying...


----------



## brihard (17 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Ontario Hydro mafia is out.



I'll reserve judgment until compensation figures for the new president and board are made public.


----------



## PuckChaser (17 Jul 2018)

Split this stuff on its own as the election is over. I'll leave the other thread open as there's always stuff that comes up relating to the election's conduct/voter turnout/etc a couple months after the polls close.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Jul 2018)

Brihard said:
			
		

> I'll reserve judgment until compensation figures for the new president and board are made public.



Sounds like they'll still retain stocks, benefits and a bunch of other shit.  Which really shouldn't surprise anyone because these people really dig themselves in WW1 style to the system.  CEO was expecting 10+ million and would be entitled to all kids of benefits. He's supposedly getting $400'000 and will still get the same benefits, which I've read could be as much as 5 mill.  Still pricey but I think getting those guys and girls out of Hydro One would be a victory for Ontario even IF they got their full severance.

Edited to add I mean the old crew. Good point about the new one but can't imagine it being worse than what we had.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Sounds like they'll still retain stocks, benefits and a bunch of other shit.  Which really shouldn't surprise anyone because these people really dig themselves in WW1 style to the system.  CEO was expecting 10+ million and would be entitled to all kids of benefits. He's supposedly getting $400'000 and will still get the same benefits, which I've read could be as much as 5 mill.  Still pricey but I think getting those guys and girls out of Hydro One would be a victory for Ontario even IF they got their full severance.



I was going to give you +300, but I've already rewarded you today.


----------



## brihard (17 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Sounds like they'll still retain stocks, benefits and a bunch of other crap.  Which really shouldn't surprise anyone because these people really dig themselves in WW1 style to the system.  CEO was expecting 10+ million and would be entitled to all kids of benefits. He's supposedly getting $400'000 and will still get the same benefits, which I've read could be as much as 5 mill.  Still pricey but I think getting those guys and girls out of Hydro One would be a victory for Ontario even IF they got their full severance.



I'm skeptical that Hydro One will have much success attracting executive talent with compensation packages that are smaller enough to put the wind in Ford's sails on this one... We shall see of course- but my understanding is that the province holds just less than a majority of Hydro One shares. They are not in a position to completely control matters, and the rest of the shareholders will only care about their return on investment.

One would have thought that as a Conservative premier, Ford would have preferred to simply divest the province of the corporation entirely.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Jul 2018)

Getting the books right doesn't require an investigation.  The finance department is entirely capable of producing documents which show the state of affairs and of highlighting any creative accounting tricks.

Investigations would properly be aimed at suspected corruption, particularly flows of money to where none should have gone.


----------



## FJAG (17 Jul 2018)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Getting the books right doesn't require an investigation.  The finance department is entirely capable of producing documents which show the state of affairs and of highlighting any creative accounting tricks.
> 
> Investigations would properly be aimed at suspected corruption, particularly flows of money to where none should have gone.



I'm generally not a believer in the conspiracy theories about civil servants being in bed with certain political parties, but the Liberals have held power here since 2004 under both the McGuinty and Wynne regimes so there has been more than enough time to both develop such relationships and departments to have buried the bodies.

I think that the financial data may be there but  whether it will be presented in context and with the relevant internal communications (especially considering the deletion of emails by Livingston scandal/conviction) still leaves room for a forensic accounting by an outside firm.

I tend to agree that the new cabinet shouldn't waste time and energy on this which is why having an outside firm do the work and render a report makes sense. Last news report I saw said that it should take some five weeks.

 :cheers:


----------



## suffolkowner (17 Jul 2018)

Brihard said:
			
		

> I'm skeptical that Hydro One will have much success attracting executive talent with compensation packages that are smaller enough to put the wind in Ford's sails on this one... We shall see of course- but my understanding is that the province holds just less than a majority of Hydro One shares. They are not in a position to completely control matters, and the rest of the shareholders will only care about their return on investment.
> 
> One would have thought that as a Conservative premier, Ford would have preferred to simply divest the province of the corporation entirely.




It will not be hard for the Ontario government to gain a controlling interest in Hydro One, unless I am missing something? Is the stock price not down as of right now?

As far as attracting talent how would you judge that? This comes up quite a bit but of the couple of studies that i have read have been unable to show any correlation between executive qualification and corporate performance.


----------



## pbi (18 Jul 2018)

suffolkowner said:
			
		

> As far as attracting talent how would you judge that? This comes up quite a bit but of the couple of studies that i have read have been unable to show any correlation between executive qualification and corporate performance.



It might not be  that hard to get good people. Really, at the level of CEO and the Board, how much do they actually have to know about how an electricity system works?  They will have a COO, VPs and a bag of tech SMEs to advise them on that. IMHO they just need to understand that the people who pay their salaries expect that they will do something about hydro rates before it chokes the life out of businesses and beggars people who struggle to pay the monthly light bill.

To be fair to the new team coming in, they will probably inherit the mess of over a half-century of public ownership during which users probably didn't pay the actual market cost of anything. That, and the infrastructure situation: we have some quite new plants like the Darlington and Bruce nukes, but Pickering nuke is quite old, and there are a lot of very old hydro plants scattered all over the province, along with thousands of km of lines, hundreds of transformer yards and switches, and all of that.

I just can't see how it won't cost us all a big bunch of money in the long run, no matter which party is in power.


----------



## FJAG (18 Jul 2018)

The following article from CNBC outlines the critical issues respecting CEOs pay.



> Since 1978, and adjusted for inflation, American workers have seen an 11.2 percent increase in compensation. During that same period, CEO's have seen a 937 percent increase in earnings. That salary growth is even 70 percent faster than the rise in the stock market, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
> . . .
> "CEOs are getting more because of their power to set pay, not because they are more productive or have special talent or have more education," says the report. "Exorbitant CEO pay means that the fruits of economic growth are not going to ordinary workers, since the higher CEO pay does not reflect correspondingly higher output."



https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/22/heres-how-much-ceo-pay-has-increased-compared-to-yours-over-the-years.html

For years I've believed that as shareholders (both public and private) we've allowed ourselves to be manipulated by the executive leadership/management profession into believing that they are worth the exorbitant compensation that they are demanding. They aren't. It's time to readjust their expectations downward.

 :cheers:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (18 Jul 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> The following article from CNBC outlines the critical issues respecting CEOs pay.
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/22/heres-how-much-ceo-pay-has-increased-compared-to-yours-over-the-years.html
> 
> ...



Agreed, and the rot is not confined to the corporate world.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Jul 2018)

> https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/ont-minister-criticized-for-saying-he-wore-bulletproof-vest-in-toronto-neighbourhood-1.4019099
> An Ontario minister tasked with fighting racism is being criticized by his political opponents for a comment that NDP Leader Andrea Horwath calls racist.
> 
> The minister pointed out that he wore a bulletproof vest during the police ride-along.
> ...



Somebody get this man a white sheet. 

Just kidding, NDP's weak ass effort to stay in the news.


----------



## PuckChaser (19 Jul 2018)

I guess he was just using his white privilege to stay alive in a city where people shoot up playgrounds in broad daylight with illegal guns.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (19 Jul 2018)

I'm guessing it was a requirement to wear it for the ride along. Insurance rules.

Perhaps the dippers figure only military and police should have vests. Goes with their only military and police should have guns. Anyone else wearing a vest, NGOs, UN Observers, the Ontario Environmental SWAT team, etc are all racist.

Horvath is portraying her party as a bunch of screaming me me's. She's going to have everyone rolling their eyes and ignoring their chicken little speeches, even before the Legislature returns to normal sitting.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Jul 2018)

Yea, the police asked him too. The NDP do love their race baiting tactics.


----------



## mariomike (19 Jul 2018)

I've never seen a politician in Toronto wear a vest to a 9-1-1 call. But, I've been retired for over nine years. 

Perhaps that is now the TPS SOP?

QUOTE

Jul 19, 2018 

He ( Toronto Mayor John Tory ) said he’s been on around 10 police ride-alongs over the years and has never requested a bulletproof vest nor has he been asked to wear one.

Tory also noted that photos appear to show Premier Doug Ford on the same ride-along as Tibollo, but without the extra protection.
https://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/07/19/bulletproof-vest-tory/

END QUOTE

I never wore a vest.  But, I never criticised co-workers who did.

To keep the Toronto hysteria in perspective,

Canada’s Most Dangerous Places 2018
https://www.macleans.ca/canadas-most-dangerous-places/
See how your community ranks


----------



## Fishbone Jones (19 Jul 2018)

Who cares. Perhaps he wanted to see what it was like. I wonder if he asked for it or was offered a chance to wear it. At any rate, Horvath and her gang are really stupid for even trying this stunt. All it does is show how dishonest, deceitful and partisan her party is. It's already forgotten.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I've never seen a politician in Toronto wear a vest to a 9-1-1 call. But, I've been retired for over nine years.


Have you seen many politicians on ride alongs? 



> Perhaps that is now the TPS SOP?





> In a statement, Toronto police say Tibollo was given the bullet-proof vest as a cautionary measure. In the photo, the vest was also emblazoned with the minister’s name and the word “POLICE.”
> 
> "When police do a ride along, there is a safety assessment," a Toronto police spokesperson said in a statement. "Since we always err on the side of caution, there is a presumption that the person doing the ride along will be provided with a vest."



From personal experience it's extremely obnoxious when you're forced to bring a civilian around a dangerous area and they don't listen to your instructions or precautions. *cough* global TV reporer*cough*
Do you think maybe the minister should have said no to the police? 

Seems like some Toronto EMS wear them
https://army.ca/forums/threads/102523/post-1079014.html#msg1079014





> I never wore a vest.  But, I never criticised co-workers who did.


But your reply #11 in the above link you say did wear a vest, an external one.



> Canada’s Most Dangerous Places 2018
> https://www.macleans.ca/canadas-most-dangerous-places/
> See how your community ranks



Western Canada sure sounds dangerous. Do you suppose there's some kind of reoccuring theme there or is it all random?


----------



## mariomike (19 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> But your reply #11 in the above link you say did wear a vest, an external one.



Did you bother to read Reply #6?



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> They gave us vests to try on at a CME ( Continuing Medical Education ). I had it on for five minutes and loathed every minute of it. It was very uncomfortable, and looked confrontational.
> That's just my personal opinion. Not everyone felt that way. I see a lot of the younger guys wearing them now.



It was offered. I made my choice not to sign one out. But, I never criticised those who did.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Jul 2018)

[quote author=mariomike ]
Did you bother to read Reply #6?

It was offered. I made my choice not to sign one out. But, I never criticised those who did.
[/quote]
I sure did. When you said you wore an external one it didn't sound like you meant only for 5 minutes. My bad.


----------



## pbi (20 Jul 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Who cares. Perhaps he wanted to see what it was like. I wonder if he asked for it or was offered a chance to wear it. At any rate, Horvath and her gang are really stupid for even trying this stunt. All it does is show how dishonest, deceitful and partisan her party is. It's already forgotten.



Quite apart from this vest business, is the evident truth of what he actually said in the House. I watched his initial comments and then his refusal to climb down in the face of self-righteous howling by the opposite benches. So, here I go, sailing close to the wind...

I don't know the Minister from Adam, and I'm not very right wing, but what I heard him say about that district, and about who kills who with guns in TO, was true. It's just that we seem very leery of actually tagging the problem to the community in question, lest we be accused of...well--you know what.

This problem is not new. When I was a young Militia recruit in 1974, my section commander was a Metro Police constable in what I believe was then 13 Division, which covered the neighbourhood the Minister mentioned.  One day, in talking about work, he offered that: "_in Jane and Finch we never go to any call with less than two cars"_. That was 44 years ago.

Since those days, the problem has not only gotten worse: it has spread to a portion of Scarborough, and out to Brampton and Mississauga. In my opinion, it can't just be shuffled off as an "immigrant problem". Most of Toronto's immigrant communities, even those who went through a violent phase, have moved onwards and mostly upwards. And, I bet, many of those involved are no longer immigrants but native-born Canadians. (Check out that 44 years figure...)

Considering who the targets of the violence normally are (not counting tragic collateral victims like Jane Creba) I have a difficult time swallowing the rationales constantly trotted out as to why this problem persists in this community. Many immigrant groups in this country have faced racism, nativism, and other bigotry. Not all of them have remained in such a terrible, lethal mess for so long. What is going wrong here?

The Minister had the courage to raise issues many people would rather not hear. And who knows, maybe the Tories can't do much to fix it. But, IMHO, the first step in fixing a problem is defining just what that problem is, as unpleasant as it may be to discuss it.


----------



## mariomike (20 Jul 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> When I was a young Militia recruit in 1974, my section commander was a Metro Police constable in what I believe was then 13 Division, which covered the neighbourhood the Minister mentioned.



13 Division covers this area,
http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/d13/neighbourhoods.php

You may have been thinking of 31 Division,
http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/d31/neighbourhoods.php


----------



## pbi (20 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> 13 Division covers this area,
> http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/d13/neighbourhoods.php



Yes: I looked at that TPS map before I posted. Maybe 13 Div boundaries are different now than they were in 1974. In any case, he was definitely speaking about the problem in Jane and Finch.


----------



## mariomike (20 Jul 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Maybe 13 Div boundaries are different now than they were in 1974.



I was stationed in the Marlee ( between Dufferin and Bathurst ) and Eglinton area in 1972. It was 13 Division back then. It is still 13 Division.

West-end City of Toronto and Borough of York divisions started with a 1. 

East-end City of Toronto and Borough of East York divisions started with a 5.

Borough of Etobicoke divisions started with a 2,

Borough of North York divisions started with a 3. ( That would include Jane and Finch. )

Borough of Scarborough divisions started with a 4.

That is the way Metro Police have numbered their divisions from 1957 to this day.

On Friday night, Mayor Tory went on a bike ride-along. Without a vest, "saying he has never donned a bulletproof vest in any of the ride alongs he's done before."

Ward 7 Councillor Mammoliti, "put on a bulletproof vest before getting into a squad car with officers."
http://www.iheartradio.ca/newstalk-1010/news/tory-mammoliti-go-on-ride-alongs-with-police-friday-evening-1.4162037

Councillor Mammoliti has suggested the army should be called in to his ward. ( The army has not been called in to Metro since the 1999 snowstorm. )
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=phtTW6S2HsbAjwSV9pboCA&q=mammoliti+army&oq=mammoliti+army&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39k1.1719.11707.0.13143.15.14.0.0.0.0.436.3333.0j4j2j3j3.12.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..3.12.3323.0..0j0i67k1j0i131i67k1j0i131k1j0i20i263k1j0i10k1j0i22i30k1j0i22i10i30k1.0.xgXpJPCej4k

Councillor Mammoliti once ran for mayor. But, dropped out after registering no more than 4% in public opinion polls.


----------



## pbi (21 Jul 2018)

> Borough of North York divisions started with a 3. ( That would include Jane and Finch. )



OK, I got the Div number wrong. But my point remains: the Jane-Finch problem is an old one, and seems to have gotten worse.


----------



## mariomike (21 Jul 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> But my point remains: the Jane-Finch problem is an old one, and seems to have gotten worse.



I'm not an expert. This is just my opinion.

Metro Police deployed heavily into the Jane-Finch corridor, and other hot spots, because, "That is where the crime is."  

Quieter neighbourhoods complained they were paying for protection that was going elsewhere.

Why so much crime in the Jane - Finch community?  Sociological problems, education, DNA....who knows?  Most victims were fellow minorities, who appreciated and strongly supported Metro Police.  The Jane and Finch community supported police pay raises and benefits. And Metro police gave them the best service they could.  

Over the years, Toronto police culture seems to have changed from aggressively pursuing criminals to laying back in police cars, taking careful and lengthy reports. 

When were you safer, taxpayers, then or now...?

See Carding (police policy)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carding_(police_policy)
"Carding, which is officially known as the Community Contacts Policy, is an intelligence gathering policy of the Toronto Police Service involving the stopping, questioning, and documenting of individuals when no particular offence is being investigated."


----------



## pbi (22 Jul 2018)

> Metro Police deployed heavily into the Jane-Finch corridor, and other hot spots, because, "That is where the crime is."


Makes sense to me.



> Quieter neighbourhoods complained they were paying for protection that was going elsewhere.



I think that would be a very narrow-minded response by people. For example, in my neighbourhood in west Kingston, I hardly ever see a cruiser unless it's called. But I know very well that Kingston has other neighbourhoods where there are calls every day and night, and a much higher police presence. (I volunteer with Victim Services, so I see a bit of it.)

 But, to me, that's fine. Why would the police deploy their very limited resources and time in places where there is little demand? I don't want to see a cruiser wasted on a daily patrol of my quiet street, when I know there's only a few of them out there at all. 

To me, it's like the Fire Department. As a property owner I pay the fire tax, but I've never had a fire call at my house. But I'm very happy that my fire tax pays for responses to places that do have fires, or medical calls, or gas leaks, or whatever. We all pay for the service, and we get it when we need it.



> Why so much crime in the Jane - Finch community?  Sociological problems, education, DNA....who knows?  Most victims were fellow minorities, who appreciated and strongly supported Metro Police.  The Jane and Finch community supported police pay raises and benefits. And Metro police gave them the best service they could.



This is the question I'm asking: why? And yes, I agree that there are thousands of decent citizens in Jane-Finch, and Scarborough, and Brampton who would like it all to just end so they can get on with life, and irritating people like me will stop asking these questions. I would guess that every ethnic community in this country that has gone through a violent phase also had lots of members who just wanted normal lives.

Those people aren't the problem, but I think they could be part of a solution. The police can't do it alone. They're just one instrument towards a solution


> Over the years, Toronto police culture seems to have changed from aggressively pursuing criminals to laying back in police cars, taking careful and lengthy reports.


That seems like a bit of a broadside into the police. I will be the first one to say that there are things about police culture in Canada today which concern me, but to blame the police for the restrictions and burdens placed on them by an ever-mounting pile of regulations, procedures, laws, etc doesn't seem right to me. A police officer I knew in Thunder Bay told me that on average, with all the reporting and paperwork involved, on a typical shift they could handle about 3 or 4 incidents and then their shift was over. Much of their day was spent writing things. And that was back before I left 38 CBG in 2005.


----------



## EpicBeardedMan (22 Jul 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I think that would be a very narrow-minded response by people. For example, in my neighbourhood in west Kingston, I hardly ever see a cruiser unless it's called. But I know very well that Kingston has other neighbourhoods where there are calls every day and night, and a much higher police presence. (I volunteer with Victim Services, so I see a bit of it.)
> 
> But, to me, that's fine. Why would the police deploy their very limited resources and time in places where there is little demand? I don't want to see a cruiser wasted on a daily patrol of my quiet street, when I know there's only a few of them out there at all.



Police Dispatcher here, you'd be surprised (maybe not)of the ignorance from the general public when it comes to police and where they should or shouldn't be. For example the general public thinks that parking a unit all day and night at a park to deter teenagers from goofing off and smoking in said park is totally a valid use of that officers time and cost, instead of dealing with higher priority calls in the area, such as assaults, domestics, gun crime, etc.

Kind of funny but I'd rather deal with our "frequent flyers" and emergency call situations than deal with the general public (as much as I love putting in multiple calls a day for stuff like, "I smell marijuana from next door" or people calling on 911 for them losing their phone 2 weeks ago, or because the hotel they are at has different prices than what was advertised online, etc) for petty and dumb crap.

The way that police are spread out are in quadrants or "zones" as we call them. There are so many units per zone. No less than 2 officers per call at minimum unless its a belated incident and something like "Yeah, my car was broken into last night..he left behind his ID" and most of the time those types of calls get put through to an alternate response unit that deals specifically with belated incidents with no suspects. Unless specifically sent to walk a beat, there are no "areas" that officers are forced to go to, if they are doing pro-active policing then sure they'll sit on a particular street if they arent put on a call but most of the time they just drive around until being placed on a call.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Jul 2018)

I was doing a quick read of the Jane and Finch stuff. I came across an article saying that the problems started when there was a population boom. The area went from 3000 to 30'000 very quickly, too quickly for the infrastructure to cope with and it's never recovered. Foreshadowing for our refugee crisis in Toronto perhaps?


----------



## mariomike (22 Jul 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> That seems like a bit of a broadside into the police.



Wasn't meant to be. My uncle served on the Metro Force for many years. 

Just that I believe times have changed in Toronto policing from what I remember. As they have in so many other things.

As a member of an allied service, my memories of Metro Police are from the 1972-2009 era. As for what has been going on for the last nine+ years, all I know about that is what I see on CP24 and read in the papers.

But, from my memories of the early 1970's, it was almost as though Metro's unofficial credo was, "Give no slack and take no shit from anyone. Confront and command. Control the streets at all times. Always be aggressive. Stop crimes before they happen. Seek them out. Shake them down. Make that arrest. And never, never admit the department has done anything wrong." 
https://www.amazon.com/Protect-Serve-Century-Domanick-1994-11-03/dp/B01F9FVDY2


This is from 1996 and concerns the decline in LAPD arrests. It may, or may not, have some relevance for Metro,

Riordan Orders Report on Plunge in LAPD Arrests
http://articles.latimes.com/1996-03-15/local/me-47313_1_lapd-arrests
"It was vexing and surprising to learn that the LAPD is now making 100,000 fewer arrests, issuing over 200,000 fewer citations and conducting over 20,000 fewer field interviews per year."

"Field interviews" is what "carding" is known as in Toronto,

QUOTE

June 28, 2018

Toronto area police chief faults new Ontario restrictions on carding for rise in violent crime
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-toronto-area-police-chief-faults-new-ontario-restrictions-on-carding/
"Carding is the controversial police practice of collecting information about people they stop to question. Although it has been found to disproportionately target people of colour, some police officers argue they have lost a necessary investigative tool.

END QUOTE

Again, speaking of LAPD, this may, or may not, have some relevance to productivity in Metro,

"In the 1960s, our 3,400 policemen (our Civil Service rank) arrested 100,000 more criminals than do today's 10,000."

LT. MAX  K. HURLBUT LAPD 
Retired from the “Golden Era” of the LAPD.
2010

Sorry for not providing Metro's productivity statistics for comparison, but I know they are out there. If anyone is interested.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Jul 2018)

[quote author=mariomike]
Toronto area police chief faults new Ontario restrictions on carding for rise in violent crime
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-toronto-area-police-chief-faults-new-ontario-restrictions-on-carding/
"Carding is the controversial police practice of collecting information about people they stop to question. *Although it has been found to disproportionately target people of colour, *some police officers argue they have lost a necessary investigative tool.

[/quote]

Loaded question but_ what if_ this is because in a given area people of colour are the primary guilty parties?

If it's noticed 24 out of 25 people committing crimes have an identifiable thing going on should police not single them out more? Or better to turn a blind eye to that?



London UK used to have a stop and search thing going on where police could stop and search someone 'at random' It was found too that POCs were singled out more and people screamed racism and the practice stopped. With the recent apparent epidemic of stabbings and murders I read the mayor is talking about bringing stop and search back.


----------



## mariomike (22 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Loaded question but_ what if_ this is because in a given area people of colour are the primary guilty parties?



Race has always been a hot potato in Metro. As it is in other municipalities, I suppose.

QUOTE

Aug. 17, 2015

Twenty-six years ago, a staff inspector by the name of Julian Fantino — future Toronto police chief — sat in a small committee room and delivered a slew of explosive race-based crime statistics focused on the Jane-Finch neighbourhood.

Fantino, then head of 31 Division, told North York’s committee on community, race and ethnic relations that, while blacks made up 6 per cent of the Jane-Finch population, they accounted for 82 per cent of robberies and muggings, 55 per cent of purse-snatchings and 51 per cent of drug offences in the previous year.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/08/17/a-thorny-history-of-race-based-statistics.html
Police in Ontario were forbidden to compile race-based crime statistics.
Police chief Jack Marks insisted the force did not keep race stats.

END QUOTE


----------



## pbi (25 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Race has always been a hot potato in Metro. As it is in other municipalities, I suppose.
> 
> QUOTE
> 
> ...



OK, it was 31 Div not 13 Div.  

But this is what I mean: there is a community-centric problem. How can anybody in their right mind say there isn't? This is not new, at all, just worse. The question that needs to be answered, IMHO, is why that community is so over represented in violent criminal activity, especially gun homicides?

Is it racist police?  A biased court system? A bad education system? Lack of employment opportunities? Cultural baggage? Cultural glorification of violence-based masculinity? Whatever it is, it clearly does not apply across all non-white, non-European communities in the GTA. If it did, the GTA would be a blood-soaked inferno. 

Putting more cops at the coal face, and bringing back carding (or an equivalent tool) will probably provide some relief. But neither will really get at "why?", and that IMHO is what is needed.


----------



## Xylric (25 Jul 2018)

I recall a study done in Baltimore some years back that found a remarkable connection between an area's crime rate and the relative tree coverage of that area.

The only crime that increased with greater amounts of tree coverage was burglary, which just makes sense.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204612000977

How many trees are in the Jane-Finch area, again?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jul 2018)

Sadly the fear of race issue, throws all the law abiding people of that race under the bus, because they are at the mercy of the gangs, because the police are restrained from doing anything. Plus the politicians won't take any direct action for the same reason.


----------



## mariomike (25 Jul 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> OK, it was 31 Div not 13 Div.



All I know about the Jane-Finch corridor now is what I see on CP24, and read on here.  

But, I agree, it has been a troubled community for many years.

eg: They were dropping garbage cans at us off the high-rise balconies at the Jane and Falstaff in the Metropolitan Toronto Housing Authority ( MTHA ) projects. 

Not being police, our options were limited. 

A very good friend of mine, Rick Boustead RIP, took it upon himself to meet with some residents of the community about what we could do to perhaps ease tensions a little bit. 

Rick\s solution was to start a Children’s Breakfast Club in that project.
http://breakfastclubs.ca/our-club/rick-boustead-breakfast-club/

This was back in 1984. Now, there's over 20 Children's Breakfast Clubs in Metro Housing projects. But, Rick's was the first. 

Not being police, I know a Children's Breakfast Club does not make a dramatic difference. But, 35 years later it's still there. 
Maybe it did some good over those years.



			
				Xylric said:
			
		

> I recall a study done in Baltimore some years back that found a remarkable connection between an area's crime rate and the relative tree coverage of that area.



Maybe Baltimore is on to something. There are lots of big old oak trees and sakura in our neighbourhood. It's very hilly. We have the river on the west, the lake on the south, and Grenadier Pond, and a smaller catfish pond, and a 400 acre park ( one third of the park remains in a natural state ) on the east. 

If it were not for Bloor West Village and the subway on the north, you feel in complete isolation to the rest of the city.  



			
				Xylric said:
			
		

> How many trees are in the Jane-Finch area, again?



That's another thing Rick did. He helped those Jane-Finch kids plant gardens in their community, and around the west-end. I remember seeing them plant flower gardens. Not sure about trees.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jul 2018)

Refugees are being kicked out of dormitories since school's starting and put up in hotels for an indefinite period of time since there's no housing available and no real plan.  Got some nice hotels downtown, good stuff.


----------



## Altair (27 Jul 2018)

Thank god for Doug Ford. 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thestar.com/amp/news/cannabis/2018/07/26/doug-ford-set-to-privatize-legal-cannabis-sales-reports-say.html



> According to the reports, the Tory government will allow legal cannabis to be sold in private stores.
> 
> Vice News states that sources close to Premier Doug Ford’s government are planning to overturn the previous Liberal government’s decision for a monopoly on cannabis sales via the Liquor Control Board of Ontario.
> 
> ...



If you're going go sell pot, do it right,  and reap the windfall


----------



## Remius (27 Jul 2018)

Interesting and somewhat unexpected move by the Premier.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tory-ford-city-council-statements-1.4763890

I don't know too much about the city council dynamic in TO to have an informed opinion on whether this is a good move or not.

Less government is good.  I'm not so sure about less representation though.


----------



## mariomike (27 Jul 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> I don't know too much about the city council dynamic in TO to have an informed opinion on whether this is a good move or not.



I vote in Ward 13. So, I'll offer my ( uninformed ) opinion, for what it is worth to the discussion.

I'm not surprised. But, as a courtesy, it would have been nice for Doug to have informed Toronto voters of his plan *before* asking us to vote for him.

One more reason I wish the city could go its own way ( amicably ) from the Province of Ontario.

Our city election is on Oct. 22, 2018.

So, imagine if Prime Minister Trudeau announced three months before the upcoming federal election that he decided to cut the House of Commons in half.

Although the population of Toronto has grown a lot since 1998, we had more than 100 politicians back then.

That number fell to 57. Now it is 44. They had just been increased to 47 wards.

Doug is bring it down to 25.

That's one-quarter what we had in 1998, with the same geographic boundary, and smaller population.

The cut will save $110,000 per councillor per year out of an $11 billion-dollar annual budget.

I don't expect Ford Nation to have a lot of love for the city after taking away Rob's mayoral powers, or Doug's defeat by John Tory in the mayoral election.

Speaking of which, Mel Lastman's son changed his mind about running for mayor. But, with just minutes left to register, the city's former chief planner Jennifer Keesmaat is running for mayor.

That makes it a whole new ball game!


----------



## Rifleman62 (27 Jul 2018)

> So, imagine if Prime Minister Trudeau announced three months before the upcoming federal election that he decided to cut the House of Commons in half.



If he did that, I would support it. Plus the Senate.


----------



## Remius (27 Jul 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> If he did that, I would support it. Plus the Senate.



it would be more akin to the PM telling Alberta to cut its MLAs by half.


----------



## mariomike (27 Jul 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> If he did that, I would support it. Plus the Senate.



Maybe I would too. Maybe a lot of people would. 

But, would there not be a referendum?



			
				Remius said:
			
		

> it would be more akin to the PM telling Alberta to cut its MLAs by half.



That's a better example than mine was.

I picked Welland randomly and found that the city has 6 councillors for a city of just over 52,000 people, or one councillor per 8,667 people. Woodstock has 6 for over 38,000 or one per 6,333 people. With 25 councillors in Toronto, each councillor would represent 116,000 residents.


----------



## kratz (27 Jul 2018)

Local government is not recognized under our constitution, so comparing the cuts in Toronto with a Provincial or Federal cut is an apple to oranges comparison.
Premier Ford can  make the cuts, as afforded provincial jurisdiction.

Suggestions to cut Provincial, Federal or Senate seats, or add a new province would all take a change to the constitution.
With the current crop of politicians, does anyone trust another Meech Lake referendum to hold the country together?     :Tin-Foil-Hat:


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I picked Welland randomly and found that the city has 6 councillors for a city of just over 52,000 people, or one councillor per 8,667 people. Woodstock has 6 for over 38,000 or one per 6,333 people. With 25 councillors in Toronto, each councillor would represent 116,000 residents.



Geography plays into the equation as well. Renfrew Country has 1 MP and 1 MPP to represent 102,000 people, but has only 9 people per Sq KM. With the amount of towns covered in the riding, it would be completely impractical to just declare the whole riding as 1 city with only 1 councillor allowed. Meanwhile, Toronto has 4,400 people per Sq KM meaning that each councillor (within the 25 limit) only has a 26 Sq KM ward. With the current system, Toronto has a councillor for roughly every 12.5 Sq KM. That's a whole lot of overhead for very little tangible gain.


----------



## dapaterson (27 Jul 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Geography plays into the equation as well. Renfrew Country has 1 MP and 1 MPP to represent 102,000 people, but has only 9 people per Sq KM. With the amount of towns covered in the riding, it would be completely impractical to just declare the whole riding as 1 city with only 1 councillor allowed. Meanwhile, Toronto has 4,400 people per Sq KM meaning that each councillor (within the 25 limit) only has a 26 Sq KM ward. With the current system, Toronto has a councillor for roughly every 12.5 Sq KM. That's a whole lot of overhead for very little tangible gain.



So we can build an infantry section with one Sgt and 54 Cpl/Ptes?  Or is there some size at which communication falls apart, and smaller organizational structures are needed?


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Jul 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> So we can build an infantry section with one Sgt and 54 Cpl/Ptes?  Or is there some size at which communication falls apart, and smaller organizational structures are needed?



Apples and Oranges. I said both geographical and population density need to be covered.


----------



## FJAG (27 Jul 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Interesting and somewhat unexpected move by the Premier.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tory-ford-city-council-statements-1.4763890
> 
> ...



I used to belong to a governing board that had over forty members and we restructured it down to just over twenty. The number of constituents represented wasn't ever the issue. The issue was that with over forty members we were dysfunctional getting wrapped around the axle for lengthy periods of time debating ridiculously small current issues rather than concentrating on the big picture, future looking things. IMHO, forty seven is too unwieldy; smaller board with a good administrative staff that can focus discussions is greatly preferable. That said, the way this was sprung on the city as a whole is less than optimal.

 :cheers:


----------



## mariomike (27 Jul 2018)

kratz said:
			
		

> Premier Ford can  make the cuts, as afforded provincial jurisdiction .



Funny how days like today remind you of things.

We got our first lesson in provincial jurisdiction when I was 12.

Against the wishes of many local citizens, our village, an official Village, was amalgamated into the City of Toronto, by order of the Province of Ontario.


----------



## a_majoor (27 Jul 2018)

As an interesting counterpoint, consider the amount of traffic discussions on the size and numbers of Headquarters, GOFO's etc. generate on other threads, and how the almost universal consensus is we would be far better off streamlining the organization and reducing headcounts. Even the arguments about how many councillors/constituent seem very familiar, how many servicemenber/GOFO do we consider an acceptable ratio?


----------



## mariomike (27 Jul 2018)

When Doug made his announcement today, former Chief City Planner of Toronto from 2012 to 2017, Jennifer Keesmaat, rushed down to City Hall to register for the mayoral race just minutes before the 2 p.m. deadline.

She Tweeted one word: "Secession."
https://twitter.com/jen_keesmaat/status/1022674165063733249

After four years of peace, CP24 shows City Hall in chaos tonight. Deja vu 2010 - 2014.

In the middle of an election. 

The people of Toronto went through a year and a half process to decide their ward boudaries. It was inclusive. There were four years of studies and consultations.

Then this announcement from Queen's Park two hours before registration closes.



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Renfrew Country has 1 MP and 1 MPP to represent 102,000 people, but has only 9 people per Sq KM.



We are comparing municipal wards to provincial and federal ridings?


----------



## PuckChaser (28 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> We are comparing municipal wards to provincial and federal ridings?



Considering that's exactly how the Premier is framing his rationale for reducing councillors, its topical. You also missed the remainder of the post, which was more about geographical size of the ridings. Toronto is likely one of the few municipalities that this sort of cut would work on, because of the density of the population.


----------



## Altair (28 Jul 2018)

Ottawa has 23 councillors,  with less than half of the population of toronto,  yet ford says he has no plans to change the number of councillors in ottawa. 

Very much a settling of scores by a scorned politician.


----------



## mariomike (28 Jul 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Ottawa has 23 councillors,  with less than half of the population of toronto,  yet ford says he has no plans to change the number of councillors in ottawa.
> 
> Very much a settling of scores by a scorned politician.



Ottawa has 41,000 per ward councillor.

Toronto will have 109,000 per ward councillor.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-ford-upends-toronto-ward-system-ahead-of-fall-municipal-elections/


----------



## PuckChaser (28 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Ottawa has 41,000 per ward councillor.
> 
> Toronto will have 109,000 per ward councillor.
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-ford-upends-toronto-ward-system-ahead-of-fall-municipal-elections/



Did you read my post at all, or just completely miss the point and cherry pick a quote? Ottawa's land area is almost 5 times the size of Toronto. Geography has to play a major role in number of councillors/MPPs/MPs as well. There's dimishing returns when your councillor is responsible for a massive area. You're telling me that Toronto councillors will be hard done by to represent 26 sq KM areas, instead of 12.5 sq KM? Meanwhile, if the City of Ottawa follows the new Toronto model, they go from roughly 100 sq KM wards to 330 sq KM wards.

Also in the "hell must have froze over" category, Doug Ford is taking the lead from the Toronto Star, after this editorial in 2014 stated that Toronto should have 1 councillor per federal/provincial riding: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/19/torontos_dysfunctional_city_hall_needs_reform.html

They've really flipped since then: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2018/07/27/doug-ford-spits-in-the-face-of-toronto.html


----------



## mariomike (28 Jul 2018)

Puckchaser, 

I was replying to Altair.  I posted my source.

Here it is again,

QUOTE

The Canadian Press

THE GLOBE AND MAIL

July 26, 2018

APPROXIMATE POPULATION PER COUNCILLOR

Toronto (25 councillors) 109,000

Ottawa (23 councillors)  41,000
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-ford-upends-toronto-ward-system-ahead-of-fall-municipal-elections/

END QUOTE



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Doug Ford is taking the lead from the Toronto Star, after this editorial in 2014 stated that Toronto should have 1 councillor per federal/provincial riding: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/19/torontos_dysfunctional_city_hall_needs_reform.html



No Puckchaser. That is not an "editorial". 

That is an "Opinion •Commentary".

This is also an "Opinion •Commentary". In the very same Toronto Star. Two days before the link you selected to post, 

QUOTE

"Downsizing city council doesn't make sense"
Nov. 17, 2014
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/17/downsizing_city_council_doesnt_make_sense.html

END QUOTE

"Opinion •Commentary" are not editorials.

THIS, is the Toronto Star editorial,

QUOTE

Star Editorial Board

Fri., July 27, 2018

Doug Ford spits in the face of Toronto
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2018/07/27/doug-ford-spits-in-the-face-of-toronto.html

END QUOTE


----------



## Altair (28 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Ottawa has 41,000 per ward councillor.
> 
> Toronto will have 109,000 per ward councillor.
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-ford-upends-toronto-ward-system-ahead-of-fall-municipal-elections/


With the premier of toronto in charge,  I think Quebec is going to be seen as the responsible and stable province regardless of the winner in October. 

Also,  as a comparison,  montreal has 65 councillor, and it works out to something around 29-30 thousand per councillor.


----------



## mariomike (29 Jul 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> With the premier of toronto in charge,  I think Quebec is going to be seen as the responsible and stable province regardless of the winner in October.
> 
> Also,  as a comparison,  montreal has 65 councillor, and it works out to something around 29-30 thousand per councillor.



An Opinion - Commentary. Not an editorial.

QUOTE

Doug Ford will have his revenge on Toronto. We did not vote for him for mayor, we did not — the majority of us — vote for him for premier, and so now he will mess us up. Because he can, and because many of his loudest supporters in other parts of the province like nothing more than to see us get the high hard one, and many more of his loudest supporters think the entire apparatus of government is useless and should be burned to the ground.

London, England has only 25 members for a population of more than eight million people. But that city also has 32 elected borough councils, many with more than 50 or even 70 members, and each of those has its own mayor. He also noted that Los Angeles has only 15 councillors and a mayor, but failed to mention the 97 neighbourhood councils that are part of its government structure. Chicago, about the size of Toronto, has 50 councillors, a mayor, and an elected clerk and treasurer — slightly larger than the body Toronto would have had after this election. New York City, between its city council, its community boards, and its borough presidents, has more than 3,000 politicians running it.
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ZyAaWNyXAZ8J:https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/07/27/fords-move-to-slash-toronto-council-without-consultation-an-undemocratic-move.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

END QUOTE


----------



## Journeyman (29 Jul 2018)

> *Editorial*
> noun
> A newspaper article expressing the editor's opinion on a topical issue.
> https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/editorial



False dichotomy:  An editorial _is_  an opinion piece.


Back to the latest political 'he said - she said'


----------



## ModlrMike (29 Jul 2018)

Wait... the Red Star had an opinion piece critical of a Conservative politician? When did that start?  :facepalm:


----------



## mariomike (29 Jul 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Wait... the Red Star had an opinion piece critical of a Conservative politician? When did that start?  :facepalm:



Like it or not, the Toronto Star has the highest circulation of any daily newspaper in Canada. 

Higher than the Globe and Mail.

Higher than the National Post and the Toronto Sun combined.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (29 Jul 2018)

Incorrect, my Padiwan learner.  ;D

Top: Globe and Mail.

And just about equal to the other two you named taken together (though neither of them is the next or even the two next most circulated dailies in Toronto. Those honours go to the 24 Hours Toronto and Metro Toronto, which together exceed the Star's readership by 30%.

http://www.cision.ca/trends/canadas-top-20-daily-newspapers/

And, BTW, all proportions kept, the next two top papers (after the G&M and TorStar) beat the hell out of everybody for readership: La Presse and the Journal de Montreal come in at 300% higher circulation that the Globe and Mail (no.1 overall) when you adjust to consider that it addresses itself to only 25% of the population of Canada, as opposed to the G&M addressing itself to the other 75%.


----------



## mariomike (29 Jul 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Incorrect, my Padiwan learner.  ;D
> 
> Top: Globe and Mail.



Thanks, OGBD.  

My source was,

Daily Newspaper Circulation Report 2015
https://nmc-mic.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2015-Daily-Newspaper-Circulation-Report-REPORT_FINAL.pdf

Based on 2015 statistics, the Toronto Star is Canada's highest-circulation newspaper on overall weekly circulation. Although it is a close second to The Globe and Mail in daily circulation on weekdays, it overtakes the Globe in weekly circulation with both its Saturday and Sunday editions, especially given that the Globe does not publish Sunday editions.


----------



## Jarnhamar (29 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Like it or not


Sage advice for Torontonians who aren't happy about the election. 

Ontario was so tired of the Liberals they aren't even a recognized party at this time. Perhaps if Torontonians were a little more cognizant of the bigger picture they could have leaned in a different direction and possibly save themselves some angst. 

Ford isn't just kicking cans down the road he's picking them up and moving them. Maybe it's good maybe it's bad but it's pretty clear Ontario wanted change and that's what he's doing and for good or for ill that's what we're getting.


----------



## YZT580 (29 Jul 2018)

Smart politics actually.  Clean house and get all the questionable stuff over with during the first year of your mandate and then spend the next 3 years dealing with less touchy subjects.  Peoples' memories don't normally last 4 years; they will only remember the last 12 months or so.  Wynn is a prime example.  Her bad press simply got worse in the last year of her government.  There was no time to forget.


----------



## Cloud Cover (30 Jul 2018)

The established bureaucracy at QP would have had a lot to do with this. There's no way Ford rolled into office and just issued this whopping command out all by himself.  It's probably true that the provincial knives are out and after every whining councilor who has caused them grief since 2003.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Smart politics actually.  Clean house and get all the questionable stuff over with during the first year of your mandate and then spend the next 3 years dealing with less touchy subjects.  Peoples' memories don't normally last 4 years; they will only remember the last 12 months or so.  Wynn is a prime example.  Her bad press simply got worse in the last year of her government.  There was no time to forget.


Depends.

Sometimes people get really angry about Premiers unilaterally imposing their will on their local municipalities and then vote for the party who says they will restore the status quo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_municipal_referendums,_2004


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Jul 2018)

You can't hold up Quebec as some sort of standard. They are totally out of step with the rest of the country. Always will be. It's their nature. :rofl:


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jul 2018)




----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

>


There are about 7500 people working for the TPS, 5200 police officers, where are TCC is losing 22 of 47 city Councillors. 

Not sure that is the best comparison.


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jul 2018)

No?

What's going to protect Toronto from criminals , 22 council members or 800 police officers? 

Just consider the cuts "modernization".


----------



## observor 69 (30 Jul 2018)

"Premier Doug Ford’s bombshell move to cut the size of Toronto city council nearly in half is a win for the suburbs, one sure to penalize people living in the downtown core, say political experts.

“The media keeps calling this a reform. That’s a mistake,” said Roger Keil, a professor and former director of the City Institute at York University. “This is gerrymandering: changing political boundaries in order to favour the party in power. It is a very blatant attempt to change the rules of the game so the opposition can’t win.”

In the current 44-seat council, suburban councillors held the balance of power, said Evrim Delen, a political consultant and former campaign staffer for 2014 mayoral candidate David Soknacki. After a four-year consultation, Torontonians were poised to elect 47 councillors this October in a redistricting that would add three downtown seats and equalize downtown and suburban representation.

“The 25-seat council definitely takes us back to the suburban advantage,” Delen said. “It brings us back to the time of downtown under-representation.”

The four-year consultation that recommended a 47-seat council dismissed the 25-seat option because downtown wouldn’t have enough representation. City staff explored adding a 26th downtown ward, but this plan was dismissed because it “does not achieve voter parity” and “capacity to represent” — or the number of constituents per city councillor — would be “reduced significantly,” according to the final report of the Toronto Ward Boundary Review."

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2018/07/28/how-does-the-urban-suburban-divide-play-out-in-a-25-seat-toronto-council.html


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> No?
> 
> What's going to protect Toronto from criminals , 22 council members or 800 police officers?
> 
> Just consider the cuts "modernization".


Comparing cutting 15 percent of the force, compared to 46 percent of the city council is really not the same thing.

I mean, sure, lets use your logic, and have the Premier eliminate the City of Toronto completely and have it run by the province(actually within his power to do).

Only 47 councillors and 1 mayor positions are eliminated, compared to 800 police officers.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

Baden Guy said:
			
		

> "Premier Doug Ford’s bombshell move to cut the size of Toronto city council nearly in half is a win for the suburbs, one sure to penalize people living in the downtown core, say political experts.
> 
> “The media keeps calling this a reform. That’s a mistake,” said Roger Keil, a professor and former director of the City Institute at York University. “This is gerrymandering: changing political boundaries in order to favour the party in power. It is a very blatant attempt to change the rules of the game so the opposition can’t win.”
> 
> ...


Yup. Can't win the mayoral race, that's fine, with the provincial one and make the rules as such that Toronto elects ford Nation in their next election.

Best way to take out your political rivals.


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jul 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Comparing cutting 15 percent of the force, compared to 46 percent of the city council is really not the same thing.
> 
> I mean, sure, lets use your logic, and have the Premier eliminate the City of Toronto completely and have it run by the province(actually within his power to do).
> 
> Only 47 councillors and 1 mayor positions are eliminated, compared to 800 police officers.



I like the way you think. Maybe put the chief of police in charge of the city, you know, until we can get this crime stuff under wraps.

Maybe you can answer this in layman's terms. What does a city councillor do? What impact will reducing these positions really have?

MarioMike has pointed out numerous times here that Toronto can't install a speed bump without a bunch of permissions. Do they need 47 councillors if they don't even have the ability to get speed bumps installed in a quick and timely manner? Will less councillors mean a more streamlined system with less administration headache or will it double the required amount of effort? What do these men and women actually do?


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I like the way you think. Maybe put the chief of police in charge of the city, you know, until we can get this crime stuff under wraps.
> 
> Maybe you can answer this in layman's terms. What does a city councillor do? What impact will reducing these positions really have?
> 
> MarioMike has pointed out numerous times here that Toronto can't install a speed bump without a bunch of permissions. Do they need 47 councillors if they don't even have the ability to get speed bumps installed in a quick and timely manner? Will less councillors mean a more streamlined system with less administration headache or will it double the required amount of effort? What do these men and women actually do?


I do not know what the Goldilocks number is for any major city, western cities seem to get away with less, eastern cities and Quebec usually more, and in the end, the level of services from each varies greatly, both within Canada and within the same province. I do think that Toronto should probably have a little more than 2 more councillors than the city of Ottawa, but what the perfect number is, hard to say.

 What I will say is that it's would probably be best for the citizens of Toronto to decide what is best for them, than the Premier of Ontario. After living through the agglomeration process in Quebec, and how a Premier rammed that process down the throats of municipalities without consultation or regard for what the citizens wanted, I will never side with a Premier deciding that they know better than the citizens of the city.

He should just hold a referendum on it, but I doubt he will.


----------



## mariomike (30 Jul 2018)

Anyone concerned about emergency services in Toronto during the Ford Nation era,

Toronto's emergency services unions negotiate with City Hall. Not Queen's Park.

"Toronto firefighters have scored a big victory over Mayor Rob Ford in their struggle for jobs and resources."
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/toronto-council-adds-to-fire-budget-in-big-win-for-firefighters-union/article7401182/

Doug Ford, firefighters union clash 
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/04/19/doug_ford_firefighters_union_clash_over_fire_truck.html

The Toronto firefighters union has only ever endorsed one mayoral candidate in recent memory. That was David Miller.

They certainly did not endorse Rob, or Doug during his failed attempt to become mayor.

Toronto Police Chief accepts formal apology and retraction of previous comments from Councillor Doug Ford
https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/08/14/police_chief_bill_blair_to_address_media_today.html

"How Toronto police surveillance closed in on Rob Ford"
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/10/31/tracking_the_mayor_how_toronto_police_surveillance_closed_in_on_rob_ford.html

"'Closed by Rob Ford': Budget cuts close Toronto fire hall, four trucks taken out of service"
https://nationalpost.com/news/closed-by-rob-ford-budget-cuts-close-toronto-fire-hall-four-trucks-taken-out-of-service

Public safety in Toronto was so badly compromised during the Ford Nation era, that Council took away his power to govern during a State of Emergency in the City. 

The vote passed 41-2, with only Rob and Doug Ford voting against it.

Taxpayers: Do you think Doug has forgotten that? 

If Toronto voters had felt safer during the Ford Nation era, they would have elected Doug Ford instead of John Tory.

As to what Toronto councillors do, they oversee a $11.12 billion dollar annual budget and a 10-year capital budget and plan of $25.98 billion.

How many does it take to run a city?



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> QUOTE
> 
> London, England has only 25 members for a population of more than eight million people. But that city also has 32 elected borough councils, many with more than 50 or even 70 members, and each of those has its own mayor. He also noted that Los Angeles has only 15 councillors and a mayor, but failed to mention the 97 neighbourhood councils that are part of its government structure. Chicago, about the size of Toronto, has 50 councillors, a mayor, and an elected clerk and treasurer — slightly larger than the body Toronto would have had after this election. New York City, between its city council, its community boards, and its borough presidents, has more than 3,000 politicians running it.
> https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ZyAaWNyXAZ8J:https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/07/27/fords-move-to-slash-toronto-council-without-consultation-an-undemocratic-move.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca
> ...


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jul 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I do not know what the Goldilocks number is for any major city, western cities seem to get away with less, eastern cities and Quebec usually more, and in the end, the level of services from each varies greatly, both within Canada and within the same province. I do think that Toronto should probably have a little more than 2 more councillors than the city of Ottawa, but what the perfect number is, hard to say.



So like myself you don't know exactly what councillers even do. It seems like you're basing your opinion on the idea that Toronto is bigger = they need more than Ottawa. But how does population size effect a councillers job? If 2 councilors can legitimately do the job that 4 are getting paid to do then cutting the number down to 2 is just streamlining, isn't it?

If there's a correlation that a certain number of citizens require a certain number of councillers then yea maybe it's a bad idea. I haven't seen a solid _explanation _why Toronto needs 47. I'm quite open minded to being wrong here.



> What I will say is that it's would probably be best for the citizens of Toronto to decide what is best for them, than the Premier of Ontario. After living through the agglomeration process in Quebec, and how a Premier rammed that process down the throats of municipalities without consultation or regard for what the citizens wanted, I will never side with a Premier deciding that they know better than the citizens of the city.



It could be best if it's left up to the citizens of Toronto about how many councillors the have, true. That can also be taken advantage of too. Maybe they should bump those numbers up to 60, you know just to make sure everyone's covered. Wink wink.

I'm not exactly in the know how everything works in the military but I'm confident saying the CAF has a problem with too many councillers and not enough police, if you catch my drift.

PS I think I keep butchering how to spell councillor  :nod:


----------



## Remius (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So like myself you don't know exactly what councillers even do. It seems like you're basing your opinion on the idea that Toronto is bigger = they need more than Ottawa. But how does population size effect a councillers job? If 2 councilors can legitimately do the job that 4 are getting paid to do then cutting the number down to 2 is just streamlining, isn't it?
> 
> If there's a correlation that a certain number of citizens require a certain number of councillers then yea maybe it's a bad idea. I haven't seen a solid _explanation _why Toronto needs 47. I'm quite open minded to being wrong here.
> 
> :



I'm the same way.  I'm not sure how many is enough.  a combination of population and geographic responsibility I would hazard as a guess. 

The role of city council is a legislative one.  Creating, developing policies, by-laws, city programs etc.  Voting on the budget, advocating for their constituents.  Being accountable etc.

Consider this though.  Municipal politics will have the greatest and direct impact on your day to day life.  It is likely the one level of government you would want to have the best representation at.  And councillors (in most of ontario) don't have a party system meaning that they truly do follow the wishes of their constituents.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Jul 2018)

Did Ford not say that this would bring TO in line with the federal and provincial boundaries, instead of a bunch of willy nilly fiefdoms? I don't see a problem doing a reset for that reason.


----------



## mariomike (30 Jul 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> And councillors (in most of ontario) don't have a party system meaning that they truly do follow the wishes of their constituents.



To paraphrase Mayor LaGuardia, there's no Liberal or Conservative way to fix a sewer.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So like myself you don't know exactly what councillers even do. It seems like you're basing your opinion on the idea that Toronto is bigger = they need more than Ottawa. But how does population size effect a councillers job? If 2 councilors can legitimately do the job that 4 are getting paid to do then cutting the number down to 2 is just streamlining, isn't it?


I am not the most familiar with the system Toronto has set up, I do know that I like the system Montreal has set up, and that Councillors in that city pull double duty in many cases, being both a representative of their Borough and Mayor of their municipality. As such, they have powers of taxation, their budgets, and how those tax dollars are used in their community, as well as having a say in how the greater Montreal area is run. And these Mayor/Councillors site on the montreal regional board for their municipality, they also have their own city Councillors to answer to who are not included in the 65 city councillors for the city of Montreal. For example, in DDO, a demerged city on the island of montreal, they have two spots on the Montreal city council, while having 8 councillors for the town of DDO itself. As a result, there is a lot of Councillors for montrealers to air their grievances to, and in general, in my experience, there are very fast response times to mail and emails about local issues.

Again, I am familiar with how montreal works, and the system is obviously different in Toronto. But it's kind of a open question if 25 Councillors can effectively represent 2.9 million people. 116 000 people for every councillor to be responsible for. if even 1 percent of them are emailing their representative a week, that's over a 1000 emails to respond to. Are these councillors getting increased staffing? Are they just working more overtime? Are they going to burn out and not even try to keep up anymore? Hard to say. Is it saving money? Probably not much.





> If there's a correlation that a certain number of citizens require a certain number of councillers then yea maybe it's a bad idea. I haven't seen a solid _explanation _why Toronto needs 47. I'm quite open minded to being wrong here.
> 
> It could be best if it's left up to the citizens of Toronto about how many councillors the have, true. That can also be taken advantage of too. Maybe they should bump those numbers up to 60, you know just to make sure everyone's covered. Wink wink.


Maybe. Maybe not. But maybe a tad bit of consultation should have been done. Instead it's a top down, rammed through legislation, in the middle of a election campaign. The campaign began on may 7th. So I expect lawsuits from those running, wanting to be reimbursed for time off work, nomination fees, money spend campaigning. This isn't the way to do thing, but this is how it's being done. 





> I'm not exactly in the know how everything works in the military but I'm confident saying the CAF has a problem with too many councillers and not enough police, if you catch my drift.
> 
> PS I think I keep butchering how to spell councillor  :nod:


Yes, however just firing 46 percent of the officers in the CF without any idea how that would effect day to day running of the CF, operations, readiness, while not adding a single NCM wouldn't be the way you would fix things, is it?

Edit: DDO has 8 councillors, not 6.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Did Ford not say that this would bring TO in line with the federal and provincial boundaries, instead of a bunch of willy nilly fiefdoms? I don't see a problem doing a reset for that reason.


Don't buy that for a second.

Ottawa has 7 federal ridings.

Carleton-Mississippi Mills
Nepean-Carleton
Ottawa Centre
Ottawa-Orléans
Ottawa South
Ottawa-Vanier
Ottawa West-Nepean

They currently have 23 councillors. Ford has no plans to change the amount of councillors in Ottawa.

Hamilton has 5 federal ridings. They currently have 15 councillors + a mayor. No plans to change that.

Only Toronto. I wonder why? Probably because he didn't lose elections in these two municipalities.


----------



## Remius (30 Jul 2018)

The debate is hardly new. 

This op ed from the Tor Star in 2014 was in favour of what Ford just did.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/19/torontos_dysfunctional_city_hall_needs_reform.html

it actually mentions matching it to federal ridings...


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> The debate is hardly new.
> 
> This op ed from the Tor Star in 2014 was in favour of what Ford just did.
> 
> ...


The solution is in the Article.

Montreal and New York have party systems.


----------



## mariomike (30 Jul 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> This op ed from the Tor Star in 2014 was in favour of what Ford just did.
> https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/19/torontos_dysfunctional_city_hall_needs_reform.html



Same link Puckchaser posted in Reply #65.



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/19/torontos_dysfunctional_city_hall_needs_reform.html



It is an "Opinion - Commentary" from an individual.

This is also an "Opinion - Commentary" from an individual. In the very same Toronto Star. Two days before the link you and Puckchaser selected to post, 

QUOTE

"Downsizing city council doesn't make sense"
Nov. 17, 2014
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/17/downsizing_city_council_doesnt_make_sense.html

END QUOTE


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Jul 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Only Toronto. I wonder why? Probably because he didn't lose elections in these two municipalities.





			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Geography has to play a major role in number of councillors/MPPs/MPs as well. There's dimishing returns when your councillor is responsible for a massive area. You're telling me that Toronto councillors will be hard done by to represent 26 sq KM areas, instead of 12.5 sq KM? Meanwhile, if the City of Ottawa follows the new Toronto model, they go from roughly 100 sq KM wards to 330 sq KM wards.



Or you know, evil Tories.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Or you know, evil Tories.


population has way more to do with,  or should have way more to do with,  the number of councillors in a region. 

How is a city councilor supposed to effectively represent around 115 000 constituents?  That is more people than most canadians municipalities which have a mayor and several councillors of their own.


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Jul 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> How is a city councilor supposed to effectively represent around 115 000 constituents?



Its a lot easier when your ward is only 10KM wide vice 40 or 50 KM. When you cram 4,000 people in a sq KM, a lot of their issues are similar because most are living in multi-family apartments. One neighbourhood 10 KM away can have a completely different set of priorities than another when you're in the suburbs.

I have a feeling a lot of the councillors are more pissed about losing this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dDfr89eRd0 than actually losing representation of their constituency.

At the end of the day, this will happen, people will forget it happened by the end of the election in October and go back to complaining about transit in Toronto.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Anyone concerned about emergency services in Toronto during the Ford Nation era,



Not really. It's all in the past and irrelevant to the current situation. Maybe I'm in a minority, but I don't read anything you post about the past, the ambulance service, Rob Ford, etc. It's usually irrelevant to the discussion.

Rob Ford is dead, but keep beating the corpse.

Doug Ford did not keep this secret. Tory decided not to take him serious because he didn't think Ford would win. Now he's playing catch up and losing groud daily.

Doug Ford won a majority government. That is his mandate and perogative. It is also his decision, not Tory's and not Miller's. 

The view through the windshield is much bigger and brighter than the view in the rear view mirror for a reason.

I can see TO being upset. They don't drive Ontario politics anymore. They are no longer the centre of the universe. They are having trouble accepting that the they are no more important than the rest of the province and that the rest of us have a vote.

So, no, I'm not concerned about emergency services in Toronto during the Ford Nation era, but maybe that's just me. I'd rather concentrate on the future and forget the last 15 years when Toronto was in the driver seat.

Time to move on.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Its a lot easier when your ward is only 10KM wide vice 40 or 50 KM. When you cram 4,000 people in a sq KM, a lot of their issues are similar because most are living in multi-family apartments. One neighbourhood 10 KM away can have a completely different set of priorities than another when you're in the suburbs.
> 
> I have a feeling a lot of the councillors are more pissed about losing this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dDfr89eRd0 than actually losing representation of their constituency.
> 
> At the end of the day, this will happen, people will forget it happened by the end of the election in October and go back to complaining about transit in Toronto.


again, if 1 percent of constituents email or mail their representative in a week, it doesn't matter if the ward is 10 kms wide or 50.

No councillor is going to be able to keep up with 115k constituents. 

As for people forgetting about it,  I think the PQ thought that as well,  but I know a lot of people who voted for the liberal party in quebec because of anger of the province ramming through forced mergers early in their mandate. The liberal party of quebec promised referendums  on reversing it and they won,  and a lot of towns demerged as a result.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

https://www.thespec.com/news-story/8768816-nearly-half-of-torontonians-oppose-ford-s-plan-to-slash-city-council-poll-finds/



> Nearly half of Torontonians disapprove of both Premier Doug Ford and his plan to dramatically shrink the size of city council, while a third are in favour of the ward reduction, according to a new poll by Forum Research.



Reason why Ford won't take this to a referendum. 

The people he's supposedly in government for,  are largely opposed to the idea.


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jul 2018)

[quote author=PuckChaser] 

I have a feeling a lot of the councillors are more pissed about losing this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dDfr89eRd0 than actually losing representation of their constituency.


[/quote]

Holy toledo . Those are some sweet perks.


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Jul 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Reason why Ford won't take this to a referendum.



He doesn't have to. Much like at the federal level where the current government can pretty much do what it wants, even if it didn't exactly campaign on it. In this case, people knew what Doug Ford wanted: more efficient government with less waste. The rest of Ontario (and suburban Toronto) voted for that. I realize its probably a shock to the downtown Toronto Liberal/NDP voters, but provincially, the world doesn't revolve around them.


----------



## mariomike (30 Jul 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I have a feeling a lot of the councillors are more pissed about losing this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dDfr89eRd0 than actually losing representation of their constituency.





			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Holy toledo . Those are some sweet perks.



Ford's problem with free perks
https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2010/10/13/fords_problem_with_free_perks.html

Metro can keep it's perks. I took the OT/Stat/shift bonus/ paid duty / meal allowance etc. in cash.

I never paid to park on City property. I never paid to ride the subway when in uniform.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> He doesn't have to. Much like at the federal level where the current government can pretty much do what it wants, even if it didn't exactly campaign on it. In this case, people knew what Doug Ford wanted: more efficient government with less waste. The rest of Ontario (and suburban Toronto) voted for that. I realize its probably a shock to the downtown Toronto Liberal/NDP voters, but provincially, the world doesn't revolve around them.


Of course.  He has a majority government,  he can do whatever he pleases. 

And naturally,  he can get sweet revenge on his political opponents like those in toronto who didn't support him for mayor or didn't vote for him for premier. 

It's all constitutional and well within his power to do so. 

I will just call it as I see it. He could have done this province wide. He focused on toronto. Is toronto the only municipality that has too many councillors per constituent?  I would dare say no. What is good for toronto would probably be good for ottawa or Hamilton,  or Windsor or thunder bay. 

But by focusing on toronto this reeks of settling scores. And he's premier,  he can do that now.  People do have long memories though. Some people still haven't gotten over bob rae,  so I don't think people will forget about this in 4 years time.  And I sure party is going to run on overturning this decision.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Ford's problem with free perks
> https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2010/10/13/fords_problem_with_free_perks.html
> 
> "Nearly half of Torontonians disapprove of both Premier Doug Ford and his plan to dramatically shrink the size of city council, while a third are in favour of the ward reduction, according to a new poll by Forum Research."
> ...


the burbs who more representation in this plan are no doubt ecstatic. 

Same burbs that vote for Ford Nation.  

Just a hunch.


----------



## mariomike (30 Jul 2018)

Same percentage as voted for Doug for Mayor. One-third. 33.73% to be exact.


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Jul 2018)

Seems The Beaverton has a solution to your number of constituents issue: https://www.thebeaverton.com/2018/07/ford-announces-plan-to-cut-toronto-city-council-size-by-killing-1-million-torontonians/


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jul 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Seems The Beaverton has a solution to your number of constituents issue: https://www.thebeaverton.com/2018/07/ford-announces-plan-to-cut-toronto-city-council-size-by-killing-1-million-torontonians/



Order 66?


----------



## Remius (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Order 66?



More along the lines of what Thanos did in the last avengers film.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Seems The Beaverton has a solution to your number of constituents issue: https://www.thebeaverton.com/2018/07/ford-announces-plan-to-cut-toronto-city-council-size-by-killing-1-million-torontonians/


would make his reelection campaign easier without a extra million progressives voting the wrong way.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Same percentage as voted for Doug for Mayor. One-third. 33.73% to be exact.





> Those who didn’t support us, I want you to know I will work even harder to earn your confidence.


 https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.macleans.ca/politics/doug-fords-victory-speech-ontario-is-open-for-business-full-transcript/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwi5qtfr8cfcAhXo6IMKHQLoBf0QFjADegQIABAB&usg=AOvVaw0wO_TNV_cbN1HFS9DRmnnd&ampcf=1

Always funny when politicians say stuff like this then immediately forget about it. 

And yes,  the liberals do it too.


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jul 2018)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-doug-ford-is-right-about-toronto/



> Not every citizen is enraged, however. To be honest, I doubt that one in a thousand Torontonians knows how many council seats there are, or whether this number is too many, too few or just right. What I do know is that Canada’s largest municipal government is unwieldy and dysfunctional – a talking shop for windbags where it’s extremely hard to get stuff done. Even insiders say so.
> 
> That’s the view of Michael Thompson, the long-time city councillor for Scarborough Centre. He’s with Doug Ford on this one. “It’s hard to get us to make decisions,” he told me. “The business of council could be done in a more timely, efficient manner if we had fewer people talking about the same things over and over.”
> 
> ...



So 47 councilors create an administrative burden that slows the system to a crawl and prevents timely resolution of matters. Interesting point of view.


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-doug-ford-is-right-about-toronto/
> 
> 
> So 47 councilors create an administrative burden that slows the system to a crawl and prevents timely resolution of matters. Interesting point of view.


it not 47 councillors that slows the system to a crawl and prevents timely resolution of matters. 

Montreal has 65(more like 200 when you count the demereged cities) and things work very quickly. 

Its 47 independent councillors that makes it unweildy. 

If there were 124 indendent MPPs or 338 independent MPs the problem wouldn't be the number of MPs or MPPs, it would be that there is no party system to push legislation.


----------



## FJAG (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-doug-ford-is-right-about-toronto/
> 
> 
> So 47 councilors create an administrative burden that slows the system to a crawl and prevents timely resolution of matters. Interesting point of view.



As I said above, when we cut back the number of benchers in the Law Society of Manitoba by and to roughly the same number we became significantly more efficient. I'm firmly on board with this move. But then it's been a long time since I lived in Toronto and actually cared about what goes on there.

Incidentally for anyone above that has/had the attitude that Torontonians feel that they are the centre of the universe; well we sure had the attitude back in the 1960s that everything that mattered in the world was situated south of the 401. Not really sure if that has changed any. But that's for another thread.

 :cheers:


----------



## mariomike (30 Jul 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-doug-ford-is-right-about-toronto/



According to a new poll by Forum Research, "a third are in favour of the ward reduction".



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> Same percentage as voted for Doug for Mayor. One-third. 33.73% to be exact.





			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So 47 councilors create an administrative burden that slows the system to a crawl and prevents timely resolution of matters.



Wonder how other cities manage,



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> QUOTE
> 
> London, England has only 25 members for a population of more than eight million people. But that city also has 32 elected borough councils, many with more than 50 or even 70 members, and each of those has its own mayor. He also noted that Los Angeles has only 15 councillors and a mayor, but failed to mention the 97 neighbourhood councils that are part of its government structure. Chicago, about the size of Toronto, has 50 councillors, a mayor, and an elected clerk and treasurer — slightly larger than the body Toronto would have had after this election. New York City, between its city council, its community boards, and its borough presidents, has more than 3,000 politicians running it.
> https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ZyAaWNyXAZ8J:https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/07/27/fords-move-to-slash-toronto-council-without-consultation-an-undemocratic-move.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca
> ...



In 1998, with a smaller population back then, Toronto had more than 100 politicians.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-fords-plan-for-toronto-is-vindictive-and-undemocratic/


----------



## Altair (30 Jul 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> "Not every citizen is enraged, however."
> 
> According to a new poll by Forum Research, "a third are in favour of the ward reduction".


all about the base :


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jul 2018)

No treble


----------



## YZT580 (31 Jul 2018)

Perhaps there is a sweet spot for the number of people required: regardless of population.  Any more than a couple of dozen makes general meetings unwieldy with too many different opinions to try and reconcile.  On the other hand a certain number are required to head committees and planning groups and to respond to constituent complaints. These numbers don't increase exponentially with population.  Most complaints are already handled at the receptionist level; only a few actually go to the the councillor for his/her response.  So  what is the sweet spot?  Perhaps around 25 to 30 making cities like Ottawa and Hamilton just about right.


----------



## Altair (31 Jul 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Perhaps there is a sweet spot for the number of people required: regardless of population.  Any more than a couple of dozen makes general meetings unwieldy with too many different opinions to try and reconcile.  On the other hand a certain number are required to head committees and planning groups and to respond to constituent complaints. These numbers don't increase exponentially with population.  Most complaints are already handled at the receptionist level; only a few actually go to the the councillor for his/her response.  So  what is the sweet spot?  Perhaps around 25 to 30 making cities like Ottawa and Hamilton just about right.


A disorderly mob is no more an army than a heap of building materials is a house-Socrates.

Again, how Montreal can have a city council of 65 people work with little issues, legislation flowing, and projects getting done, while Toronto is a unruly mob with 47 Councillors is simple. 

It's all a matter of organization. In this case, parties.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4358422/toronto-city-council-other-cities/



> Here’s how Toronto compares to other cities of a similar size:
> 
> Toronto, population of 2.73 million
> 
> ...


So most cities around the world have more or less come to the conclusion that a city councillor shouldn't have more than 100 thousand constituents, but of course, Toronto is going to be special.

So there is no consensus magic number, but either way, Toronto is going to be on the high side.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (31 Jul 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> A disorderly mob is no more an army than a heap of building materials is a house-Socrates.
> 
> Again, how Montreal can have a city council of 65 people work with little issues, legislation flowing, and projects getting done, while Toronto is a unruly mob with 47 Councillors is simple.
> 
> It's all a matter of organization. In this case, parties.



Montreal doesn't work though.  Have you been there?  It is the exact opposite of working! Citing the most corrupt city in Canada as an example for Toronto to emulate is  :facepalm:


----------



## Remius (31 Jul 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Perhaps there is a sweet spot for the number of people required: regardless of population.  Any more than a couple of dozen makes general meetings unwieldy with too many different opinions to try and reconcile.  On the other hand a certain number are required to head committees and planning groups and to respond to constituent complaints. These numbers don't increase exponentially with population.  Most complaints are already handled at the receptionist level; only a few actually go to the the councillor for his/her response.  So  what is the sweet spot?  Perhaps around 25 to 30 making cities like Ottawa and Hamilton just about right.



Ottawa has 12 standing committees.  None of them seem frivolous to me and seem to all have a purpose (as in not fluffy).  Each has a chair and a few members.  So Ottawa has 23 council members plus the mayor who sits on at least one committee.  there are also 5 advisory committees with a council member acting as a liaison.  there is also an Aboriginal Working committee but does not seem to have any council members on that. 

Toronto has 12 Standing committees but...has 65 community council and other advisory and boards etc.   Seems a bit excessive.


----------



## Altair (31 Jul 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Montreal doesn't work though.  Have you been there?  It is the exact opposite of working! Citing the most corrupt city in Canada as an example for Toronto to emulate is  :facepalm:


How does Montreal not work? When did Denis Corderre have issues passing legislation, or approving projects? Or Valarie Plante? Corderre was easily able to finance and approve the disaster that the Formula E race, was able to push the nonsense for the Montreal 375, the mayor of Montreal and their party doesn't have to herd cats like in Toronto to get things done. In large cities, it seems like having political parties at the municipal level is the way to go.

As for corruption, I think you are talking two Mayors ago, for I haven't heard anything regarding Corderre or Plante. Have you? Calling Montreal the most corrupt city in Canada is quite a claim to make without any evidence.


----------



## YZT580 (31 Jul 2018)

Saying Toronto councillors are independent of a party is flat out wrong.  The vast majority are NDP.  The only difference in individuals is the distance to the left which varies to the extreme.


----------



## Remius (31 Jul 2018)

Actually it is flat out right.  There is no party system, no whip etc.  How one leans politically is not the same thing.


----------



## Altair (31 Jul 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Saying Toronto councillors are independent of a party is flat out wrong.  The vast majority are NDP.  The only difference in individuals is the distance to the left which varies to the extreme.


They may be ideologically NDP, but their is no party apparatus that can keep them in line.


----------



## FJAG (15 Aug 2018)

> Ontario caps off summer session with bill slashing Toronto city council
> 
> 'People want smaller government,' Premier Doug Ford says, but court challenge looms
> 
> ...



See full article here:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/better-local-government-act-passes-1.4785145

 :cheers:


----------



## Xylric (15 Aug 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> See full article here:
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/better-local-government-act-passes-1.4785145
> 
> :cheers:



Might be a silly question, but how on earth does the province have the power to reduce the number of municipal Councillors?


----------



## larry Strong (15 Aug 2018)

Under Canada's constitution, municipalities officially exist as "creatures of the provinces," meaning that their very existence in Ontario is completely dependent on the will of Queen's Park.


Cheers
Larry


----------



## mariomike (15 Aug 2018)

Reply #128,

> "Ontario caps off summer session with bill slashing Toronto city council"

The City of Brockville has 8 councillors for 30,000 residents. Roughly 1 councillor per 3,750 constituents.
https://brockville.com/index.cfm?ID=205

The City of Toronto will now have 1 councillor per 112,000 constituents. 

Only reason I mention Brockville is because their former mayor, now Minister of Municipal Affairs, was tweeting about it,

"Our gov’t #ForThePeople has delivered a streamlined, cost-effective Toronto council and is ensuring local gov’t works to make life better for all. for your leadership and our @OntarioPCParty caucus for your support!"
https://twitter.com/SteveClarkPC/status/1029490942083039232


----------



## Cloud Cover (15 Aug 2018)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> Under Canada's constitution, municipalities officially exist as "creatures of the provinces," meaning that their very existence in Ontario is completely dependent on the will of Queen's Park.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> Larry



Agree. However, the arbitrary exercise of power by a Province will always attract scrutiny for an potential effects that impact democratic rights of its citizens. It would be an uphill battle for Toronto to establish a genuine case without a sympathetic ear from the judiciary, which is entirely possible and damned near probable. Doesn't mean the city will win, but they will have a full opportunity to litigate.


----------



## FJAG (15 Aug 2018)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> Under Canada's constitution, municipalities officially exist as "creatures of the provinces," meaning that their very existence in Ontario is completely dependent on the will of Queen's Park.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> Larry



You will generally find provincial legislation which deals with municipal structures, powers etc throughout the province. In most provinces it's called the "Municipal Act". It's also quite common to make special provincial legislation for some of the larger centres (such as the City of Winnipeg Act, the City of Toronto Act etc) that deal with that specific municipality. Long story short, whatever structure, powers etc that a given municipality has is as a result of provincial enabling legislation.

On top of that there are several other acts in each province such as "Planning Acts", "Municipal Elections Acts", "Municipal Conflict of Interest Act", etc which deal with specialized categories of powers and responsibilities

 :cheers:


----------



## larry Strong (15 Aug 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> You will generally find provincial legislation which deals with municipal structures, powers etc throughout the province. In most provinces it's called the "Municipal Act". It's also quite common to make special provincial legislation for some of the larger centres (such as the City of Winnipeg Act, the City of Toronto Act etc) that deal with that specific municipality. Long story short, whatever structure, powers etc that a given municipality has is as a result of provincial enabling legislation.
> 
> On top of that there are several other acts in each province such as "Planning Acts", "Municipal Elections Acts", "Municipal Conflict of Interest Act", etc which deal with specialized categories of powers and responsibilities
> 
> :cheers:



Thanks for that  

I would be the first to admit I was spouting the layman's version... 

Cheers
Larry


----------



## FJAG (15 Aug 2018)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> Thanks for that
> 
> I would be the first to admit I was spouting the layman's version...
> 
> ...



You were actually bang on. Specifically s 92(8) of the Constitution Act, 1867 (previously known as the British North America Act, 1867) provides as follows:



> 92. In each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws in relation to Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated; that is to say,
> . . .
> 8. Municipal Institutions in the Province.
> . . .



Hence, municipalities are exclusively creatures of the provincial legislatures.

 :cheers:


----------



## mariomike (16 Aug 2018)

Unfortunately, according to the 2000 report from the Toronto city solicitor, the Canadian constitution gives the Province of Ontario the right to opt out of any  federal amendment that takes away from its provincial legislative power over Toronto.

Meaning, Ontario would have to agree to allow the secession of Toronto from the province.

In 2000, Toronto city council proposed for Toronto secession to be made a ballot issue — only to have the proposal swiftly slapped down by Ontario’s then-Progressive Conservative government of Mike Harris.

If the GTA were allowed to secede from Ontario, its estimated $304 billion GDP would make it Canada's fourth-wealthiest province. Just behind Alberta.

It would only be slightly larger geographically than the Province of P.E.I..

Jonathan Malloy, a Carleton political science professor, called the chance of Ontario allowing Toronto to secede, "pretty much impossible."

National Post 3 Aug., 2018


----------



## larry Strong (16 Aug 2018)

> The city of Toronto has little hope of winning a legal challenge against the newly enacted Bill 5, says a confidential legal opinion obtained Thursday by the Toronto Sun.
> 
> The opinion by city solicitor Wendy Wahlberg and her staff makes it clear that City Clerk Ulli Watkiss is “now confident” she is able to deliver a 25-ward election in time for Oct. 22, and litigation or a sudden reversal to a 47-ward model will result in “continued uncertainty” for voters, candidates and those administering the election.
> 
> “Among other things it could undermine the clerk’s ability to administer a fair election and public confidence in a fair outcome of the election,” Wahlberg’s opinion states.



More at link...

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/levy-citys-legal-eagles-say-fighting-bill-5-a-hopeless-case


Cheers
Larry


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Aug 2018)

https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/08/21/premier-doug-ford-puts-stop-to-drivers-licence-fee-hike.html



> _ Premier Doug Ford puts stop to driver’s licence fee hike_
> 
> 
> Motorists are getting a break as Doug Ford’s new Progressive Conservative government slams the brakes on fee increases slated to kick in Sept. 1 for driver’s licences and related knowledge and road tests.


----------



## Bluebulldog (22 Aug 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Ottawa has 12 standing committees.  None of them seem frivolous to me and seem to all have a purpose (as in not fluffy).  Each has a chair and a few members.  So Ottawa has 23 council members plus the mayor who sits on at least one committee.  there are also 5 advisory committees with a council member acting as a liaison.  there is also an Aboriginal Working committee but does not seem to have any council members on that.
> 
> Toronto has 12 Standing committees but...has 65 community council and other advisory and boards etc.   Seems a bit excessive.



This is the crux of much of this debate. It's not necessarily the amount of bodies......it's what they effectively do.

Several smaller municipalities cited in earlier posts actually have part time councillors. ( Not every municipal councillor job is a full time gig).

Several municipalities also have effective staff and committees which are often volunteer, or partial compensation, which work extremely well at developing policy, and making recommendations for same. 

Several municipalities also have admin staff ( Toronto is no different). The notion that Toronto City Councillors are always the face that a member of their constituency sees is fallacy. Most have staff who in fact filter, and respond to the majority of inquiries, and issues, ( often without the councillor even getting involved).

Is Ford taking issue with Toronto in particular? Of course. Is it "revenge"? Possibly.....or quite possibly he's doing something about a government he previously served on, and has esoteric knowledge of, and was powerless to do anything about it when he served.

Yes. The GTA is upset.... The previous Govt. treated it as the center of the Universe, to the detriment of the rest of the Province. They have just fallen out of favour as the favourite child....some sulking and whining is to be expected.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (22 Aug 2018)

I was listening to a talk radio station the other day when Scott Gilmore was talking about even more drastic cuts then this.....how about cutting out every provincial Govt? 
On my phone so if someone would paste the Macleans link I'd appreciate it.


----------



## mariomike (22 Aug 2018)

Bluebulldog said:
			
		

> Is Ford taking issue with Toronto in particular? Of course. Is it "revenge"? Possibly.....or quite possibly he's doing something about a government he previously served on, and has esoteric knowledge of, and was powerless to do anything about it when he served.



Toronto voters have an "esoteric knowledge of" Doug as a one-term councillor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P183mGLvkI

He had the third worst attendance record on council. Behind one who was dying of cancer. The other had brain surgery.

As the mayor's older brother, Doug referred to himself as "co-mayor" of Toronto. 

Until council stripped the "co-mayor" of his power and transferred that power, and staff, to Deputy Mayor Norm Kelly. 

When Doug ran for mayor, he lost to John Tory. 

Now he is at Queen's Park, he can finally take care of Toronto.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Aug 2018)

Take care of Toronto and the rest of Ontario, thankfully.


----------



## mariomike (22 Aug 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Take care of Toronto and the rest of Ontario, thankfully.



He took care of Toronto. 

As for the rest of Ontario's 444 municipalities,

QUOTE

Global News

August 20, 2018

No plans to cut other local councils in Ontario, Ford tells municipal leaders

In a keynote address to delegates at the annual conference of the Association of Municipalities Ontario (AMO), Ford said he “occasionally” gets asked whether the new government at Queen’s Park will do to other local governments – like Ottawa – what it did to Toronto.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4397011/doug-ford-amo/

END QUOTE


----------



## a_majoor (22 Aug 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, according to the 2000 report from the Toronto city solicitor, the Canadian constitution gives the Province of Ontario the right to opt out of any  federal amendment that takes away from its provincial legislative power over Toronto.
> 
> Meaning, Ontario would have to agree to allow the secession of Toronto from the province.
> 
> ...



This is much like reading the articles supporting California seceding from the United States. True, they have a multi-billion dollar economy, but _only because it is connected to the greater United States_. California imports electricity, since it does not generate its own, and even their water supply is somewhat dependent on an aqueduct and irrigation system connected to other parts of the US.

Toronto is much the same. Unlike Singapore or Hong Kong (a current and former modern city-state) or even Ancient Athens, Toronto has no means of existing independently from the rest of the province or nation. Being a "city-state" will be largely fictitious, and I would imagine that if Toronto councillors were allowed free reign, you would see a lot of people and business departing for Ontario proper, other provinces or the United States.

The issue of connectivity is highly important, but treating Toronto, the GTA and Golden Horseshoe as the "centre" and the remainder of the province as essentially a hinterland to be exploited for taxes and resources is not a model for success either (as the Liberals demonstrated since 2002).


----------



## mariomike (22 Aug 2018)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Toronto has no means of existing independently from the rest of the province or nation.



There was never a proposal to secede from Canada. Only from Ontario. 

This should read, "secession from Ontario",



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> In 2000, Toronto city council proposed for Toronto secession to be made a ballot issue — only to have the proposal swiftly slapped down by Ontario’s then-Progressive Conservative government of Mike Harris.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2018)

Another court case lost for Doug Ford.

First Tesla now this.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/judge-ruling-city-council-bill-election-1.4816664

I wonder what happens next for Toronto city council...


----------



## Blackadder1916 (10 Sep 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Another court case lost for Doug Ford.
> 
> First Tesla now this.
> 
> ...



And Justice Belobaba's ruling for those interested http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/scj/2018ONSC5151.pdf


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Sep 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Another court case lost for Doug Ford.
> 
> First Tesla now this.
> 
> ...



Give themselves a raise probably.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Give themselves a raise probably.



Ha!  probably...or a golden parachute.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Sep 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Ha!  probably...or a golden parachute.



Maybe you're right abour them needing a parachute  ;D



Premier Ford Overrules Judge with Notwithstanding Clause, Toronto City Council Cuts Move On
https://thenectarine.ca/politics/premier-doug-ford-to-use-notwithstanding-clause-and-appeal-court-decision/


----------



## FJAG (10 Sep 2018)

> Premier Doug Ford to use notwithstanding clause to cut size of Toronto city council



Article here.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/judge-ruling-city-council-bill-election-1.4816664

Personally, I thought that the decision by Judge Belobaba is a bit of a stretch. The heart of his decision is here:



> [17] Second, a federal or provincial legislature is sovereign and cannot bind itself. The provincial legislature can over-rule or contradict a previously enacted law. A subsequent
> enactment that is inconsistent with an earlier enactment is deemed to impliedly repeal the
> earlier enactment to the extent of the inconsistency.6 Thus, the argument that the City of
> Toronto Act7 somehow imposed an immutable obligation to consult cannot succeed. The Province was entitled to enact Bill 5 and ignore completely the promise to consult that was set out in the previous law.
> ...



Essentially he confirmed the provincial government's broad unfettered authority to make the law that it did but then points to two so-called constitutional breaches. The second, the one about the size of the constituencies is entirely arbitrary on his part and glosses over the simple fact that these constituencies already exist as Federal ridings and provide entirely adequate representation. Regardless of any Toronto commissioned review, it is the role of the legislature to determine if representation is adequate. The first, respecting the existing candidates freedom of expression is, IMHO, also a made-up ground. The change of boundaries in mid-election did not interfere with the candidates freedom of expression, merely modified the audience within which they were free to express themselves. This might very well have been unfair and difficult but provinces can be that way and still not create a breach of any "constitutional right". 

IMHO this judgment reads like a case of "situating the estimate" to get the desired result. An expedited appeal would be the way to go. I think re-passing the legislation with a "notwithstanding clause" is certainly doable but sends a bad message. The clause should be used on "line in the sand" issues. Quite frankly this doesn't strike me as such a significant piece of legislation that the government should go to the wall on it. It does make a statement though which will be appreciated by many of the Party's base.

 :cheers:


----------



## PuckChaser (10 Sep 2018)

I don't think Judge Belobaba thought of the far-reaching repercussions of his decision. He's basically drawn a line in the sand saying that its against the Charter Rights of individuals if they're in riding over 66,000 people and only have 1 MP/MPP. There's only 1 Ontario riding Federally that is below that threshold (Kenora) and 10 more for the remainder of the provinces (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_of_Canadian_federal_ridings). It's also specious reasoning to state that it's "the middle of a campaign" when notice was given 90 days out from the municipal election and the candidate list isn't even finalized until 14 Sep 18.

I don't see the decision standing on appeal, but we won't need that thanks to Notwithstanding. A primer on that clause is here: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/what-is-the-notwithstanding-clause-1.4087536


----------



## ModlrMike (10 Sep 2018)

The only point in that ruling that I would concede would be the one about changing things in the middle of an election. Better to have said "this will be the last 47 member council, so prepare yourselves".


----------



## mariomike (10 Sep 2018)

Resistance is futile. 

QUOTE 

Report prepared by the City Solicitor, City of Toronto 
June, 2000 (updated October 2001)

Secession from the Province of Ontario

• Subsection 42(1)(f) of the Constitution Act provides that amendments to the Constitution of Canada to establish a new province are to be made in accordance with the general amending procedure set out in section 38. This procedure requires resolutions of the Senate, the House of Commons and at least two thirds of the provinces having at least 50% of the population of all the provinces.
• Subsection 38(2) provides that where a constitutional amendment is made under 38(1) that derogates from the legislative powers, the proprietary rights or any other rights or privileges of the legislature or government of a province, the resolutions referred to in the previous bullet must be supported by a majority of the members of each of the Senate, the House of Commons and the Legislative Assemblies required under subsection (1). In other words, a majority of all members of these bodies must support the amendment, not just the majority of those present and voting.
• Subsection 38(3) provides that when the majority of the members of a Legislative Assembly rejects a resolution for a constitutional amendment that would derogate from the powers, rights or privileges of that Assembly, the government of that province can opt out.
• Consequently, an amendment to the Constitution Act to create Toronto as a new province would require support from the Province of Ontario.


END QUOTE

Note: In 2000, Toronto city council proposed for Toronto secession from Ontario to be made a ballot issue — only to have the proposal swiftly slapped down by Ontario’s then-Progressive Conservative government of Mike Harris.


----------



## Cloud Cover (11 Sep 2018)

I’m sure the rest of Ontario would be happy to build a wall. Toronto is not representative of Ontario, and Queens Park, most of the regulating bodies, the OHRC included, would be better located someplace real and staffed with  people of common sense. As FJAG states above, as well as many constitutional experts, not just lawyers but political scientists as well, todays court decision was a stretch and likely an incorrect decision. 
That being said, pulling a stunt like Bill 5 at the material  time it was done, was a now or never decision, like so many other necessary decisions that will be forth coming because we are out of Time. . There has been so much damage done to the fabric of this province in the past 20 years, almost all of it stems from Toronto based interests. Only sustained use of  S33 will un#uck it. And if Toronto special interests whines and complains and throws it toys away, cut off the highways, slow down the extra food, need gas? Sorry that trucks not coming today....go to the courts and Ford will use section 33. Hopefully the gig is up....
#hadenoughofToronto


----------



## GR66 (11 Sep 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> I’m sure the rest of Ontario would be happy to build a wall. Toronto is not representative of Ontario, and Queens Park, most of the regulating bodies, the OHRC included, would be better located someplace real and staffed with  people of common sense. As FJAG states above, as well as many constitutional experts, not just lawyers but political scientists as well, todays court decision was a stretch and likely an incorrect decision.
> That being said, pulling a stunt like Bill 5 at the material  time it was done, was a now or never decision, like so many other necessary decisions that will be forth coming because we are out of Time. . There has been so much damage done to the fabric of this province in the past 20 years, almost all of it stems from Toronto based interests. Only sustained use of  S33 will un#uck it. And if Toronto special interests whines and complains and throws it toys away, cut off the highways, slow down the extra food, need gas? Sorry that trucks not coming today....go to the courts and Ford will use section 33. Hopefully the gig is up....
> #hadenoughofToronto



That seems a little extreme doesn't it?  The courts find something unconstitutional so you propose blanket application of the Notwithstanding Clause as a response, and if people complain you blockade them and cut off their food and fuel supplies?

I'm actually not convinced that Bill 5 is totally a bad thing but the timing was poor.  If the Conservatives are so convinced that the change MUST take place now rather than after the next election could they not simply legislate a change to the election date to give more time for candidates to adjust?  As for the representation part of the Judge's ruling I tend to agree with those that see that as a weak argument since those are already existing electoral districts.

But why does every action and reaction these days have to be so extreme?  Will the world end if the reduction in the council doesn't take effect until the next election?  Will having council members having to serve larger wards make Toronto government screech to a halt?  Of course not on both counts.  But to hear many people talk on these issues and you'd assume the sky was falling and the end days are here.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> The only point in that ruling that I would concede would be the one about changing things in the middle of an election. Better to have said "this will be the last 47 member council, so prepare yourselves".



Yeah, I would agree on that point.  I have no problem with trimming the fat. But to do it once the campaign has started isn't very good. 

Also, maybe he should have campaigned on that.


----------



## Underway (11 Sep 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I don't see the decision standing on appeal, but we won't need that thanks to Notwithstanding. A primer on that clause is here: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/what-is-the-notwithstanding-clause-1.4087536



From what I can tell the Gov't is going to appeal the decision anyways.  If it falls to appeal then Section 33 will not need be applied continuously.  The issue her isn't whether the Ontario is within its rights, its that Ford is using a sledgehammer to put in a finishing nail.  Standby for more uses of the notwithstanding clause against everyone and all.  Primacy of government over the courts is going to look real nasty in Ontario for a while yet.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (11 Sep 2018)

Personally, I don't have a problem with primacy of the elected officials over the courts. That's what democracy is all about. 

Contrary to some of the (in my mind illiterate) statements of so called experts found in the press, there is *NO* requirement whatsoever to be in an "exceptional" circumstance in order to call upon section 33 of the Constitution. it's purpose is solely to ensure that the primacy of the legislature/Parliament over the courts, and as result the primacy of the electorate, remains the supreme decision making body in the nation/provinces.


----------



## YZT580 (11 Sep 2018)

Agreed.  The not withstanding clause should have been used long ago.  The judges have built themselves up to the point where it is their rulings that dictate the law rather than parliaments and that isn't the way it is supposed to be.  In many rulings, their personal bias shows through.  The decision re|: the pipeline being one glaring example.


----------



## FJAG (11 Sep 2018)

Time for me to pipe up again. 

There is no "war" between the elected officials and the courts. Firstly the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was created by legislatures and declared by them to be the supreme law of the land and that all other laws need to be subordinate to it. The judges are also appointed by the legislatures (or more accurately by the cabinets/premiers/prime minister) for the express purpose of settling disputes between the citizens and between citizens and the state. In that respect the judges that you get are the ones that the legislatures have deemed to be the ones to best do the job (and yes, conservative legislatures appoint conservative judges and liberal legislatures liberal ones and, provincially, socialist legislatures socialist ones. Legislatures reap what they sow.

Once appointed, the judges are quite constrained in their job of interpreting the laws that legislatures make. They must abide firstly by the constitution itself, secondly by the legislation and thirdly (or concurrently) by the rulings of courts higher than they are.

Sometimes judges do screw up. That's why you have appeal courts. Two levels of appeal courts so that laws within a province are consistently applied throughout the province and nationally so that laws which have national import are applied consistently across the nation.

Sometimes legislatures (or more accurately the various departments and ministers of justice that draft the laws)  screw it up. Toews was famous for consistently drawing up criminal laws that pretty much everyone knew would never pass muster but they voted on them and put them out there anyway only to have them struck down afterwards.

In the long run, legislatures do remain supreme. They can change the Charter of Rights and Freedoms if enough of them want to; so far they haven't wanted to do that. They can use the "notwithstanding" clause if an issue is important enough to them. The clause was specifically introduced at the urging of Peter Lougheed who, like others, felt that without it the legislatures would, in fact, loose the final word to the courts. It was part of the "Kitchen Accord" which caused almost everyone (remember Rene Levesque) to sign on to the new Charter. Trudeau's daddy didn't like the clause and blamed Chretien for it being there.



> To date, two provinces have used the power of override. Saskatchewan has used it to force provincial employees to work and to allow the government to pay for non-Catholics to attend a Catholic school; Quebec uses it to allow the government to restrict language of signage.



Anyway, that's a long way around to saying that it isn't so much judges who are "building themselves up" as it is legislatures that are basically passing poorly conceived or worded laws which contravene the constitutional legislation that they themselves have created. Sometimes they need to be told to fine tune what they've created. It's generally not hard to amend legislation so that it complies with the Charter and this goes on all the time. The trouble is politicians have no restraints in whining when they think their toes have been stepped on and that always makes good press. Judges on the other hand speak only through their judgements and, generally, only a handful of people read those and most reporters only look for the easy soundbites in the judgements (when they understand them at all)

I personally don't disagree with Ford's wanting to use the "notwithstanding clause". There simply isn't time to run through the appeal process and quite frankly, as I said above, I happen to think this judge reached too far. It comes with a risk though but that's a political decision and not a legal one. I really couldn't give a rat's a** about Toronto's city council and wish that my party spent some time trying to figure out why it continues to support the dairy cartel (when it's philosophically counter to conservative thinking; I think they are kowtowing gutlessly to a tiny part of the farm sector) or why we have our shorts in a knot over a school sex education program which wasn't really a problem and was only offensive to a fraction of the conservative base (but that was the platform so go to it)

 :cheers:


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 Sep 2018)

Another view on the matter and about another "notwithstanding clause"

http://brianlilley.com/judges-have-their-own-notwithstanding-clause/


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Sep 2018)

I read Los Angeles has twice Toronto's population and only 15 councilors. Vancouver has 11. 

The biggest complaint in my opinion seems to be that there are too many politicians in Toronto to get anything done in a timely manner.

So personal feelings about Ford aside, is he right? 
IS there too many councilors to get anything done?
Will cutting the numbers in half improve the system?

Ford talked about reducing the government, kind of sounds exactly what he's trying to do.


----------



## PuckChaser (12 Sep 2018)

Especially when each Toronto councilor gets paid $192K a year. I can see why they're making a big stink about having more competition for their jobs.


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Especially when each Toronto councilor gets paid $192K a year.



QUOTE

CBC
Apr 09, 2018 

A Toronto city councillor's pay is about $112,000.

Mayor John Tory topped out at $192,503, according to his office. That's less than some 905 councillors took home last year. 

Some councillors from smaller GTA municipalities making big bucks
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/some-councillors-from-smaller-gta-municipalities-making-big-bucks-1.4609427

END QUOTE



> So glad you're here to fact check the thread into rabbit holes.


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I read Los Angeles has twice Toronto's population and only 15 councilors.





			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> QUOTE
> 
> London, England has only 25 members for a population of more than eight million people. But that city also has 32 elected borough councils, many with more than 50 or even 70 members, and each of those has its own mayor. He also noted that Los Angeles has only 15 councillors and a mayor, but failed to mention the 97 neighbourhood councils that are part of its government structure. Chicago, about the size of Toronto, has 50 councillors, a mayor, and an elected clerk and treasurer — slightly larger than the body Toronto would have had after this election. New York City, between its city council, its community boards, and its borough presidents, has more than 3,000 politicians running it.
> https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ZyAaWNyXAZ8J:https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/07/27/fords-move-to-slash-toronto-council-without-consultation-an-undemocratic-move.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca
> ...







			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Vancouver has 11.



QUOTE

Vancouver Sun

Compared to elsewhere, Toronto doesn't actually have all that many city councillors
https://vancouversun.com/news/canada/toronto-doesnt-actually-have-all-that-many-city-councillors/wcm/bba005bb-aa30-4996-810c-0d5ca4dd5f54?video_autoplay=true
Even with its giant city council, the city has fewer politicians per person than almost anywhere else in Canada 

When ranked against other major Canadian cities, Torontonians already have fewer councillors than almost anyone else.

Should Ford be successful in reducing the number of councillors from 44 to 25 plus a mayor, the city would have an average of one elected municipal representative for every 105,060 people.

In Metro Vancouver, by contrast, there are currently 15,893 people per elected municipal representative. Having never faced regional amalgamation, the Vancouver area is still governed by a patchwork of city, town, village and district governments.

Roll them all together and Metro Vancouver has 21 mayors and 94 total councillors — not including the chiefs and councillors of the city’s First Nations.

END QUOTE


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I read Los Angeles has twice Toronto's population and only 15 councilors. Vancouver has 11.
> 
> The biggest complaint in my opinion seems to be that there are too many politicians in Toronto to get anything done in a timely manner.
> 
> ...



L.A. is a really bad example to use. They are the highest paid council in the US.  They actually get paid more than the Governor of the state.  About 185,000 USD a year plus an additional 100, 000$ no questions asked slush fund.  To top it off they get about 20 or so staff with around 8 cars per councillor.  And don't forget that there are around 97 neighbourhood councils as well.

Toronto is a bargain by comparison with three times the councillors.


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Toronto is a bargain by comparison with three times the councillors.



At $112,000 a year they are a bargain.

Considering our chief paramedic made $223,824.33 last year - not including over $10,000 in taxable benefits.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Sep 2018)

Is the $112K just pay, or total compensation (ie. benefits including pension, if any)?


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Is the $112K just pay, or total compensation (ie. benefits including pension, if any)?



See,

https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/council/policies-and-guidelines/

They have to get re-elected every four years.

Whereas, it's almost impossible to throw out a unionized City employee - unless they become a public disgrace.


----------



## Mick (12 Sep 2018)

City of Vancouver has 11 councillors (incl mayor) for a population of approx 635,000 people.  That's 1 representative for every 57,700 residents.

Using this equation, Toronto, with a population of 2.7 million residents, ought to have 47 councillors.  

What exactly is the problem?


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

mick said:
			
		

> City of Vancouver has 11 councillors (incl mayor) for a population of approx 635,000 people. That's 1 representative for every 57,700 residents.



According to the Vancouver Sun,

QUOTE
https://vancouversun.com/news/canada/toronto-doesnt-actually-have-all-that-many-city-councillors/wcm/bba005bb-aa30-4996-810c-0d5ca4dd5f54?video_autoplay=true

In Metro Vancouver, by contrast, there are currently 15,893 people per elected municipal representative. Having never faced regional amalgamation, the Vancouver area is still governed by a patchwork of city, town, village and district governments.

Roll them all together and Metro Vancouver has 21 mayors and 94 total councillors — not including the chiefs and councillors of the city’s First Nations.

END QUOTE


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Sep 2018)

Okay, so forget comparisons then.

IS there too many councilors to get anything done?
Will cutting the numbers in half improve the system?


----------



## Mick (12 Sep 2018)

Less representation in the name of: cost saving?


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Okay, so forget comparisons then.



Why?


----------



## Mick (12 Sep 2018)

Maybe it is possible to be relatively over-represented, but I don't think it's just a simple matter of cutting a deliberative body in half in the name of saving money, or for the notion of making consensus easier or decision-making less burdensome.

A larger, more diverse population will always be more difficult to democratically empower, compared to a smaller population.  Larger population = more representation.

I agree that it's possible to tweak / overhaul the status quo, but slashing by 50 percent - with no studies or research to justify it - seems a bit arbitrary.


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Okay, so forget comparisons then.



Why?



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> IS there too many councilors to get anything done?



The work will always get done. Depends on how long the taxpayers are willing to wait, and what level of service they expect.

We could ask the same question, "How many police officers, firefighters and paramedics does the city need?"

The taxpayers get the level of protection and service that they pay for. 

Former ( Conservative ) Ontario premier Bill Davis: Ford wrong to use notwithstanding clause
https://tvo.org/blog/current-affairs/former-ontario-premier-bill-davis-ford-wrong-to-use-notwithstanding-clause

For reference to the discussion, prior to 1998, Toronto had well over 100 councillors, and six mayors and six city halls.

The geographic size remains the same now as it was prior to 1998. The geographic area remains the same now as it was in 1954. 

I am sure the population has increased significantly since then, however.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Sep 2018)

mick said:
			
		

> Less representation in the name of: cost saving?



Getting stuff done quicker. 
Not being slowed down by endless red tape and bureaucracy. 
Trimming fat.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Sep 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Why?



Because the core of my question is will this action of cutting councilors actually improve the situation in Toronto or make it worse. 

Common complaint, it takes forever to get anything done and there's too many hands in the pot. Will axeing these counclers fix that?


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

Regarding whatever the correct the ratio of councillors to residents is.

Worth mentioning that one-third of Canada's population lives within 160 km of Toronto.

A significant percentage of them come into Toronto for employment, or other reasons.

So, the work these councillors do has an impact on them as well. Even though they pay their property taxes to other municipalities.


----------



## Mick (12 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Getting stuff done quicker.
> Not being slowed down by endless red tape and bureaucracy.
> Trimming fat.



Are we now counting elected officials as part of the bureaucracy?  Does parliamentary process count as "red tape"?  Is democratic debate the process that needs to be culled?  Or is it implementation of that is slowed by bureaucratic processes and delays (by the actual bureaucracy)?

Using the same logic, why not cut the number of federal MPs in half?

Will Premier Ford "trim fat" by reducing Ontario MPPs by half?


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Because the core of my question is will this action of cutting councilors actually improve the situation in Toronto or make it worse.
> 
> Common complaint, it takes forever to get anything done and there's too many hands in the pot. Will axeing these counclers fix that?



Honest question, because I'm not from Toronto.  What is slowing things down and not getting done?  What is the real reason for the council's dysfunction if it exists at all?

I'm all for efficiency but I would like to know what is inefficient about Toronto that other cities are excluded from the axe?  In Ottawa the Light rail has been delayed twice now and it took years to build a pedestrian bridge.  Was it too many councillors?  Lack of councillors?  Not really, just bad contracts and shoddy city staff work.

Over the years, would not a drug using Mayor with one mess after another supported by his brother be a source of dysfunction?

Apparently this guy , a Ford ally is one such source of problems...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/matt-elliott-on-councillor-giorgio-mammoliti-1.4799032

I agree that the Premier can do this and is well within his right.  How he went about it, the timing and the perception though isn't that good though.


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Honest question, because I'm not from Toronto.  What is slowing things down and not getting done?  What is the real reason for the council's dysfunction if it exists at all?
> 
> I'm all for efficiency but I would like to know what is inefficient about Toronto that other cities are excluded from the axe?  In Ottawa the Light rail has been delayed twice now and it took years to build a pedestrian bridge.  Was it too many councillors?  Lack of councillors?  Not really, just bad contracts and shoddy city staff work.
> 
> ...



Rob and Doug made Toronto ( the forth largest city in North America, only NYC, LA and Mexico City are bigger ) the laughingstock of the world and a staple on the American late night talk show circuit. Who are the clowns - our city councillors, who held our government together, or the Fords, who brought it to its knees?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Sep 2018)

2018 Salaries	
Councillor’s salary	$114,306.06
Mayor’s salary	$192,503.43

This is their base salary. Most, if not all, also make thousands more sitting on committees and boards.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Mayor's real wage was approx $250,000
Same thing goes for councillor's. More money from committees and appointments.

Not to mention all the perks.

The numbers posted on the website do not indicate a politicians true wage or the true cost of their benefits.


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I wouldn't be surprised if the Mayor's real wage was approx $250,000



CBC News 

Mar 23, 2018 

Ontario releases its annual Sunshine List of top public sector salaries

Toronto Mayor John Tory earned $188,529.02 
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-sunshine-list-2017-public-sector-salary-disclosure-1.4589673

END QUOTE


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Sep 2018)

So they can't even get the info right on the website?

Good thing they have all that high priced help.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Sep 2018)

"City of Vancouver" =/= "Metro Vancouver".  See here ("Membership").

City of Vancouver has a mayor and 11 council members.  So yes: about 55,000+people per member.


----------



## PuckChaser (12 Sep 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> A Toronto city councillor's pay is about $112,000.



Link I found had erroneous labelled the mayor's salary as Councillor average, thanks for the clarification.

You can keep the trolling to yourself, however.


----------



## Cloud Cover (12 Sep 2018)

mick said:
			
		

> Will Premier Ford "trim fat" by reducing Ontario MPPs by half?



Just the ones with a propensity to dis the Ford Nation, apparently.


----------



## FJAG (12 Sep 2018)

> Federal Disallowance Can’t Be Used To Block Ford’s Use Of Notwithstanding Clause
> Voters who are displeased will have to take it out at the ballot box.
> By Emma Paling
> 
> ...



See full article here:

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/09/11/federal-disallowance-can-t-be-used-to-block-ford-s-use-of-notwithstanding-clause_a_23524147/?utm_hp_ref=ca-homepage

 :cheers:


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Just the ones with a propensity to dis the Ford Nation, apparently.



Karma time for City Hall, apparently, 
"You guys have just attacked Kuwait!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P183mGLvkI
Check out Doug.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (12 Sep 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> So they can't even get the info right on the website?
> 
> Good thing they have all that high priced help.



Yes, it is a good thing that they have high priced help.  And they do have their figures right.

The $188k amount as reported in the CBC article is based on the annual reports that the city have on line.  It is the historical amount that the mayor earned in 2017.  (They seem to do their fiscal year reporting in calendar years)  The $192K amount is the salary that Mayor Tory is projected to earn in 2018 (the year is not over yet) The difference is likely due to the automatic salary increase that takes effect on 1 Jan of each year to reflect the change in the CPI for Toronto, which for the past year was 2.1%.


----------



## mariomike (12 Sep 2018)

Public sector salary disclosure 2017 calendar year, aka "The Sunshine List":

Mayor Tory, John 

Salary paid: $188,529.02

Taxable benefits $1,408.22

https://www.ontario.ca/page/public-sector-salary-disclosure-2017-all-sectors-and-seconded-employees


----------



## Bluebulldog (13 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I read Los Angeles has twice Toronto's population and only 15 councilors. Vancouver has 11.
> 
> The biggest complaint in my opinion seems to be that there are too many politicians in Toronto to get anything done in a timely manner.
> 
> ...



Actually. The LA model ( and indeed other similar cities) works quite well from a representation standpoint.

A councillor is the one that actually attends the meetings where things are tabled and voted on. However, they aren't always the ones dealing with the faces. There are a number of appointees ( staff, who do that, typically called aldermen, etc who represent the populace in a given geographic area, or ward).

Cutting city council isn't a bad thing if it gets mired by the differing agendas, people wishing to be heard etc.....

Pretty sure Ford didn't say that the GTA couldn't restructure so that each councillor was able to appoint / hire and alderman to assist in determining the needs of their constituents either. For that matter, they might not even need to be FT positions.


----------



## Journeyman (13 Sep 2018)

I'm sorry, but I just can't see this as anything but a petulant vendetta by Ford against a city council for having mocked and 'disrespected' him and his brother for their abysmal behaviour and council attendance.  

It seems to be a growing theme in contemporary politics, and some social circles.

 :2c:


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (13 Sep 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, but I just can't see this as anything but a petulant vendetta by Ford against a city council for having mocked and 'disrespected' him and his brother for their abysmal behaviour and council attendance.
> 
> It seems to be a growing theme in contemporary politics, and some social circles.
> 
> :2c:



Probably is...but I'm glad you think politics was all sunshine and rainbows before now....

Oh, you meant like that? ;D


----------



## Journeyman (13 Sep 2018)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Probably is...but I'm glad you think politics was all sunshine and rainbows before now....
> 
> Oh, you meant like that? ;D


Well, more unicorns and rainbows.... (as in excellent examples are non-existent or fleetingly rare)  :nod:

No, politics has always had a degree of 'mud-wrestling with a pig' to it, but I think messing with Charter of Rights and Constitutional issues, plus trash-talking the judiciary (Canada actually has a pretty respectable one), just to bitch-slap some people who hurt your feelings is pretty petty.... even by the low standards expected from Ford.   :


----------



## PuckChaser (13 Sep 2018)

Almost every constitutional law expert that's been interviewed on the case has said the judge was completely wrong in his decision, so I'm not sure where the Charter is being messed with. In fact, its pretty telling that the judge had to reach into freedom of expression instead of democratic rights, because democratic rights do not apply to municipal elections.


----------



## QV (13 Sep 2018)

How do you mess with the charter when the action you take is empowered by the charter?


----------



## FJAG (13 Sep 2018)

Just for the record, when the City council voted in 2017 to increase the number of wards from 44 to 47, there was considerable opposition to it and in fact many (including some councillors) favoured the 25 ward system. The matter ultimately went to the Ontario Municipal Board for a review on the grounds that the 47 wards would not have voter parity due to unequal distribution of voters. It is notable that of the three OMB members, one-Blair S Taylor-dissented and would have imposed a system using the 25 federal riding boundaries. 

There are some interesting facts including the one that starting in 2000 and lasting until 2017, the city used the then existing 22 federal ridings as the basis of their wards taking each riding and dividing it in half so that there were 44 councillors representing roughly 60,000 people each. Going back to the federal ridings should therefore not be that difficult albeit that there are now 25 and that under the Ford legislation there is only one councillor for each and therefore representing about 120,000 people. 

The real issue it seems is not so much the voter parity (because everyone acknowledged that the 47 ward system that the city designed wouldn't achieve that anyway for a few elections but the number of people being represented by each councillor. In fact the federal riding system achieved better immediate voter parity than the 47 ward system. The dissenting board member stated:



> [52] Sixth, I find that the use of the FEDS {federal electoral district} would result in a fair election in 2018, that the continued use of the FEDS would provide the basis for future elections that are fair, that they will result in boundaries that are derived from regular, thorough, arms-length, open public processes and which can be quickly, reliably, and relatively inexpensively adjusted and adopted by the City on an ongoing basis.
> 
> [53]Finally, I strongly disagree with the submission of City’s counsel that: “…there is no jurisdiction or statutory authority that the City must achieve parity [of voter/population] in any particular time frame”
> 
> ...



Or, of course, the decision on the number of councillors is also one within the jurisdiction of the provincial government. 

See full decision in this article:

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2017/12/13/omb-approves-47-wards-for-toronto-for-the-2018-election.html

Long story short, from a constitutional point of view, using the federal ward system achieves voter parity before the 47 ward system by probably some two elections and is therefore the federal ward system is more constitutionally sound. The number of councillors is an open question as to whether it should be 25 or 50 but typically, the larger a committee becomes, the more dysfunctional it is as a decision making body.

I'm not a member of Ford Nation but I think that his use of the notwithstanding clause is fundamentally defensible in this very unique case.

 :cheers:


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Sep 2018)

The ratio of council members to citizens is a bit of a red herring.  City of Vancouver has 11.  Township of Langley, with less than 1/5 the population of Vancouver (but over 2.5 times the land area), has 8.  Kamloops, with less than 1/7 the population of Vancouver (and also with 2.5+ times the land area), has 8.

I don't know whether there is a statutory minimum, and don't care - it's beside the point.  Clearly the number of council members doesn't have to be scaled up linearly with population in order for a municipal government to function effectively.


----------



## Cloud Cover (13 Sep 2018)

Listened to Canada Talks on Sirius tonight, I think it was the CBC slot. They called the segment The Premiers Power Hour. 3 former provincial leaders were on the line. (Christie Clark, Brad Wahl and Jean Charest). All 3 of them concurred, without hesitation, that section 33 was the right call. 
Further, Clarke and Charest both made statements that this has been a “long time coming”, and that courts have become far too “adventuresome” (word attribution-Clarke), have “ misinterpreted their role and ultimately it is the divine right of a Parliament in a democracy to have the final say” (statement attribute to Charest) and, according Wahl, Premiers can sleep peacefully as he did when he used S33.
Clarke opined that unless Trudeau wants to trigger an epic constitutional crisis that could see the provinces push for a constitutional change that limits much further the activity of the courts, the federal Liberals had better be careful.  It seems that maybe a few premiers (current and former) were consulted before the trigger was pulled.


----------



## FJAG (13 Sep 2018)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> The ratio of council members to citizens is a bit of a red herring.  City of Vancouver has 11.  Township of Langley, with less than 1/5 the population of Vancouver (but over 2.5 times the land area), has 8.  Kamloops, with less than 1/7 the population of Vancouver (and also with 2.5+ times the land area), has 8.
> 
> I don't know whether there is a statutory minimum, and don't care - it's beside the point.  Clearly the number of council members doesn't have to be scaled up linearly with population in order for a municipal government to function effectively.



In fairness to Toronto, it has a population of 2,731,571 while Vancouver is 631,486 or 4.3 times the size. With 11 counsellors, Vancouver has roughly 60,000 people per councillor which is roughly what ratio Toronto has now at 47. 

I agree with you. I don't believe that there is a ratio issue or that 60,000 people represented by one councillor has some kind of magic to it. IMHO (others, including the present council of Toronto, obviously disagree) the number of councillors should be determined according to how efficiently the council will function. That's best done through smaller councils with efficient rules of order for council meetings and committee work.

 :cheers:


----------



## mariomike (14 Sep 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> In fairness to Toronto, it has a population of 2,731,571 while Vancouver is 631,486 or 4.3 times the size. With 11 counsellors, Vancouver has roughly 60,000 people per councillor which is roughly what ratio Toronto has now at 47.



Whatever the math, Toronto is the fourth most populous city in North America, behind Mexico City, New York City and Los Angeles.

That does not include the GTA ( Durham, Halton, Peel and York ).

Prior to amalgamation, our political structure was one Chairman, six mayors, and 28 wards.

( East York had 1 ward, Etobicoke 4, North York 7, Scarborough 6, Toronto 8, York 2. )

Each of those 28 wards had two councillors, for a total of 56 councillors, six mayors and one chairperson.

It seems as our population increases, our political representation decreases.

For example, our councillor in Swansea announced yesterday she will not be seeking re-election. That's unfortunate. She and her family lived in our neighbourhood for many years and we knew them. She worked at the Swansea Town Hall since 2004. She became our councillor in 2010, and was re-elected in 2014. 

She is a part of our community. 

She also knows Doug from his one term at City Hall, and failed mayoral campaign,

"We know what he wants to do. Now, unfortunately, he's capable of doing these vindictive things he threatened to do when he was a councillor," she said.

My uneducated guess is that much needed transit projects could be on the chopping block next. 

The King Street pilot project will likely be the first to go.


----------



## Infanteer (14 Sep 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> In fairness to Toronto, it has a population of 2,731,571 while Vancouver is 631,486 or 4.3 times the size. With 11 counsellors, Vancouver has roughly 60,000 people per councillor which is roughly what ratio Toronto has now at 47.



As well, Toronto amalgamated, while Vancouver has not.  How many councilors do Vancouver, Burnaby, North Vancouver, West Vancouver, Richmond, Surrey, Delta and Langley have together?

Either way, you are right in your latter statement - I don't care what the ratio of electors to councilors is, I care on how efficiently and effectively the city is run.


----------



## mariomike (14 Sep 2018)

From what I remember of the Ford Nation era, my uneducated guess is that he has only just begun to take care of Toronto.

There seems to be little to stop the province from taking over the Toronto Transit Commission ( TTC ). 

Or any other Agency, Board, Commission, Department or Service ( the ABCDS ) operated by the city.

He could abolish the City of Toronto Act ( 2006 ) without input from the city. 



			
				Infanteer said:
			
		

> I care on how efficiently and effectively the city is run.



I live here, so I do too.

You get what you pay for. Depends on what level of service one expects.

Personally, with a budget the size of Toronto's, I like the idea of a sufficient number of councillors to keep an eye on it - and each other.

"In Vegas, everybody's gotta watch everybody else. Since the players are looking to beat the casino, the dealers are watching the players. The box men are watching the dealers. The floor men are watching the box men. The pit bosses are watching the floor men. The shift bosses are watching the pit bosses. The casino manager is watching the shift bosses. I'm watching the casino manager. And the eye-in-the-sky is watching us all."


----------



## X Royal (14 Sep 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, but I just can't see this as anything but a petulant vendetta by Ford against a city council for having mocked and 'disrespected' him and his brother for their abysmal behaviour and council attendance.
> 
> It seems to be a growing theme in contemporary politics, and some social circles.
> 
> :2c:


I fully agree that it is vendetta by Ford against Toronto council.
If it wasn't many other Ontario cities would have also been targeted. 
Why not Ottawa, London, Hamilton, Windsor ect?
Because Ford is upset that Toronto failed to elect him as mayor?


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2018)

If 5 communities of 120K pop, 1 mayor, and 8 council members each were amalgamated into a Vancouver-sized city, I'd expect the 5+40 to drop to 1+11.


----------



## Cloud Cover (14 Sep 2018)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Municipal government is the level of government that is closest to me, not the province or the feds. It seems to me the easier it is to get hold of a person who actually is familiar with my neighbourhood is going to be far more understanding about the impact of delivery of services in my neighbourhood. I have often felt that with all the municipal downloading that has occurred in Ontario, more entrenched municipal authority and better representation at the local level far outweighs the importance of representation numbers that are equal to the provincial or federal riding distribution level.
> 
> While I 100 percent agree that the judge made more than a palpable error in his decision about Bill 5, and using 33 was probably the most expedient thing to be done, I'm not impressed with the idea that "finding efficiencies" means taking the axe to local government. If anything, improving local government representation and resources would probably end up being cheaper in the long run. What Ford is doing is creating "bigger" government, not efficient government. It is "bigger" interns of distancing itself from neighbourhoods.
> What Ford could have done is change the municipal act to prevent municipalities from engaging in wedge politics issues, like parade permits, sanctuary cities etc. The primary and maybe even the only purpose would be infrastructure, services, zoning and related bylaws and useful things like that. Nothing else to be debated, considered, discussed at taxpayer expense and no power or authority given to a municipality to go down contentious social engineering paths, in fact potentially use legislation to preclude them from even considering it.   I would trade 100 city hall political staff, bureaucrats, lawyers, advisors etc. for 100 more snowplow drivers, crossing guards, health unit nurses, sanitation workers and other services that are more pragmatic.
> ...


----------



## mariomike (14 Sep 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> I'm not impressed with the idea that "finding efficiencies" means taking the axe to local government.



It would have been nice if he had mentioned to Toronto voters that he was going to take an axe to their council before the provincial election.


----------



## FJAG (14 Sep 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> . . .
> Fortunately I live in a municipality where many of our board members etc. are volunteers or receive a small yearly stipend. They make decisions like whether to refresh the gravel road, ditch digging and culvert replacement projects, and whether they should send a letter to Joe Bloggins to remind him to fix his fence so his frickin' sheep stay off the road. These are not, obviously, big city problems and it seems to me mega cities have mega problems to address at the municipal level. Ford has not explained how a smaller council can solve those problems, nor has John Tory et al adequately explained how 47 seat council would solve them either.
> . . .



That to me in a nutshell is what's wrong with most municipal councils and why large ones don't work. These are the type of routine decisions that should be made by staff based on policy guidance/limitations provided by council.

Councils should be the visionaries for a municipality. They should set overarching policy based on staff studies and create a vision for the municipality's future. Rather than making routine decisions, they set limits within which staff is free to make all routine decisions and accomplish the council's vision. The more members that a council has the more likely it is to waste energy and time meddling in matters that should be dealt with by staff. This in turn this undermines the staff's authority and makes them less likely to use their own initiative.

 :cheers:


----------



## FJAG (19 Sep 2018)

The Ontario Court of Appeal has now ruled and released it's decision re the Toronto Council Ward matter.

In short the court stayed the ruling of Justice Belobaba clearing the way for the election to proceed on a 25 ward basis without the need for the legislature to use the "notwithstanding clause".

Along the way the court said the following about Belobaba's decision:



> [12]       The application judge’s interpretation appears to stretch both the wording and the purpose of s. 2(b) beyond the limits of that provision. His decision blurs the demarcation between two distinct provisions of the Charter: the protection of expressive activity in s. 2(b) and the s. 3 guarantee of the democratic rights of citizens to vote and be qualified for office. The s. 3 right to vote and stand for office applies only with respect to elections to the House of Commons and the provincial legislatures: Haig v. Canada, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 995, at pp. 1031, 1033. Section 3 does not apply to municipal elections and has no bearing on the issues raised in this case.. . .
> 
> [18]       Finally, the application judge’s conclusion that Ontario substantially interfered with the voter’s right of freedom of expression when it doubled the ward population size from a 61,000 average to a 110,000 average cannot be supported. The size of the City’s electoral wards is a question of policy and choice to be determined by the legislative process subject to other provisions of the Charter, including s. 15(1). Whether wards of 61,000 or 110,000 are required to ensure effective representation is a debatable issue that cannot be determined by reference to the right to freedom of expression. Further, we share the application judge’s inclination that there is no infringement of s. 15(1).  . . .
> 
> [20]       Our finding of a strong prima facie case on appeal bears upon the analysis under the second and third prongs of the RJR-MacDonald framework: see RJR-MacDonald, at p. 339. We recognize that in this case, Ontario does not have a monopoly on the public interest and that the City also speaks for the public interest. However, having acceded to the argument of the respondents that the more exacting “strong likelihood of success” standard should be applied and having reached the decision that the judgment under appeal was probably wrongly decided, we have no doubt that the moving party would suffer irreparable harm if a stay were not granted. It is not in the public interest to permit the impending election to proceed on the basis of a dubious ruling that invalidates legislation duly passed by the Legislature. We do not accept the respondents’ submission that, because Ontario exercised its legislative authority to enact Bill 5, it does not have “clean hands” and should not be entitled to the equitable relief of a stay from this court.



See the whole decision here:

http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/2018/2018ONCA0761.htm

And the CBC's take on it here:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ford-court-toronto-council-1.4829250

 :cheers:


----------



## Furniture (19 Sep 2018)

My favourite line in the CBC article; "Unfairness alone does not establish a charter breach."


----------



## FSTO (19 Sep 2018)

I have to chuckle when big city mayors go on how they are beholding to the provinces, they should be their own entity and that they shouldn't be ruled by the rural vote.

Excuse me? Last I looked at the federal cabinet all the heavy hitters are from urban ridings and all the provincial cabinet heavies are from urban ridings. In fact in a province like Manitoba, the city of Winnipeg has more seats in the provincial legislature than the rest of the province. I'm pretty sure the Ontario legislature is close to 50% Toronto.

So big cities don't whine to me about your lack of power. In my view you have more than enough power to influence the federal and provincial to bend to your will. I worry about the tyranny of the majority of urban governments when it comes to national infrastructure (ie - pipelines, solar and wind power generation) that can adversely affect rural Canada.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (19 Sep 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> . . . I'm pretty sure the Ontario legislature is close to 50% Toronto.



Since this whole issue is about reducing the number of Toronto municipal wards to the same number and boundaries as the current federal and provincial ridings that are within the city, it is easy to figure out how many Torontonians sit in the legislature - 25.  Out of a 124 seat legislature, that makes it closer to 20%.


----------



## FSTO (19 Sep 2018)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Since this whole issue is about reducing the number of Toronto municipal wards to the same number and boundaries as the current federal and provincial ridings that are within the city, it is easy to figure out how many Torontonians sit in the legislature - 25.  Out of a 124 seat legislature, that makes it closer to *20*%.



Thanks, I pulled my number out of thin air. 
My point still stands, by sheer numbers urban Canada has all the power it needs.


----------



## mariomike (19 Sep 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Thanks, I pulled my number out of thin air.



Fact check,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Toronto#Members_of_Provincial_Parliament


----------



## Cloud Cover (19 Sep 2018)

There are 121 Federal Ridings in Ontario, and 124 Provincial Ridings. 
The GTA is by far the electoral powerhouse in Ontario with 58 Federal ridings of which there are 25 in Toronto proper.


----------



## mariomike (20 Sep 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> The GTA is by far the electoral powerhouse in Ontario < snip >



Half the population of Ontario lives in the GTA ( Halton, Peel, York, Durham and Toronto ).
https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/dp-pd/hlt-fst/pd-pl/Table-Tableau.cfm?LANG=Eng&T=302&SR=1&S=3&O=D&RPP=9999&PR=35

Without the GTA ( population 6,054,191 ), the population of Ontario would shrink to 6,797,630.

If the boundaries were redefined to also include the adjacent city of Hamilton to turn the contiguous Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area ( GTHA ), it would supersede the resized province of Ontario as the 2nd largest province by population. 

That's from the 2011 census. I believe the population of the GTA has increased considerably since then.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Sep 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Half the population of Ontario lives in the GTA ( Halton, Peel, York, Durham and Toronto ).



Is Toronto the provincial epicenter for our economy as well?  Like, is Toronto responsible for most of our revenue or whatever its called?


----------



## mariomike (20 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Is Toronto the provincial epicenter for our economy as well?



You can look that up for yourself,
https://www.google.com/search?rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-CA%3AIE-Address&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&ei=ZYajW6DiMauLjwT4l4WACw&q=toronto+%22economic+engine%22&oq=toronto+%22economic+engine%22&gs_l=psy-ab.12..0i22i30k1.27615.31297.0.33720.2.2.0.0.0.0.91.176.2.2.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.2.172...0i30k1.0.Q6CNr9W2fYw

My reply was to this,



			
				whiskey601 said:
			
		

> The GTA is by far the electoral powerhouse in Ontario < snip >



I'm not an economist. But, I can offer a couple of anecdotal examples about jobs and property values,

When Ontario forced Metro to rescind the Residency Requirement for our city emergency services ( prior to that, recruits had to be long term Metro residents ), it was/is amazing how many applicants suddenly flooded in from out of town,

eg: "I found it interesting that those fire fighters with many years experience with a full-time fire department elsewhere were willing to leave to pursue there ( sic ) “dreams” as they put it and work for Toronto Fire. It made me feel a little bit special that I have been a part of an organization that others envy and want to be a part of as well."
https://www.torontofirefighters.org/wp-content/uploads/firewatch/Spring2009.pdf
Secretary - Treasurer,
Toronto Professional Fire Fighters’ Association
I.A.F.F. Local 3888

At least in my neighbourhood, property values have increased substantially over the years.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Sep 2018)

Well, maybe you can help me with my maths then.

Empire Toronto makes up almost 50% of Ontario's population.

The Liberals sucked so bad that they even lost their party status.

So not just 'the rest' of Ontario wanted Ford elected but a good chunk of Toronto as well?


----------



## mariomike (20 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Empire Toronto makes up almost 50% of Ontario's population.



You use the word "Empire" about Toronto. I suggest you look up the meaning.



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So not just 'the rest' of Ontario wanted Ford elected but a good chunk of Toronto as well?



Toronto rejected Ford Nation years ago.

In 2013, City Council removed Rob's powers as Mayor of Toronto and transferred them to Deputy Mayor Norm Kelly. 

As a matter of public safety, this included his power to govern the city during a state of emergency.

Rob likened it to a coup d'état and compared his situation with the 1990 invasion of Kuwait, promising "outright war" in response to the councillors who voted to remove his powers.

I guess, in a way, he is getting karma on the city from the grave. 

Add to that, the humiliation of Doug's defeat by John Tory in the 2014 mayoral election.

Reply #210 


			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> It would have been nice if Doug had mentioned to Toronto voters that he was going to take an axe to their council before the provincial election.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Sep 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> You use the word "Empire" about Toronto. I suggest you look up the meaning.




_ 1. an extensive group of states or countries ruled over by a single monarch, an oligarchy, or a sovereign state.
2.an extensive sphere of activity controlled by one person or group.
_ 
So like a bunch of smaller cities ruled by by an oligarchy (_ a small group of people having control of a country or organization._ 

Seems accurate enough to me. 



> Toronto rejected Ford Nation years ago.


Did they?  If Toronto makes up half of Ontario's population, and you've provided an excellent source supporting that, why then did Ford have such a sweeping victory? Why did the Liberals lose their party status?

Did all or even most of Toronto vote Liberal?


----------



## mariomike (20 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> _ 1. an extensive group of states or countries ruled over by a single monarch, an oligarchy, or a sovereign state.
> 2.an extensive sphere of activity controlled by one person or group.
> _
> So like a bunch of smaller cities ruled by by an oligarchy (_ a small group of people having control of a country or organization._
> ...



Must I remind you, again, that our Emperor mayor at City Hall can't even install a speed bump without permission from the Emperor premier at Queen's Park.

If you want to call people and places empires and emperors, you should read this,
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/doug-ford-premier-powers-1.4764817



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Seems accurate enough to me.
> Did they?  If Toronto makes up half of Ontario's population, and you've provided an excellent source supporting that, why then did Ford have such a sweeping victory? Why did the Liberals lose their party status?
> 
> Did all or even most of Toronto vote Liberal?



I don't follow party politics.

As far as I am concerned, ( I'll say it again ) there is no Liberal or Conservative way to fix a sewer.



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So not just 'the rest' of Ontario wanted Ford elected but a good chunk of Toronto as well?



You asked. I answered. Toronto rejected Rob ( 2013 ) and Doug ( 2014 ) Ford.

As far as party politics are concerned, I suspect people who are going to vote Conservative are going to vote Conservative no matter who is running the party. Patrick Brown, Christine Elliott, Doug Ford, Tanya Granic Allen, Caroline Mulroney ...

My question would be, did the Conservatives get in because of Doug, or in spite of Doug?

Compared to Toronto's 2014 mayoral election, Doug's time on the provincial campaign trail was a lot shorter. 

He also seemed relatively subdued compared to his behavior at City Hall and during the mayoral election campaign.

Perhaps he understood, or it was explained to him, that unlike municipal politics, the election is less about him, and more about the party. The Conservatives seemed likely to get in even before Doug hit the provincial campaign trail.


----------



## Remius (20 Sep 2018)

They got in because of Kathleen Wynee.


----------



## mariomike (20 Sep 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> They got in because of Kathleen Wynee.



My uneducated guess is that they would have got in if Patrick Brown, Christine Elliott, Doug Ford, Tanya Granic Allen, Caroline Mulroney ... was their candidate.


----------



## YZT580 (20 Sep 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> My uneducated [ctiolor=yellow]guess[/color] is that they would have got in if Patrick Brown, Christine Elliott, Doug Ford, Tanya Granic Allen, Caroline Mulroney ... was their candidate.


Quite likely they would have succeeded but Toronto voted for the party WITH Doug and, since they had seen him in action in city council they knew exactly what they were voting for.


----------



## mariomike (20 Sep 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Quite likely they would have succeeded but Toronto voted for the party WITH Doug and, since they had seen him in action in city council they knew exactly what they were voting for.



As someone eligible to vote in Toronto elections, I do not recall Doug mentioning his intent to immediately cut our council in half before our fall municipal election. 

I also do not recall him threatening the use the Notwithstanding Clause ( as if anyone ever heard of it, because it has never been used in Ontario ) if he does not get his way with City Hall.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Sep 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> My uneducated guess is that they would have got in if Patrick Brown, Christine Elliott, Doug Ford, Tanya Granic Allen, Caroline Mulroney ... was their candidate.



In Canada, most governments are "unelected" rather than governments getting elected, the other party just wins by just not being the party currently out of favour.


----------



## mariomike (20 Sep 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> In Canada, most governments are "unelected" rather than governments getting elected, the other party just wins by just not being the party currently out of favour.



From what I have read, it sounds like the Conservatives were going to get in - with or without Doug.

Someone put it this way,



			
				Remius said:
			
		

> They got in because of Kathleen Wynee.


----------



## Furniture (20 Sep 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> As someone eligible to vote in Toronto elections, I do not recall Doug mentioning his intent to immediately cut our council in half before our fall municipal election.
> 
> I also do not recall him threatening the use the Notwithstanding Clause ( as if anyone ever heard of it, because it has never been used in Ontario ) if he does not get his way with City Hall.




Lack of knowledge of the "not withstanding" clause is more likely due to a lack of awareness of politics in areas outside the centre of the universe. It's been discussed at length in the media  whenever it's brought up by a politician, particularly one the media doesn't like. 

Toronto's urban progressives will get back in power some day again, and I'm sure they'll go back to pandering to urbanites. Maybe expanding city councils will be their number one priority, or maybe a 25 member city council will be great and all the fuss will have been for nothing.


----------



## Remius (20 Sep 2018)

People and parties in power have all sorts of tools they can use.  The notwithstanding clause, prorogation, recalling parliament etc etc.  We should always assume that they will use any one of those things to further their agenda or what they think is right.


----------



## YZT580 (20 Sep 2018)

The not withstanding clause should be used more frequently than it has been.  It was placed there in the first place to prevent the courts from becoming the de facto legislators.  It protects us from having an un-elected organisation deciding what is 'democratic' or reading intent into legislation that was never intended.  I am actually grateful that an elected official had the guts to actually use it and in retrospect the ruling from the court of appeal upheld Ford's position (fair or not).


----------



## Furniture (20 Sep 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> The not withstanding clause should be used more frequently than it has been.  It was placed there in the first place to prevent the courts from becoming the de facto legislators.  It protects us from having an un-elected organisation deciding what is 'democratic' or reading intent into legislation that was never intended.  I am actually grateful that an elected official had the guts to actually use it and in retrospect the ruling from the court of appeal upheld Ford's position (fair or not).



My position on this is similar, it's a legitimate tool placed in the constitution to prevent abuse of power by the courts. The judge that ruled against the provincial government used a weak argument to try to prevent an elected government from doing what is completely in it's power to do. 


Normally it seems the Canadian courts appear free of politics(to me at least), hopefully they can stay that way. Making decisions that appear politically driven diminishes the respect people have for the courts.


----------



## FJAG (20 Sep 2018)

Furniture said:
			
		

> My position on this is similar, it's a legitimate tool placed in the constitution to prevent abuse of power by the courts. The judge that ruled against the provincial government used a weak argument to try to prevent an elected government from doing what is completely in it's power to do.
> 
> 
> Normally it seems the Canadian courts appear free of politics(to me at least), hopefully they can stay that way. Making decisions that appear politically driven diminishes the respect people have for the courts.



For the life of me I can't understand why so many here are fixated on the notion that there is an "abuse of power by the courts".

I won't rehash my views on this but to set matters straight, the "notwithstanding clause" provisions are designed to enshrine the British system of "parliamentary supremacy" so that ultimately, when a legislature thinks that an issue is important enough, they can temporarily enact a measure even if the measure is contrary to the Charter. Think of the Parti Quebeqois use of the clause in the early 1980s when every law they passed (as well as retroactively to all prior laws passed in Quebec) was made using the "notwithstanding" clause because they wanted to ensure that no Quebec law could ever be challenged in court. In effect they wanted to preempt the courts from challenging any Quebec law under the Charter.

Remember too that any use of the clause is limited to a five year term expressly to ensure that there will be an election before the clause can be reused so that the people have an opportunity to also voice their opinion through their vote on the issue.

Courts and legislatures each have their respective roles in an effort to have checks and balances in place. There is a much greater potential for elected officials to abuse their "powers" to further their party's agenda then there is for a tenured-for-life judge. 

The judge in this case got it wrong. He tried to equate "unfair" with "unconstitutional". In short order, the Court of Appeal told him so. The system worked. In four years or so the electors of Toronto can tell Ford what they thought about him on this issue one way or the other. That too is the system working.

 [cheers]


----------



## Furniture (20 Sep 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> For the life of me I can't understand why so many here are fixated on the notion that there is an "abuse of power by the courts".
> 
> I won't rehash my views on this but to set matters straight, the "notwithstanding clause" provisions are designed to enshrine the British system of "parliamentary supremacy" so that ultimately, when a legislature thinks that an issue is important enough, they can temporarily enact a measure even if the measure is contrary to the Charter. Think of the Parti Quebeqois use of the clause in the early 1980s when every law they passed (as well as retroactively to all prior laws passed in Quebec) was made using the "notwithstanding" clause because they wanted to ensure that no Quebec law could ever be challenged in court. In effect they wanted to preempt the courts from challenging any Quebec law under the Charter.
> 
> ...



I suppose I was going for brevity over clarity in the quoted post, I don't think there was an abuse of power in this case. Just  saying that the clause exists to place a check on the power of the courts, just as the courts are a check on the parliaments, as you said much more eloquently.  :bowdown:


----------



## YZT580 (20 Sep 2018)

FJAG, your logic is correct.  BUT using the same reasoning, the use of the not withstanding clause is a constitutional tool to ensure exactly the same result.  It can prevent the courts from having an unreasonable say in the way that the province or country is being governed.  It allows for the government to make a decision, the justice department to reject it, the government to apply the not withstanding clause and then the people to decide whether the government or the courts were correct.  It may not be a perfect check and balance but it covers most bases.  So I say again, I am very grateful that we had an elected official who was willing to go against the courts.  That is the way it is supposed to work and not just give in to the court's decision every time which is what has been happening.


----------



## FJAG (20 Sep 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> FJAG, your logic is correct.  BUT using the same reasoning, the use of the not withstanding clause is a constitutional tool to ensure exactly the same result.  It can prevent the courts from having an unreasonable say in the way that the province or country is being governed.  It allows for the government to make a decision, the justice department to reject it, the government to apply the not withstanding clause and then the people to decide whether the government or the courts were correct.  It may not be a perfect check and balance but it covers most bases.  So I say again, I am very grateful that we had an elected official who was willing to go against the courts.  That is the way it is supposed to work and not just give in to the court's decision every time which is what has been happening.





			
				Furniture said:
			
		

> I suppose I was going for brevity over clarity in the quoted post, I don't think there was an abuse of power in this case. Just  saying that the clause exists to place a check on the power of the courts, just as the courts are a check on the parliaments, as you said much more eloquently.  :bowdown:



The difference in our points of view is that I do not think that the "notwithstanding clause" was designed as a check on the courts (whether reasonable or unreasonable).

What the clause is, IMHO, is a check on the Charter itself. It's a tool that the legislatures gave themselves where any one of them can say: 'this legislation that we are passing is more important than a specific provision of the Charter and we're prepared to put our political reputation/future on the line over this issue'. The legislature can use the clause either retroactively where a court has interpreted a specific statute component as contravening the Charter or proactively, like in Quebec, to give a piece of legislation immunity from a challenge where they know it is going to be in contravention of the Charter even before a court deals with the issue.

 :cheers:


----------



## YZT580 (20 Sep 2018)

The problem with your statement is quite simple: if I agree with you than it would imply that we are conceding a significant level of wisdom to the authors of the charter and that is a scary thought


----------



## FJAG (21 Sep 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> The problem with your statement is quite simple: if I agree with you than it would imply that we are conceding a significant level of wisdom to the authors of the charter and that is a scary thought



The idea came from Peter Lougheed of Alberta and was supported by the western premiers in order to ensure parliamentary supremacy. Here's a short article in Lougheed's own words:



> The Honourable E. Peter Lougheed
> Why a Notwithstanding Clause?
> Shortly after our government was sworn into office in September, 1971, I asked the new Attorney General, Merv Leitch, to prepare an Alberta Bill of Rights. This would be the first item of legislation to be introduced at the first session of the new Legislature in the spring of 1972.
> 
> ...



https://web.archive.org/web/20161107160251/http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/rights-and-freedoms/023021-1400-e.html

I've always thought that the provision (as well as the S1 "subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society" provision) was a good balancing act. IMHO there were some fairly bright guys involved on both sides in working out the various compromises.

 :cheers:


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Sep 2018)

Ontario Liberals understated their deficits? 
Hard to believe. 



> * Wynne’s Liberals “cooked the books”, left deficit 224% larger than reported*
> 
> 
> The Progressive Conservative government announced the independent inquiry in July and tasked it with probing the Liberal regime’s accounting methods surrounding a pair of teacher pension plans and the province’s Fair Hydro Plan.
> ...



https://thenectarine.ca/politics/wynnes-liberals-cooked-the-books-left-deficit-224-larger-than-reported/


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2018)

The chief role of a constitution is to set impenetrable limits on government, especially with regard to rights of the person.  A "notwithstanding" clause is a mockery.


----------



## Halifax Tar (21 Sep 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Ontario Liberals understated their deficits?
> Hard to believe.
> 
> 
> https://thenectarine.ca/politics/wynnes-liberals-cooked-the-books-left-deficit-224-larger-than-reported/



Thats crazy, no wait is that not criminal ?


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Sep 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Thats crazy, no wait is that not criminal ?



Naw they just used a different way to count money. You know, so it doesn't look as bad. 

They're not even trying to hide their lies anymore. 

http://brianlilley.com/ontarios-liberals-admit-they-lied-for-years/


----------



## Cloud Cover (24 Sep 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> As someone eligible to vote in Toronto elections, I do not recall Doug mentioning his intent to immediately cut our council in half before our fall municipal election.
> 
> I also do not recall him threatening the use the Notwithstanding Clause ( as if anyone ever heard of it, because it has never been used in Ontario ) if he does not get his way with City Hall.



So far as I can tell, the  PCPO seemed careful to avoid having a detailed platform at all. All they needed was a person who could stand upright and had a pulse. Sort of like a crash test dummy that is alive. A highly intellectual leader would have made informed statements that for very many would be unforgettable and not forgivable. With Doug, at least those who elected him got neither a philosopher or a village idiot. They got Doug.


----------



## FJAG (29 Sep 2018)

Good news in Ontario



> Ontario Drive Clean Program Cancelled By PC Government



This crappy piece of legislation had long ago outlived it's usefulness. The Liberals recognized that the public hated it when it decided to make the tests free. They hung on to it, however, making it a public expense to the tune of about $40 million per year. The new program will focus on the heavy truck industry where it ought to be.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/09/28/ontario-drive-clean-program-cancelled-by-pc-government_a_23545199/?utm_hp_ref=ca-homepage

 :cheers:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Sep 2018)

QV said:
			
		

> How do you mess with the charter when the action you take is empowered by the charter?



Intellectuals don't bother with legalities. If it fits their agenda, that's the answer. When they need to, they'll haul out the same Charter to bash you over the head with, because now it fits what they want.


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Oct 2018)

Visited someone in the hospital not too long ago. They were getting their stomach cut open and had to spend 4-5 days in the hospital before the operation. Spent the whole time laying in a shitty hospital bed in the hall way, it was like seeing a sick animal at the zoo. Zero privacy.  

Pretty happy to read this story this morning 


HEALTHFord government increases hospital funding by $90 million to address overcrowding
https://thenectarine.ca/news/ford-government-increases-hospital-funding-by-90-million-to-address-overcrowding/


----------



## mariomike (5 Oct 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> HEALTHFord government increases hospital funding by $90 million to address overcrowding
> https://thenectarine.ca/news/ford-government-increases-hospital-funding-by-90-million-to-address-overcrowding/



Opinions,

QUOTE

TORONTO, Oct. 03, 2018 

Doug Ford cuts hospital beds and funding – calls it an increase, says Ontario Health Coalition
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/10/03/1601051/0/en/Doug-Ford-cuts-hospital-beds-and-funding-calls-it-an-increase-says-Ontario-Health-Coalition.html

END QUOTE

QUOTE

TORONTO, Oct. 3, 2018 

Registered Nurses Association of Ontario ( RNAO )

Adding flu season surge capacity to hospitals will not resolve hallway health care
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/adding-flu-season-surge-capacity-to-hospitals-will-not-resolve-hallway-health-care-695097571.html
"On a day that the government announced it would address hallway health care, its officials ordered Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario (RNAO) staff to leave the media conference, stranding President Angela Cooper Brathwaite in a hallway at Queen's Park."

"RNAO says the $90 million to add beds falls far short of the $187 million the Kathleen Wynne government promised to spend in the 2018-2019 budget year before losing power in the June provincial election."

END QUOTE


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Oct 2018)

I  was going to say wow those are two very different takes.  Sorry but as it were I have a little more faith that the hospitals will see the 90 million Ford is promising than the 187 million Wynne promised.


----------



## mariomike (5 Oct 2018)

Nothing new about "hallway medicine". We called it "the Hall of Shame".

The official name is Off-Load Delay ( OLD ). 

In Metro, OLD increased from 35 minutes in 2000 to 70 minutes by 2008. I retired in 2009.

The OLD standard is 30 minutes. With our growing and aging population, OLD will remain a challenge. 

The Community Paramedicine Program provides the most appropriate patient treatment and reduces trips to the ER. This in turn helps reduce "hallway medicine". That's the theory, anyway.


----------



## Remius (5 Oct 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I  was going to say wow those are two very different takes.  Sorry but as it were I have a little more faith that the hospitals will see the 90 million Ford is promising than the 187 million Wynne promised.



It’s 187 million the Liberals didn’t have nor was willing to find.  With Ford I think it is 90 million he’ll find.


----------



## mariomike (5 Oct 2018)

Regarding the future of health care in Ontario, and the Ontario Conservative Party, this was written just before the election. 

Have to see how it goes this time around.

QUOTE

For the last 20 years health care has been the Tories' biggest image issue, with memories still sharp of the 1990s when the Mike Harris government ordered 28 hospitals closed and fired 6,000 nurses.

Harris ignited a firestorm of protests when he suggested nurses were as obsolete as hula-hoop makers. "Just as hula hoops went out and those workers had to have a factory and a company that would manufacture something else that's in, it's the same for government," Harris said.
https://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/8628234-if-ford-wins-prepare-for-even-harder-times-in-health-care/

END QUOTE


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Oct 2018)

* Ontario bill aims to strip returning terrorists of provincial privileges* 

With a quarter of the nearly 200 Canadian members of overseas terrorist groups returning home and at least a dozen more held in Syrian detentions camps, an impending private-members bill will ensure they’re not entitled to benefits enjoyed by law-abiding Ontarians, the Sun has learned.

Set to be tabled at Queen’s Park next week, the Terrorist Activity Sanctions Act targets those who’ve carried out terrorist acts abroad and excludes them from such privileges as holding an Ontario driver’s licence or accessing provincial health coverage.



https://torontosun.com/news/provincial/ontario-bill-aims-to-strip-returning-terrorists-of-provincial-privileges?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1539995227


----------



## blacktriangle (20 Oct 2018)

Thanks for sharing that Jarnhamar. I hope it goes through. 

I'd also like Ontario to consider a registry for terrorists. I think communities deserve to know who they have in their midst.


----------



## mariomike (20 Oct 2018)

Saw that on CP24.

They said, "It's not clear how the proposed Bill will work if the alleged offenders are not convicted of any crimes in court."


----------



## blacktriangle (20 Oct 2018)

How it will work? They will be move in next door to you and your family. That's how it will work. 

How does that make you feel?


----------



## mariomike (20 Oct 2018)

standingdown said:
			
		

> They will be move in next door to you and your family.



That's not what CP24 said,

QUOTE

"It's not clear how the proposed Bill will work if the alleged offenders are not convicted of any crimes in court."

END QUOTE

The proposed Bill ( Reply #255 ) is only about driver’s licence and health coverage.

Nothing in it about where people can, or can not, live.


----------



## blacktriangle (20 Oct 2018)

Sorry, I was speaking directly to what will happen if they aren't convicted in court. I stand behind my comment still. 

I'm betting this will get squashed somehow, and they will move in next door to you with health care and driving privileges intact. They will probably get some form of stipend, and free education. 

Anyone want to bet? 

Anyways, good on the Ontario government for trying to do what they can. Now awaiting the outcry over human rights.


----------



## mariomike (20 Oct 2018)

CP24
"It's not clear how the proposed Bill will work if the alleged offenders are not convicted of any crimes in court."

Global News clarified the proposed Bill will only apply to _convicted_  terrorists.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4575780/ontario-bill-strip-returning-terrorist-benefits/


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Oct 2018)

Carbon tax is such a bullshit thing. It's just a slush fund for the Liberal government. 




> TORONTO — Ontario Premier Doug Ford has come out swinging against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s plans for carbon tax rebates.
> 
> Trudeau announced details of the plan Tuesday, saying provinces that have not implemented their own carbon taxation system will have one imposed on them by the federal government.



https://thenectarine.ca/business/doug-ford-slams-trudeau-and-federal-carbon-tax-plan/


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Nov 2018)

Seems like a better plan than raising minimum wage. 




> The Ford government is introducing a new tax credit that * will exempt minimum wage earners from provincial exempt tax * and says its cost-cutting measures have reduced the 2018 deficit to $14.5 billion.
> 
> Finance Minister Vic Fideli's first fall economic statement tabled Thursday afternoon also includes new expanded hours for booze sales in Ontario and a new loophole exempting all new rental housing from rent controls starting tomorrow.
> 
> ...



https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ford-gov-t-says-deficit-reduced-to-14-5b-with-new-suite-of-cost-cutting-measures-1.4178057?fbclid=IwAR2F1m9j4TGQXO8Duo2BNXGiOVN4kBGLHu1F42Wtk31TFxUUBTFwGJ6uoWs


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Nov 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Seems like a better plan than raising minimum wage.
> 
> 
> 
> https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ford-gov-t-says-deficit-reduced-to-14-5b-with-new-suite-of-cost-cutting-measures-1.4178057?fbclid=IwAR2F1m9j4TGQXO8Duo2BNXGiOVN4kBGLHu1F42Wtk31TFxUUBTFwGJ6uoWs



If they went to the $15/ hr, their taxes would go up and they'd likely see less money in their pocket.

The liberals didn't do this to help the poor, they did it to collect more taxes.

Ford's decision cuts through the bullshit and leaves the money with the taxpayer.

There's going to be a lot of tough decisions as the Conservatives try to dig out Ontario from under the liberal debt. Lot's of people aren't going to like the belt tightening. I'd rather bite the bullet and tackle the problems now though, than kick the can down the road until the socialists take over again to add to what they've already done.

Funny I don't hear anyone that works for a living and pays taxes to support all those that won't, complaining about the plans.


----------



## Loachman (15 Nov 2018)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> The liberals didn't do this to help the poor, they did it to collect more taxes _votes_.



You display more kindness than they deserve ...


----------



## Remius (28 Nov 2019)

Figured this might a be a good place to post this.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-premier-doug-ford-prime-minister-justin-trudeau-1.5375495

Politics makes for interesting bedfellows.


----------



## OceanBonfire (21 Feb 2020)

> For the first time in 24 years all four major teachers unions in Ontario are on strike the same day, shutting the province’s public education system and leaving more than two million school children out of class.
> 
> The unions, representing nearly 200,000 teachers and education workers, are calling on the government to back down on cuts to education.
> 
> ...


----------



## observor 69 (22 Feb 2020)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> You'd think that they were Ontario school teachers.  op:
> [/quote
> 
> "Ford's government announced last spring it would increase average high school class sizes from 22 to 28 and require students to take four e-learning courses to graduate.
> ...


----------



## BeyondTheNow (22 Feb 2020)

Baden Guy said:
			
		

> Journeyman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Journeyman (22 Feb 2020)

So if students miss a whole bunch of school and everyone still graduates, would people be amiss in believing that there is significant fluff in the curriculum and that maybe teachers don't deserve more?    

Staff edit: hit modify instead of quote


----------



## BeyondTheNow (22 Feb 2020)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> So if students miss a whole bunch of school and everyone still graduates, would people be amiss in believing that there is significant fluff in the curriculum and that maybe teachers don't deserve more?



Moot comment. “Everyone” won’t still graduate. End of story.


----------



## Journeyman (22 Feb 2020)

BeyondTheNow said:
			
		

> Moot comment. “Everyone” won’t still graduate. End of story.


Yes, I understand that some people fail regardless (Most people in the military have a vague understanding of the instructional business).  I also understand that family connections to the issue may cause a dismissive, but unwarranted, response.

The potential perception remains nonetheless.


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Feb 2020)

>The majority of society believe teachers have it made in this province. That is hardly the case. 

In what way(s) do they not have it made?  Pay?  Pension?  Other benefits?  Time off?  Provisions for sickness?  Difficulty acquiring credential?


----------



## BeyondTheNow (22 Feb 2020)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Yes, I understand that some people fail regardless (Most people in the military have a vague understanding of the instructional business).  I also understand that family connections to the issue may cause a dismissive, but unwarranted, response.
> 
> The potential perception remains nonetheless.



With all due respect, JM, while you retain a breadth of knowledge on several subjects, and I’ve always appreciated when you’ve chosen to share your knowledge in a straightforward and clear manner without including condescension and thinly-veiled trolling, I don’t think it appropriate for you to be casting judgement on what is and isn’t a “warranted” response. The sheer fact that you did another one of your unnecessary and blatant drive-bys is what, in part, lead to my post in the first place. 

Furthermore, asserting that I’ve based my opinions on familial connections to the profession is grossly inaccurate. My sole point in bringing that fact forward was to show that I’m glad I’m fortunate to have access to a view-point from people directly tied to the issues at hand, rather than solely depending on (incomplete and/or unbalanced) aspects seemingly dominating the media at the moment. I don’t necessarily agree with all tactics being used by the side of the teachers, but I am on their side. I wouldn’t want their job.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (22 Feb 2020)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >The majority of society believe teachers have it made in this province. That is hardly the case.
> 
> In what way(s) do they not have it made?  Pay?  Pension?  Other benefits?  Time off?  Provisions for sickness?  Difficulty acquiring credential?



Zeros in a pay cheque and vacation time aren’t enough to compensate for physical & verbal abuse on part of students, zero recourse and/or protection when students act out, destroy the class room, disrupt other students, fail to adhere to simple rules and guidelines, etc. 

More and more numbers point to teachers working in poorer conditions, lacking resources and supplies for the students and sometimes basics for themselves. Steadily increasing percentages point to a distinct rise and correlation between numbers of students from lower socio-economic backgrounds and higher percentages of special-needs students; meaning attention is being taken away from the majority of the class to donate extra time to those struggling.

Elevated ESL student numbers (not necessarily a negative aspect for the individual) puts teachers in positions of great difficulty when clear communication and understanding is required, not only between teacher and student, but also teachers and parents/guardians.

Not all teachers are fortunate enough to work in what can be classed as ‘good’ schools. And even if they are, it doesn’t exclude them from risk. (My son’s teacher has been out for over 6 weeks due to a concussion sustain from an incident in the classroom. A grade 4 classroom. And he goes to a “good” school.)

_And if smaller class sizes and/or more TAs wasn’t such an issue, then private schools wouldn’t be using those features specifically as selling points...edit to add: which they’ve been boasting long, long before current class sizes became issues with this government, and prior to that one also._

It’s true that work-load becomes more manageable once a teacher has some time in and lessons are prepped well ahead of time, so that’s a plus. But it’s largely a myth that all teachers just get to relax during holidays and summer breaks. 

Just to play devil’s advocate, there are some people on the outside of CAF who think we have it very good. Pensions, good salaries, paid vacation, stability (RegF) etc etc. I think it’s fair to say that while our job has a few niceties, people on the outside are missing a large chunk of the picture.


----------



## brihard (22 Feb 2020)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> So if students miss a whole bunch of school and everyone still graduates, would people be amiss in believing that there is significant fluff in the curriculum and that maybe teachers don't deserve more?
> 
> Staff edit: hit modify instead of quote



They aren’t asking for ‘more’ of anything, barring a pay adjustment for inflation. They want class sizes to not increase dramatically, e-learning to not substitute for other courses, and teacher jobs to not be eliminated through consequential attrition. And they’re already out more than 2% in lost pay due to strikes, so a ‘greed’ argument wouldn’t stand up to scrutiny. The strikes are costing them money.


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Feb 2020)

Pay and vacation time are compensation for something.  I don't know very many people who have jobs that have no stressors.  The question to answer isn't whether teachers have it made by their own standards, but whether they have it made compared to most occupations.

I assume that the situational differences aren't too large between provinces, because a common point of negotiation is for the provincial unions to demand whatever other provinces have.

Disciplinary issues in some jurisdictions are partly a self-inflicted wound (maybe not in ON).  Check the contracts.  If the unions are being strict with rules that restrict teachers from intervening, then they should ask for those to be taken out of the contracts.  If disruptive students are in classrooms, it's unfair to lay that at the feet of the classroom teachers but it is fair to lay that at the feet of the educational theorists and social scientists.  If parents are uncooperative, that's a leadership issue, not a contract issue.

"Poorer conditions" needs qualification.  Older schools are rubbled, re-purposed, or sold off where school age populations fall, and newer ones built where school age populations increase.  In between, schools are refurbished or replaced.  Generally the physical quality of schools and amenities is increasing over time.

If teachers are unable to relax during holidays and summer breaks, what is the identifiable cause: poor time management, or they volunteered to teach summer school or tutor?

To truly play devil's advocate, imagine what it's like for people who have been receiving pay raises below inflation or zero since the 2008 recession (at which point in time some received 5 to 10 percent absolute cuts), who max out at 3 or 4 weeks of vacation, whose occupations have their own distinct and often fatal hazards, who are below or not much above the Canadian salary median, whose pensions (if any) are not backed by any government, and who will probably not only be unable to retire before 65, let alone 60, but will need to keep working in some capacity beyond that age.


----------



## brihard (23 Feb 2020)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> To truly play devil's advocate, imagine what it's like for people who have been receiving pay raises below inflation or zero since the 2008 recession (at which point in time some received 5 to 10 percent absolute cuts), who max out at 3 or 4 weeks of vacation, whose occupations have their own distinct and often fatal hazards, who are below or not much above the Canadian salary median, whose pensions (if any) are not backed by any government, and who will probably not only be unable to retire before 65, let alone 60, but will need to keep working in some capacity beyond that age.



None of which is particularly relevant to the situation of the teachers. The things you describe are matters for those workers to hash out with their own employers. They may want to consider unionizing if they have been unable to protect their rights and employment conditions without them.

If we stick purely to the teachers, let's look at the actual things in contention:
- Class sizes. What is the government's justification for seeking to increase class sizes? Are facts on the teachers' side when they stress that increased class sizes will make it harder for them to teach their students? What would be the impact of a more than 25% increase in class sizes?

- E-Learning. Is the government prepared to assert against many accounts to the contrary that the shift to e-learning will not disadvantage students? Is the government prepared to demonstrate that every student will have equitable access to the necessary courses, and that poorer kids without access to computers and internet at home won't be left hanging?

- Pay. Not correcting for inflation is a pay cut. Public sector wages as a general norm are adjusted for inflation during the periodic contract negotiations. Anyone who does draw or has drawn a military paycheck has been the beneficiary of this. A proposed wage increase that falls below inflation is an effective pay cut. What is the government's justification for proposing to cut teach pay? How does that jive with the simultaneous demand to increase class sizes by 27% and greatly increase teacher workload? How does this work when at his policy convention yesterday, the premier was touting the strength of the provincial economy under his watch?

I back the teachers on this. I have no family nor close friends teaching, I don't have kids. I don't have a dog in the fight other than wanting our society to do a really good job of educating kids an reaping the benefits that brings.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (23 Feb 2020)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> So if students miss a whole bunch of school and everyone still graduates, would people be amiss in believing that there is significant fluff in the curriculum and that maybe teachers don't deserve more?
> 
> Staff edit: hit modify instead of quote



Teachers are appropriately compensated for what they do.  I say that as someone whose parents were both school teachers.  My mother was a teacher, vice principal, principal, director and finally school district superintendent.  She ran a school district with 36 schools, thousands of students, a significant aboriginal student population, 100s of teachers, support staff, bus drivers, maintenance workers, technicians, etc and a budget that's every bit as large as something you would see at an L1/L2 level in the Armed Forces, with the added complexity of some significant domestic political issues thrown in.

She would say that one of the biggest issues facing the education system today is too many people becoming teachers who have absolutely no business being in the classroom and Universities handing out certifications like candy.

They go in to the profession because they see it as an easy pay cheque where they don't have to do a whole lot of work.  Teachers do less today than they used to and they are compensated more.  It's a struggle getting teachers nowadays to run extra-curricular activities and many teachers view work like lesson planning, etc as something they should only have to do when they are on the clock.  

We aren't getting value for money out of the education system anymore.


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Feb 2020)

>None of which is particularly relevant to the situation of the teachers. 

It's highly relevant to what I'm addressing, which is: "The majority of society believe teachers have it made in this province.".

As to most of the "what is the reason for..." questions: ultimately, money.  Small shifts in the number of teachers per classroom, number of specialists, etc multiply into large numbers across a province.

Arguments that "X amounts to being a pay cut" don't sound well among people who are getting less than "X".

It all comes down to finite dollars and the balance of political support (government, attempting to contain spending growth or spend on different things; employees, attempting to bargain for more money for less work).


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (23 Feb 2020)

Someone close to me is a school secretary, and says there are no cuts that she can see, and she does the paperwork for the school. To her this is a pure bunfight between the Govt. and the Teachers Unions [*not the teachers*] over who really runs this Province.


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Feb 2020)

>What would be the impact of a more than 25% increase in class sizes?

All the hand-wringing over class sizes is small beer compared to the impact of "mainstreaming" highly disturbed children.  If kids are paying a "learning tax", that's the standout cause.


----------



## mariomike (23 Feb 2020)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> To her this is a pure bunfight between the Govt. and the Teachers Unions [*not the teachers*] over who really runs this Province.



The teachers, as in any union, vote for their leaders. The teachers also voted in favour of strike action,



> Ontario public elementary teachers vote 98% in favour of strike action
> https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk00GfNgF-UlRCSUvdLj3JsxKwPHJ3w%3A1582481253560&ei=Zb9SXs7hIYGIggfZ5qWADg&q=ontario+teachers+strike+%2298+per+cent%22&oq=ontario+teachers+strike+%2298+per+cent%22&gs_l=psy-ab.12...0.0..1963...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz.vlbiBWdjSXY&ved=0ahUKEwiOqO2HoujnAhUBhOAKHVlzCeAQ4dUDCAo#spf=1582481423900


----------



## brihard (23 Feb 2020)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >None of which is particularly relevant to the situation of the teachers.
> 
> It's highly relevant to what I'm addressing, which is: "The majority of society believe teachers have it made in this province.".
> 
> ...



Yes, you'd neatly distilled the issue to its essence: Ford's government is trying to save money off the backs of teachers and of schoolkids. They're trying to eliminate teachers' jobs by increasing class sizes dramatically, letting inflation contract their pay, and shifting more classes to E-learning. The teachers see more work on them, for less effective pay year over year, and they have seen and called out a number of ways in which this will disadvantage students. If class sizes didn't matter, private schools wouldn't trumpet their small class sizes as an indicator of quality. It's an absolute no brainer that 26 or 28 kids is harder to handle than 22. Anyone with any experience with kids will grasp this intuitively.



			
				Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> While I disagree with your dimunition of the impact of class size increases, absolutely there are other systemic issues to be dealt with in terms of how kids with behavioural challenges are integrated into the classroom. Yes there is disruption there, yes there are problems there. This is why educational assistants for special education programs are also in play here and also protesting, but the government would much rather focus on the much more highly compensated teachers.
> 
> With that said, you quoted my question and didn't address it. Are you contending that a 27% growth in class sizes is not a big deal, and will not likely cause a significant decrease in the quality of teaching kids in those classes receive?
> >What would be the impact of a more than 25% increase in class sizes?
> ...


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Feb 2020)

>With that said, you quoted my question and didn't address it. Are you contending that a 27% growth in class sizes is not a big deal, and will not likely cause a significant decrease in the quality of teaching kids in those classes receive?

It depends on where the class size is. If the reasonable range is 22-28 and the sizes are currently at the low end, a one-quarter increase that still falls in or at the high end of the range is nothing to fear.  Most students, and most subjects, don't require a lot of one-to-one and are adequately well-served by "desk time".  Adding one high-needs kid to a class is much more impactful.  But that's a matter properly dealt with by the principal, not by contract language.  Fixing limits in contracts eliminates class size and composition flexibility.  At the margins, some kids may have to move schools (away from friends).  What's the impact of that?  Some schools may have to add portable classrooms (which I always found a little less comfortable in the winter).  What's the impact of that?  Some (secondary) schools will have to eliminate electives to redirect teachers to larger numbers of core subjects.  What's the impact of that?

>Ford's government is trying to save money off the backs of teachers and of schoolkids.

That's one perspective.  Here's another: teachers are trying to make money off the backs of everyone else who depends on provincial governments for services: health, welfare, etc.


----------



## YZT580 (23 Feb 2020)

I agree.  Smaller classes would be great so would all the other stuff but no one has answered the question as to how we pay for it.  Health care costs have sky rocketed because our population is ageing.  It costs a lot of money to pave one kilometer of highway and our climate means that we have hundreds to re-do every year.  Immigration means more cars, more commuters, more schools, more pavement, more money. Who pays for it.  The Wynn government bought off the teachers for 8 years in order to gain their support.  We can't afford them anymore.  To pay for smaller classes you need more teachers and more buildings.  The only way to get those is to cut costs elsewhere.  So teachers, I've said it before, if you will accept a 2% cut in pay, we can give you those smaller class sizes.  Your move.


----------



## brihard (23 Feb 2020)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> I agree.  Smaller classes would be great so would all the other stuff but no one has answered the question as to how we pay for it.  Health care costs have sky rocketed because our population is ageing.  It costs a lot of money to pave one kilometer of highway and our climate means that we have hundreds to re-do every year.  Immigration means more cars, more commuters, more schools, more pavement, more money. Who pays for it.  The Wynn government bought off the teachers for 8 years in order to gain their support.  We can't afford them anymore.  To pay for smaller classes you need more teachers and more buildings.  The only way to get those is to cut costs elsewhere.  So teachers, I've said it before, if you will accept a 2% cut in pay, we can give you those smaller class sizes.  Your move.



They aren't asking for smaller class sizes. They're asking to keep the class sizes they have now. They're asking to keep the 'in class' classes (vs e learning) that they have now. They're asking to keep the same pay adjusted for inflation that they have now. Teachers are asking for literally nothing new. They just want to status quo, and for things to not get worse.

I do not see an argument being made by the government that they are unable to pay for what currently exists, or that we face economic difficulty. On the contrary, from yesterday: 



			
				Premier Ford said:
			
		

> Inside the convention centre, the party was debating their policies going forward and cheering on accomplishments so far.
> 
> “Our economy is firing on all cylinders. Over 307,000 new jobs have been created in Ontario since we took office,” Premier Doug Ford said during his speech to supporters.
> 
> https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-unions-try-to-shout-down-premier-but-ford-keeps-on-truckin



So yeah, to keep this crystal clear: Teachers are asking for things to stay as they are. Not any improvement, not any effective increase in salary beyond inflation, not smaller classes than they have now, nothing of the sort. They want conditions in the classroom to not get worse and for their pay and working conditions to not get worse, during a time when our premier is bragging on the state of the provincial economy.


----------



## Cloud Cover (23 Feb 2020)

More than anything else, they just want to be seen to be the premiere socialist movement opposing the Ford government. If those things were all they were asking for, there would be no strike.


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Feb 2020)

>So yeah, to keep this crystal clear: Teachers are asking for things to stay as they are. 

From where I sit (in BC), ON teachers did really well over the past decade.  I realize they want to keep those gains; I realize that "win" and "tradesies" are part of what unions will talk about, but "lose" is not.  Sometimes gains should be clawed back.

Secondary problem: would anything in the teachers' demands trigger "me-too" clauses if granted?  If the unions are asking for things that would trigger those clauses, it's not as pure-minded as "for the children" and "stay as they are".  When unions plan strategy collectively, they like to concentrate resources in the one or two occupations looked upon most favourably by the public (typically, teachers or nurses).  All the rest settle, reasonably quickly and without draining the war chests, and the focus and funds go to the remaining one or two for the real political fight.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (23 Feb 2020)

mariomike said:
			
		

> The teachers, as in any union, vote for their leaders. The teachers also voted in favour of strike action,



You should have paid more attention to your union while you worked.....need a meme for the things I trust more then my Union on elections/vote counting.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (23 Feb 2020)

The situation(s) for teachers vary greatly province to province. Teaching environments, student-bodies, unions, extra-curricular involvement and/or availability, salaries, curriculums, etc., ALL have differences,  and sometimes very significant in many areas. It’s entirely unrealistic to compare a single teacher’s career/experience between, say, Scarborough, ON and Victoria BC. Experiences even within a single school board can be night and day.

Poor time management and/or prep has nothing to do with those teachers who volunteer to donate their time so students can get the most out of their education. Sports, arts, trips, etc can only operate through volunteering. There are teachers who are working 10-12hr days.

It’s not right to fault the body of teachers for the fact that Ontario has an abundance of those looking for positions. It’s been like that for well over a decade now. (Many don’t want to relocate elsewhere in the country, or even venture up north). But again, that’s not the fault on all Ontario teachers—that’s a separate issue altogether, which perhaps needs to be evaluated by the universities—perhaps limiting teacher’s colleges acceptance numbers more? But that won’t happen, because they still want their money... 

Are there teachers who figured the gig would be an easy, rosey go and just figured they’d get guaranteed weekends, holidays and 6 weeks off in the summers? Yup. At the elementary, secondary AND post-secondary levels. Just like there are those in several other professions who went into things disillusioned and then find themselves miserable. I’m also fairly certain that that isn’t a new phenomenon. I’m confident in saying almost every user on this site had at least a couple of teachers during their schooling who were awful compared to others. To utilize any sort of blanket statement(s) to describe the entire body of teaching in not only Ontario, but country-wide (or inter-provincial) is nothing but counter-productive to everyone, regardless of which side of the fence one is sitting on wrt the current state of affairs.


Many teachers are being very clear on what they feel is necessary in order to keep Ontario’s standards as they are now, and people are entirely against them. Are those same people going to blame the teachers also when our standards slip, when our scores and ratings fall? When there’s no one left to take on the responsibility of helping run outside-classroom events/competitions/any experiences geared towards higher learning? Probably. It seems they can’t win.

Some articles very much worth a gander...

What are this issues in dispute?



> ...Education funding
> 
> At the root of the conflict is the question of how much the Conservative government will spend on the province’s schools. The government has said it wants to trim education spending in order to help balance the provincial budget.
> 
> ...



Full article:
 https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/what-are-the-issues-in-ontario-teacher-dispute

If Doug Ford’s government gets its way, Ontario risks losing its educational edge



> As in other provinces and many other countries, provincial laws in Ontario restrict teachers’ legitimate concerns – what they can protest about, or bargain for – to issues of salary, benefits and working conditions. Teachers are expressly prohibited from negotiating on issues of policy (for example, curriculum), even while policies may be serious issues of concern to them.
> 
> As a consequence, teacher unions are often criticized for emphasizing such “trivial” or “self-serving” issues seemingly at the expense of student learning. But the notion that the conditions of teaching are also students’ learning conditions is more than just a slogan. Research conducted in Ontario and other jurisdictions has demonstrated that the factors that allow teachers to teach well, and to know it, are the same factors that support student learning.
> 
> ...



Full article:
 https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-if-doug-fords-government-gets-its-way-ontario-risks-losing-its/

Teacher working conditions that matter



> ... To advance our understanding of the issues, the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario commissioned one of the authors (Ken Leithwood) to do an analytical review of the literature on teachers’ working conditions. This resulted in the publication, Teacher Working Conditions That Matter: Evidence for Change.2 The framework for this report is based on the premises that teachers’ feelings and knowledge (“internal states”) are the immediate “causes” of what teachers do and that many of these internal states are significantly influenced by the circumstances in which they work. Some working conditions will have quite positive effects on one or more of these internal states, whereas some will have negative effects. Teachers’ performance will be influenced accordingly. Evidence points to the influence on teachers’ work and, in some cases, also on student learning, of eight specific internal states:
> •Individual sense of professional efficacy; •Collective sense of professional efficacy; •Organizational commitment;
> •Job satisfaction;
> •Stress and burnout;
> ...



Full article:
 https://www.edcan.ca/wp-content/uploads/EdCan-2007-v47-n2-Leithwood.pdf


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Feb 2020)

>There are teachers who are working 10-12hr days.

How many, and how often?  Is that claim meant to suggest that teachers are like associates in high-pressure corporate litigation firms?


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Feb 2020)

> The larger classes announced by the government last spring would eliminate 10,054 teachers, saving $900 million a year when fully implemented



Maybe it's semantics or maybe it's not even accurate but I read the government wasn't planning on firing 10,000 teachers. They weren't hiring as many replacements ones the others leave, leaving us 10,000 less positions.


----------



## Remius (24 Feb 2020)

I'm pretty much annoyed by both sides of this.  I also do not have any kids in the Ontario system.  Mine is in private school. My mother was a teacher and even back then they faced all sorts of challenges (she taught at a school with a reputation for having tough students).

But a few things come to mind. 

1) Teacher seniority is an issue the union does not what to drop.  Seniority should not be the basis of hiring or getting plum spots,  Merit should be.  Teachers should drop that but I doubt the union will. 

2) If funding is an issue then drop expensive programs like French immersion.  If you want your kids to be bilingual send them to French school.  French immersion causes the system to be unbalanced and creates schools where most students don't need as much one on one and others (the non-immersion ones) with high concentrations of students who need more attention.  But it brings in students and that translates to money for boards.  Take those funds and reinvest in programs for students with special needs.  

3) Integration needs to go.  Integrating special needs students was a dumb idea and is likely contributing to teacher burnout.  Recruit more specialised teachers for that and redirect more ECEs to those classes. 

4) I have no issues with teachers asking for more money even if it was more than the rate of inflation.  That's what collective bargaining is for. 

5) There are some crappy teachers out there and virtually not mechanism to get rid of them.  Principals need to have the power to fire some of them.  The union will never go for that though.

All things considered, Doug Ford is losing the PR war but only just barely.  Teachers are on thin ice with parents.  While I think most do support them, that might change if they don't see any willingness to compromise.


----------



## mariomike (24 Feb 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> Teacher seniority is an issue the union does not what to drop.



From what I remember of this discussion, I doubt any unions want to drop seniority rights,

Public Sector Unions  
https://army.ca/forums/threads/98623.0.html
3 pages.
Locked.


----------



## Remius (24 Feb 2020)

The problem is that seniority rule they have (which the Liberals gave them) applies to the hiring of teachers.  Meaning they have to hire someone with more seniority than someone who might actually be more qualified and deserving.  It keeps younger teachers on supply lists. 

The government claims that it could lead to a very experienced history teacher being hired over a more qualified math teacher but the history teacher might be hired to teach Math.  I can't confirm if that has happened or not but I can see the issue.  It's one thing to have seniority when you are in the workplace but the hiring process is something else. 

Where I work my seniority is rewarded with pay, longer leave entitlement etc.  But if I apply for another position, it plays no role other than the fact that I might have gained some experience but if I am a crappy candidate or a better candidate with less time in but is a better choice, then that is what counts.  Just because someone spends 20 years in a position does not mean they should automatically get the job.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (25 Feb 2020)

Brihard said:
			
		

> None of which is particularly relevant to the situation of the teachers. The things you describe are matters for those workers to hash out with their own employers. They may want to consider unionizing if they have been unable to protect their rights and employment conditions without them.



That statement is a joke. On one hand you have the private sector which is thanks to the global economy required to be competitive not just in Canada but the rest of the world, meaning it is very difficult to achieve any sort of pay raise as the company could just close doors and go elsewhere. The other hand you have a closed market not driven by profits, which if there is ever a financial issue they can just force the government to pay more money, made by levying the private sector. The same private sector which is not getting pay raises anywhere near the same amount, so not only is their value going down through inflation it is also going down due to the taxes levied to pay for the ever increasing public sector salaries. Every pay raise a teacher or any other public sector employee makes, provided there hasn't been cuts elsewhere in the government, is made off the backs of the rest of us. Why should Teachers or any other government employee be entitled to more than what everyone else is getting? 

Personally I feel no sympathy for teachers (my mom was one, and she worked with the worst of the students as that's where she specialized), they are exceptionally well paid for what they do, excellent benefits, and a gold standard pension. Much of the time at the high school level they are putting in roughly 40 hours a week (sometimes a bit more, but also sometimes a bit less), and when you break down their wage by the hour they are getting paid roughly 55$ a hour worked with a third of the year off at all the prime times. Coupled with the fact most of these people couldn't find another job anywhere else above minimum due to the fact their 'skills' are flooded in our market. Not much demand for English, history, or arts degrees in our society, ask most of the graduates of those programs who got pushed towards them by teachers. Teaching itself isn't that hard a skill to have, if we can train a bunch of people in the military to do so effectively, clearly it isn't some mystic skill like teachers pretend it is. A teachers degree doesn't mean someone is effective at it, the same way a drivers licence doesn't mean someone is good at driving. 

I disagree with the online classes, I think they are absolute garbage, much like the militaries online training. I also don't think it should be the teachers union fighting that, as far as I am concerned their job is to teach, not to tell the government how or what to teach. If you don't like it quit and find another job.

For high school class sizes, I think 28 is reasonable. Studies have shown there is no really difference in the quality of education for highschool students at 22 or 28. Studies have shown that class sizes make a huge difference in Elementary school, which is why I am against increasing the size there. People are also forgetting in 4 years most are on to college or university and if they can't handle 28 students they are in for a world of hurt when they have 200+ to a classroom. 

For pay raises, I personally think all the public service in Ontario (not just teachers) needs a hair cut, especially the MPPs, and its disgusting how Ford is attacking one part of public sector and increasing his own wage at the same time. Personally I think a solution to this is to have a fixed base rate off a multiplier of average income in a province or the country, it adjusts automatically depending on how everyone else is doing. ex. If teachers got paid 1.5 times the average Ontarian income, there would be no debates on wages, it would have automatic increases AND decreases, and it would be a fair way to ensure the balance between Public and Private doesn't grow too wide (like it is at the moment). There would also be no strikes due to wages and it would really allow the Union and government to focus on what their priorities should be, working conditions. 

One thing I think that could save a lot of money is to amalgamate the school boards. There is no reason to have 4 different publicly funded school boards, likely tons of redundancies in management could be made and a lot of money saved there alone.

Ultimately the teachers brought this upon themselves. They chose to become political through there union, interfere in the political process, and are shocked when the side they companied against won. it doesn't mean I like Ford or agree with his policies, but I recognize how ridiculous it is for someone to say their employer is garbage, side against them, then expect to be treated well. In the private sector, I would likely lose my job if I talked about my employer the way many of the teachers I know do. This is exactly why I don't think public unions should be allowed to pick sides in elections as it is essentially campaigning against your employer and really does kill any attempt at impartiality (which should be the governing principle for all public service jobs).


----------



## Remius (25 Feb 2020)

Eaglelord17 said:
			
		

> Teaching itself isn't that hard a skill to have, if we can train a bunch of people in the military to do so effectively, clearly it isn't some mystic skill like teachers pretend it is. A teachers degree doesn't mean someone is effective at it, the same way a drivers licence doesn't mean someone is good at driving.



I'm going to take you to task on this. 

We don't train the military to be teachers.  They become instructors.  Not the same thing.  Also the military training system literally spoon feeds a course its content and supplies to its instructors. it's very cookie cutter.  Dealing with a class of military types is very different than dealing with kids.  Military instructors have the CoC and the NDA behind them to get their jobs done.  What do you think a teacher can do if an 8 year old takes a swipe at them?  

Let's stop comparing apples and oranges here.  An A PLQ/IJLC with a mod on instructing does not equate to a degree in education. 

You bring up some good points, that one is not one of them.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (25 Feb 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> I'm going to take you to task on this.
> 
> We don't train the military to be teachers.  They become instructors.  Not the same thing.  Also the military training system literally spoon feeds a course its content and supplies to its instructors. it's very cookie cutter.  Dealing with a class of military types is very different than dealing with kids.  Military instructors have the CoC and the NDA behind them to get their jobs done.  What do you think a teacher can do if an 8 year old takes a swipe at them?
> 
> ...



Fair enough, however a teaching degree also doesn't mean someone is competent to teach. Personally I am in the skilled trades. My teachers are the tradesmen around me. Some of them I doubt have highschool yet they are some of the best teachers I have ever had. Others though aren't particularly good at teaching despite being excellent at what they do. Same thing applies to teachers themselves. They might be very knowledgeable on a subject, that doesn't mean they are good at transferring the information.


----------



## YZT580 (25 Feb 2020)

What skills are actually learnt in university that can't be taught in a one or two year college course as was the case up until the mid-70's? I can almost guarantee that for anyone over 40 most of your best teachers were the product of that system.  Many went on to get degrees (to up their pay levels) but they were teachers first and the distinction is important.

 As was pointed out above, and is true in many professions, the actual materiel to be taught can be broken down into segments and instructed by individuals who really don't have a lot of background: excepting sciences and maths.  History, geography and the like can be acquired by personal study.  They are simply knowledge based classes.  In fact, getting rid of the history majors might not hurt as the courses would have to revert to events, causes and results based on facts rather than the teacher's interpretation, clouded by his/her own biases.  Languages need specialised teachers for sure but a four year major in languages does not provide the skills necessary to present the language in a way that permits the student to master it.  

The skills needed to teach are not taught in a general course.  They come after the fact and are or should be focused on lesson preparation, presentation, classroom management, discipline, dealing with parents and child behaviour.  We have put the emphasis on academic qualifications and taken it off teaching capability.  IMHO


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Feb 2020)

[quote author=Remius] An A PLQ/IJLC with a mod on instructing does not equate to a degree in education.[/quote]
What about a PLQ with a mod in instructing and 15 years of experience instructing a multitude of subjects from basic training to advanced courses. Teaching students with grade 10 level educations to MAs and PhDs. Teaching Canadians, Latvians, Afghans, Ukrainians, Iraqi's, Jordanians and so on?

I agree instructors are different than teachers but our military instructors have a little more to them than just a mod on instructing.

I have a few teacher friends. Like the military, they recycle lesson plans and courses. Plug and play.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Feb 2020)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> What about a PLQ with a mod in instructing and 15 years of experience instructing a multitude of subjects from basic training to advanced courses. Teaching students with grade 10 level educations to MAs and PhDs. Teaching Canadians, Latvians, Afghans, Ukrainians, Iraqi's, Jordanians and so on?


Yup -- I agree that there's at least some overlap between the work teachers do and the work military instructors do.  I've seen some military instructors transfer information/knowledge better than some post-secondary teachers.  The biggest difference is this right here:


			
				Remius said:
			
		

> ... Military instructors have the CoC and the NDA behind them to get their jobs done ...


While the school system is supposed to have the backs of teachers in general, the CF (even when it's not as tough as the "good old days") offers more & different tools to instructors to support classroom & behaviour management.  Also, CF instructors (at least Reg Force) have a _lot_ more control of out-of-classroom time (even if you can't eliminate _all_ the environmental friction-makers) than teachers do.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Feb 2020)

[quote author=Remius]

But a few things come to mind. [/quote]
Really liked your points and agree with all of them.



> 1) Teacher seniority is an issue the union does not what to drop.  Seniority should not be the basis of hiring or getting plum spots,  Merit should be.  Teachers should drop that but I doubt the union will.


Absolutely. A big gripe is that shitty teachers aren't called out for being shitty because they have seniority. People with seniority also get a really big case of entitlement. Like someone working full time should get all the best shifts/positions and part timers get screwed over.



> 2) If funding is an issue then drop expensive programs like French immersion.  If you want your kids to be bilingual send them to French school.  French immersion causes the system to be unbalanced and creates schools where most students don't need as much one on one and others (the non-immersion ones) with high concentrations of students who need more attention.  But it brings in students and that translates to money for boards.  Take those funds and reinvest in programs for students with special needs.


It does seem like French immersion is a weird thing. Put the money else where.



> 3) Integration needs to go.  Integrating special needs students was a dumb idea and is likely contributing to teacher burnout.  Recruit more specialised teachers for that and redirect more ECEs to those classes.


100%.
I don't think it benefits either range of students. My daughter has an (unfortunately) super disruptive kid in her class with special needs. The whole class is suffering and being brought down because of it. Parents are getting super pissed off. Teacher said they school won't touch the issue.



> 4) I have no issues with teachers asking for more money even if it was more than the rate of inflation.  That's what collective bargaining is for.


Asking for more money is fine. Protesting and making kids education suffer and super inconveniencing parents because they're being told no is not fine IMO.



> 5) There are some crappy teachers out there and virtually not mechanism to get rid of them.  Principals need to have the power to fire some of them.  The union will never go for that though.


Absolutely. Needs to have some quality control. I'm no brain myself but I've talked to some teachers and thought you're as dumb as a post. It's incredible to think they have university educations.



> All things considered, Doug Ford is losing the PR war but only just barely.  Teachers are on thin ice with parents.  While I think most do support them, that might change if they don't see any willingness to compromise.


No idea if Doug Ford is a crappy leader or not, haven't really been following. I'm confident putting a lot of the blame for our budget and need to make crazy cuts on the Liberals door steps.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Feb 2020)

[quote author=milnews.ca] The biggest difference is this right here:While the school system is supposed to have the backs of teachers in general, the CF (even when it's not as tough as the "good old days") offers more & different tools to instructors to support classroom & behaviour management.
[/quote]

True.

I may be wrong but I've found lately we as an institution are hyper worried about optics and passing the Toronto Star test. Soldiers who mess up and should get hammered for it know how to work the system and know they'll look like a victim to Twitter and Facebook and the CAF backs off. That's going down another fox hole though.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Feb 2020)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> ... Soldiers who mess up and should get hammered for it know how to work the system and know they'll look like a victim to Twitter and Facebook and the CAF backs off. That's going down another fox hole though.


That's why I caveated with the fact that the system _may_ not be quite as supportive in the same way as it was when I was still a young Reserve MCPL


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Feb 2020)

Teaching kids, who have to be there, is substantially different than teaching adults, who at some level must have chosen to be there.  The few ex-mil people who successfully take up teaching after mil retirement will mostly be found in secondary schools, not elementary.

The formal part of learning to teach is basically a one-year post-secondary program - it doesn't matter whether it's taught at a "college" or "university" unless you care about the flavour of the credential.  (It can be stretched out to two years for less ambitious people.)


----------



## mariomike (25 Feb 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> Where I work my seniority is rewarded with pay, longer leave entitlement etc.



Where I worked, the three emergency services were all unionized on three different dates in 1917 and 1918.

Whatever ones opinion is on seniority, it is what it is, it always has been, and probably always will be. 

So, the younger you join, the better your date.



			
				Remius said:
			
		

> But if I apply for another position, it plays no role other than the fact that I might have gained some experience but if I am a crappy candidate or a better candidate with less time in but is a better choice, then that is what counts.  Just because someone spends 20 years in a position does not mean they should automatically get the job.



In our local, it depended on the Job Posting. Some were Senior Qualified Process. Some were Relative Ability Process.


----------



## Remius (4 Mar 2020)

This will be interesting to see how it evolves...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/education-minister-stephen-lecce-announcement-1.5483979

Teachers are now in a bad spot.  They've been saying it is about the kids an not the money.  I think they've been caught off guard by this and how they react may or may not help their cause.


----------



## Jarnhamar (4 Mar 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> This will be interesting to see how it evolves...
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/education-minister-stephen-lecce-announcement-1.5483979
> 
> Teachers are now in a bad spot.  They've been saying it is about the kids an not the money.  I think they've been caught off guard by this and how they react may or may not help their cause.



It's always been "about the kids" so with no e-Learning and no larger class sizes they'll stop the protests I'm sure.


----------



## YZT580 (4 Mar 2020)

Hard to reconcile that announcement with the one made by the high school teachers that negotiations are at a standstill and none are planned.  Certainly can't accuse the government of intransigence.  Perhaps the timing was off and the minister made the announcement before the negotiating team could inform the union.  At any rate I would say the ball is in the union court to justify continued action.  The seniority issue won't wash with most working types particularly non-union where jobs depend upon competence and not time in.


----------



## mariomike (4 Mar 2020)

For those ( like myself ) unfamiliar with hiring practices for Ontario teachers,

Education Act

ONTARIO REGULATION 274/12

HIRING PRACTICES 

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/120274


----------



## Remius (4 Mar 2020)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Hard to reconcile that announcement with the one made by the high school teachers that negotiations are at a standstill and none are planned.  Certainly can't accuse the government of intransigence.  Perhaps the timing was off and the minister made the announcement before the negotiating team could inform the union.  At any rate I would say the ball is in the union court to justify continued action.  The seniority issue won't wash with most working types particularly non-union where jobs depend upon competence and not time in.



Actually it seems more and more that the unions were aware.  At first union leaders refused to answer if the knew about this.  Now they are watching their language.  Now it’s that they were not informed in writing or hadn’t heard of this in this “format”. 

Looks like they’ve been outmanoeuvred here.


https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-ford-government-tries-to-outmanoeuvre-teachers-with-contract-offer


----------



## mariomike (4 Mar 2020)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> The seniority issue won't wash with most working types < snip >



My one and only full-time job was with a unionised municipal employer here in Ontario.

So, I'm not speaking of teachers, but unions in general.

I read this regarding Retention,


> Seniority does an effective job in helping people, interested in staying at one organization, in working towards having a "marathon" career. One of the goals of a seniority system is employee retention, which ensures an organization is retaining institutional knowledge, erudite employees, and an opportunity for mentorship of new hires. It's important to make sure employees are here to stay.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seniority#In_employment





			
				YZT580 said:
			
		

> < snip > where jobs depend upon competence and not time in.



I can only speak to my own experience, regarding internal Job Postings. 

Regardless of seniority, to qualify, first you had to go through the assessment process. That included verbal and written tests, physical test and demonstration of skill, training, experience, work, disciplinary and attendance record and finally a panel type interview.

Only after that, if they considered you qualified, did seniority rule.


----------



## YZT580 (4 Mar 2020)

Exactly.  Our organisation set the qualification level via scores.  Over say 70 you were included in the list. List was then organised according to time at grade. In the event of two people at grade on the same date which was always a possibility due to the competition process the placing reverted to scores.  It was simple and fair to all.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (5 Mar 2020)

I think the recent moves by the gov are a good step forward. I agree it would look very bad on the unions to not, at the very least, head back to the bargaining table. Although the Ottawa and eastern ON strikes slated for the Catholic & French-language boards today are still occurring as planned, hopefully there won't be further instances and parties settle. 

I came across this article and found it interesting, as I could relate to the stance of the author. Her accounts (and those of her peers) ref abusive students, blame-passing parents and government/union discourse are sadly far too common. The author is now in China and I taught in South Korea. Although I was in a private school teachers are indeed revered differently. I have close friends who taught in the standard public school system in SK as well, and it was the same. Teachers are respected. There's no tolerance for misbehaving students.

While I believe seeking work overseas is drastic, since quality teachers are needed in several communities within our borders, I don't necessarily blame anyone for not wanting to deal with the added politics, drama and regular contention that's now par for the course wrt Ontario teachers.    



> “One of my kids threw a chair today.”
> 
> “My kid locked himself in the classroom at lunch and then threatened to run away.”
> 
> ...



Full article:

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/ontario-teachers-strike_ca_5e5ead07c5b6732f50e96ca7?utm_hp_ref=ca-perspectives


----------



## YZT580 (5 Mar 2020)

Discipline and student behaviour should be separate issues entirely.  Political correctness has created an extremely toxic environment within the schools but giving a teacher more money or reducing the class size is not going to provide any improvements and any steps by the boards to institute a stricter regimen will be met by ambulance chasing lawyers.  Some of it is the result of multiculturalism particularly where women teachers are concerned.  They are considered as second-class by many of the middle-eastern immigrants.  The word of their sons is considered more germane than that of the teacher.  That compounds the problems presented by parents (of the western persuasion) who refuse to accept responsibility for their angel's actions or even accept the possibility that they might commit any offence at all.  But that is not the issue in the bargaining.  If it were, the teachers would certainly have my full support.  I don't recall the issue of school discipline ever coming up in bargaining.  
From what I gather the teachers have been offered 1% in cash and 4% in increased benefits: benefits already un-heard-of in the private sector.  That is not caring for the student's welfare.  What are my credentials for speaking out: I have a vice-principal, and 5 public school teachers in my immediate family so I have heard it all.


----------



## brihard (5 Mar 2020)

For ‘bigger picture’ context, Ontario corrections just got a new collective agreement that gives them 7.5% over 4 years, beginning 2018. Depending on how that’s stacked year over year, this basically is a cost of living adjustment that falls narrowly short of inflation. The nurses’ union is also at the table and it looks like they’re headed to arbitration. They’ve filed a legal challenge against the provincial wage-attrition law limiting annual increases to a well-below-inflation 1%. Interestingly, the union is arguing that there is a sexy discrimination component to this as the professions that are exempted (corrections, fire, police, etc) are male dominated. I’ll be curious to see what the courts make of that. On its face there’s a valid claim to be made of discriminatory effect.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (5 Mar 2020)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Discipline and student behaviour should be separate issues entirely.  Political correctness has created an extremely toxic environment within the schools but giving a teacher more money or reducing the class size is not going to provide any improvements and any steps by the boards to institute a stricter regimen will be met by ambulance chasing lawyers.  Some of it is the result of multiculturalism particularly where women teachers are concerned.  They are considered as second-class by many of the middle-eastern immigrants.  The word of their sons is considered more germane than that of the teacher.  That compounds the problems presented by parents (of the western persuasion) who refuse to accept responsibility for their angel's actions or even accept the possibility that they might commit any offence at all.  But that is not the issue in the bargaining.  If it were, the teachers would certainly have my full support.  I don't recall the issue of school discipline ever coming up in bargaining.
> From what I gather the teachers have been offered 1% in cash and 4% in increased benefits: benefits already un-heard-of in the private sector.  That is not caring for the student's welfare.  What are my credentials for speaking out: I have a vice-principal, and 5 public school teachers in my immediate family so I have heard it all.



No, not in those words. But larger class sizes equates to higher percentages of special needs, those with behavioural issues, etc. So the gov is readjusting their targeted class size proposal--that's very good. But it doesn't solve the issue entirely. This has been a problem for some years now. I *very much * agree our society has aided in how the union now dictates what measures are at teachers' disposal wrt control within their classrooms...which is basically nil.

Your point ref multiculturalism is very valid, hence an earlier comment I made in the thread that comparing the certain locations/experiences of teachers in some parts of Ontario to those in other parts of the country is entirely unrealistic. Parts of Toronto or Ottawa vs, say, _any_ mainly higher-income, mostly Caucasian, English-speaking neighbourhood? The demographics are entirely different and can't be compared. 

My main point with sharing the article was to showcase the broader picture that there are those teachers who are simply tired of the continued issues surrounding the profession, particularly in this province.


----------



## YZT580 (5 Mar 2020)

Agreed entirely but contract negotiations no matter how sweet the results for the teacher are not going to stop the burn out.  Only a change in mindset will do that.  They should perhaps bring back the strap (he said with tongue in cheek).  Seriously though, the strap worked but the reason it worked was kids knew that when their parents found out that they had been strapped, it would happen again.  

Contract negotiations won't solve the special needs problems.  Special needs kids should never have been integrated in the first place.  It is simply too costly and too inefficient to upgrade a classroom to provide the correct facilities and then do the same to the next grade the next year and so on. So the facilities are almost always less than optimum. Special needs kids have special needs and lumping them in with even a dozen other kids means that either a) they don't get the one on one that they require or b) the other kids don't get the attention that they deserve.  They need their own facilities tailored to their needs and an expert staff dedicated to their requirements.  Political correctness put paid to that too often because the parents didn't want their child to be treated differently.

Finally, we keep adding things to the curriculum that have no business being there.  It is not a teacher's job to train my child, teach them manners, convince them to vote liberal, explain intercourse or any of the other extras we have thrown at them.  It is their job to produce a young adult that can read, write, think for themselves and use words longer than 4 letters to express themselves.  The rest is my responsibility as a parent and allowing parents to abdicate those tasks ends up doing no one any favours.

In short, regardless of what we pay them, teachers are not a parent substitute.  Paying them more won't stop burn out.  Establishing rules and enforcing them in the schools will go a long way towards negating any detrimental aspects of adding 2 kids to the roster.  School boards need to back their teachers in disciplinary decisions and learn to tell parents NO.  End of tale I have nothing further to add.  At least I don't think so.


----------



## mariomike (5 Mar 2020)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> They should perhaps bring back the strap (he said with tongue in cheek).  Seriously though, the strap worked but the reason it worked was kids knew that when their parents found out that they had been strapped, it would happen again.



Got the strap when I was 8-years old for throwing a snowball at recess. 

I wasn't being disobedient, just got caught up in the fun and forgot the rules. 

Made sure to remember after that.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (3 Apr 2020)

This has indeed been a welcomed about-face in this province. (Another article I was reading earlier was speaking of the change and calm from the government side ref the teacher’s unions, and how significant progress has been able to be made.)

Of course, not everyone will be fully content with the all decisions made and directives given during this time. But he has certainly stepped up, is prioritizing accordingly and is leaving any blatantly questionable behaviour/comments and agendas on the back-burner...at least for the time being.



> Doug Ford's surprising turn
> 
> Max Fawcett: Before the coronavirus made its way into Canada, Ford was best known for leading a government that could best be described as dumpster-fire adjacent.
> 
> ...



 https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/doug-fords-surprising-turn/


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Apr 2020)

Eaglelord17 said:
			
		

> Fair enough, however a teaching degree also doesn't mean someone is competent to teach. Personally I am in the skilled trades. My teachers are the tradesmen around me. Some of them I doubt have highschool yet they are some of the best teachers I have ever had. Others though aren't particularly good at teaching despite being excellent at what they do. Same thing applies to teachers themselves. They might be very knowledgeable on a subject, that doesn't mean they are good at transferring the information.



Teachers, or trainers?  Do you mean teach/train in the sense that Craftsmen pass on to Journeymen and Apprentices, and Journeymen to Apprentices, that skill and expertise of the trade?


----------



## mariomike (3 Apr 2020)

> When Ford, who is famous for fielding phone calls from constituents against the advice of his political staff, got wind that an Ontario medical supply company was donating 90,000 masks to hospitals in the province, he personally drove over to their warehouse in Markham and loaded them onto his truck—and didn’t tell anyone.



Reference,



> Toronto Sun
> 
> Premier uses own truck to pick up donated masks amid the COVID-19 crisis
> 
> https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/premier-uses-own-truck-to-pick-up-donated-masks-amid-the-covid-19-crisis


----------



## Remius (3 Apr 2020)

Can’t fault Doug Ford for his handling this crisis.

Good on him.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (4 Apr 2020)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Teachers, or trainers?  Do you mean teach/train in the sense that Craftsmen pass on to Journeymen and Apprentices, and Journeymen to Apprentices, that skill and expertise of the trade?





			
				Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Teachers, or trainers?  Do you mean teach/train in the sense that Craftsmen pass on to Journeymen and Apprentices, and Journeymen to Apprentices, that skill and expertise of the trade?



One in the same. Show me the difference between teaching/training? With both you are acquiring knowledge and new skills. With teachers and tradesmen they are both teaching their subject area with the skills and knowledge they (hopefully) have in their field. The skilled trades teachers (high schools, colleges, etc.) are just tradesmen generally. Some have a teaching degree as a add on, some do not (my college professors didn't have any teaching degree, just their trades tickets).


----------



## Remius (4 Apr 2020)

Eaglelord17 said:
			
		

> One in the same. Show me the difference between teaching/training?



Both involve learning learning.  But they are not quite the same. 

https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-teaching-and-training.html


----------



## YZT580 (4 Apr 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> Both involve learning learning.  But they are not quite the same.
> 
> https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-teaching-and-training.html


Remius, the attachment does a wonderful job of explaining the difference between teaching and training.  It does not differentiate between being a teacher or a trainer.  And that is the point.  A teacher can be involved in presenting either the theoretical information on a subject for example explaining the interactions between welding rod temperatures and differing metals or the same individual can be guiding his student's hands as they try and draw a bead for the very first time.  But from the passing on of knowledge which is the common element of both the teaching and training elements viewpoint the skills of the trainer are far more valuable than the knowledge of the teacher.  Any reasonably well read individual can acquire knowledge.  Being able to convey that knowledge to a variable assortment of minds in a manner that is conducive to the knowledge transfer is the crux and that does not require a degree.  It requires empathy and an ability to communicate and for the best teachers that is intuitive.  What teacher's unions have done is try and place the teaching portion on a pedestal while down playing the importance of the hands-on thing.  It was their way of creating a 'uniqueness' that resulted in higher pay.  It also forced out those undesirables who knew how and why but couldn't write B.A. after their names and forced the pay scales up as it forced boards to pay for the education.


----------



## mariomike (25 Apr 2020)

Doug had this to say,



> "We have a bunch of yahoos out in front of Queen's Park sitting there protesting that the place isn't open," Doug Ford says in response to protesters who want Ontario reopen. "They're setting us back months. Obviously they don't care about everyone else."
> https://twitter.com/TorontoStar/status/1254099071192760328


----------



## Remius (26 Apr 2020)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Doug had this to say,



Cats are barking and dogs are meowing. 

When you read the comments and replies to his tweet a lot of people who were not Ford supporters are certainly impressed with his performance.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (26 Apr 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> Cats are barking and dogs are meowing.
> 
> When you read the comments and replies to his tweet a lot of people who were not Ford supporters are certainly impressed with his performance.



It’s true. I absolutely detested his brother for personal and political reasons, and while Doug, slightly less-so, he was still quite high on my ‘no friggin’ way’ list.

In addition to overall candour (or lack thereof) and complete disagreement with certain policy initiatives, also having connections to those who knew the two of them from high-school and early adulthood days and the reputations surrounding them made him a hard no in my book. (I had issue with Libs too, but not to the same degree.)

Anyway, I’ve been extremely impressed with how he’s stepped up since this all began. I believe in giving credit where credit is due. That being said, I have no idea how I’d vote in the next election. For now, I’m cautiously optimistic that a hammer won’t fall at some point to reveal some old shenanigans again, but right now, it’s safe to say he’s winning over some potential voters.


----------



## mariomike (26 Apr 2020)

BeyondTheNow said:
			
		

> It’s true. I absolutely detested his brother for personal and political reasons, and while Doug, slightly less-so, he was still quite high on my ‘no friggin’ way’ list.
> 
> In addition to overall candour (or lack thereof) and complete disagreement with certain policy initiatives, also having connections to those who knew the two of them from high-school and early adulthood days and the reputations surrounding them made him a hard no in my book. (I had issue with Libs too, but not to the same degree.)
> 
> Anyway, I’ve been extremely impressed with how he’s stepped up since this all began. I believe in giving credit where credit is due. That being said, I have no idea how I’d vote in the next election. For now, I’m cautiously optimistic that a hammer won’t fall at some point to reveal some old shenanigans again, but right now, it’s safe to say he’s winning over some potential voters.



In my opinion, when being sent into homes during a time of psychological stress, showing empathy is 90 per cent of the job. 

Doug is showing empathy when he is sent into homes via TV. So, good for him.


----------



## Walt (26 Apr 2020)

To add to BTN's post, I agree. Doug Ford's reputation has been tarred by "the sins of his brother", and perhaps by the premier himself. I was dumbfounded, and actually scared for the future of Ontario when he won the election. That was then, and this now. Within the past few months, during the Covid pandemic crisis, I've garnered a new respect for the man. Drastic times call for drastic measures, and I would not want to be in his shoes.


----------



## PuckChaser (26 Apr 2020)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Doug is showing empathy when he is sent into homes via TV. So, good for him.



It feels like a real empathy as well. He either actually does, or gives off a convincing impression that he really does care. He'd be the world's best actor if those tears when answering a question about LTC outbreaks the day his mother-in-law was diagnosed with COVID-19 were fake. The same cannot be said for other politicians in this country in higher levels of government.

He's even quick to abandon his attempts to balance the budget recognizing how serious the economy could tank without supports. That's real leadership, the ability to abandon your ideology because its the morally right/tactically correct thing to do.


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Apr 2020)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> ... That's real leadership, the ability to abandon your ideology because its the morally right/tactically correct thing to do.


 :nod:  I'm also impressed with his dropping the partisan politicking as well, acknowledging other people's work while at the same time saying clearly what's needed.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (29 Apr 2020)

I have mixed feelings about Doug Ford's "performance" ... I'm not quite ready to jump on the bandwagon of "he's shown great leadership" but I do agree with those who say he's apparently shown real compassion and I give him major kudos for putting his money where his mouth is and going out personally delivering PPE and it does not come across as merely making a show or trying to score political points.

That said, I'm not convinced that such draconian measures and trampling of civil liberties was necessary or advisable. Not that anyone else would have done anything different.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (29 Apr 2020)

I'm a right wing Doug Ford/ Donald Trump kind of guy and my "draconian and trampling" would have been more severe then what we did.  Maybe it's about time this generation (s) actually had to know what a real bobo can feel like.


----------



## Remius (29 Apr 2020)

LittleBlackDevil said:
			
		

> That said, I'm not convinced that such draconian measures and trampling of civil liberties was necessary or advisable. Not that anyone else would have done anything different.



And that is just it.  It isn’t a liberal vs conservative thing.  All parties are more or less following the same play book.  At least in Canada. 

So much is unknown with this virus that you can’t take any chances.


----------



## Underway (29 Apr 2020)

LittleBlackDevil said:
			
		

> I have mixed feelings about Doug Ford's "performance" ... I'm not quite ready to jump on the bandwagon of "he's shown great leadership" but I do agree with those who say he's apparently shown real compassion and I give him major kudos for putting his money where his mouth is and going out personally delivering PPE and it does not come across as merely making a show or trying to score political points.



So what is great leadership to you. He's shown compassion, not tried to score political points, followed the medical/scientific advice and worked with former political "enemies (read Federal Liberals)" to get the job done.  At every turn, he's tried to do the right thing.  So... is it perhaps your own political leanings and previous opinions are getting in the way.  By any objective measure, he's doing amazing.  And let me say... I was NOT a fan before this.



			
				LittleBlackDevil said:
			
		

> That said, I'm not convinced that such draconian measures and trampling of civil liberties was necessary or advisable. Not that anyone else would have done anything different.



I'm impressed (not intended to be sarcastic, that's a genuine compliment).  Some consistency in an opinion.  One of the least talked about issues with left/right is their inconsistent belief systems (pro-life but also pro-death penalty?  What?  Generally soft on law and order but in favour of lockdown of the economy?  Huh? and vice versa).


----------



## OceanBonfire (29 Apr 2020)

> *Ford says Ontario will not put children in 'harm's way' as Quebec moves to reopen daycares, schools*
> 
> https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ford-says-ontario-will-not-put-children-in-harm-s-way-as-quebec-moves-to-reopen-daycares-schools-1.4915629
> 
> ...


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (30 Apr 2020)

Underway said:
			
		

> So what is great leadership to you. He's shown compassion, not tried to score political points, followed the medical/scientific advice and worked with former political "enemies (read Federal Liberals)" to get the job done.  At every turn, he's tried to do the right thing.  So... is it perhaps your own political leanings and previous opinions are getting in the way.  By any objective measure, he's doing amazing.  And let me say... I was NOT a fan before this.



Great leadership would include all of the above BUT would also include considering a variety of opinions and balancing multiple competing interests rather than just basically handing the reins of leadership over to the medical professionals.

I don't take issue with medical professionals wanting a lockdown because, they are focusing on their field as they should. And in a vacuum, without other competing interests to consider, absolutely you lock it all down. But, the medical ramifications of those infected with COVID-19 is only one piece of the puzzle. It seems like no one has considered the long term economic impact and the deaths that will result from the lockdown.

It seems to me that locking everything down was in fact the easy, politically expedient one, because no one was going to criticize him for doing that. I think placed like Sweden are the ones who actually made a tough decision because they risk a higher death toll now, to avoid a much much worse death toll down the road. I believe we are in the "calm before the storm" and we are only just starting to see the tip of the iceberg of the lockdown consequences that are coming and they'll be bad.

I'm impressed (not intended to be sarcastic, that's a genuine compliment).  Some consistency in an opinion.  One of the least talked about issues with left/right is their inconsistent belief systems (pro-life but also pro-death penalty?  What?  Generally soft on law and order but in favour of lockdown of the economy?  Huh? and vice versa). 
[/quote]

I don't see an inconsistency between being pro-capital punishment and pro-life at the same time, but I'm not going to get into that because it's off topic.

That said, I'm not necessarily ideologically opposed to a lockdown _per se_ ... my concern has always been more along the lines that the cure is worse than the disease.


----------



## YZT580 (30 Apr 2020)

damned if you do, damned if you don't.  I'm old enough to remember both the Hong Kong and the Asian Flu pandemics.  Both had death tolls exceeding this one (so far) and that was with a much smaller population base.  We lived or died and went on with life.  There was no lockdown although a number of businesses had to reduce shifts and go slow because of staff shortages.  People developed immunity.  With this thing, we still may end up with it but it spreads it out over a much longer period of time at a horrendous cost.  But what politician is going to go against the medical experts even though they have no idea when or whether there will be an improvement.  These experts only have computer simulations to go by and they haven't the foggiest whether the data going in is the right data or not.  As proof, consider the death counts that were originally forecast with the best case scenario which is why the lock down.  Nowhere have we even come close to approaching the estimates except in seniors homes and that is a totally distorted picture.  Come election though and the inevitable I told you so's would sound the death knell for the leader if they contradicted the experts.


----------



## Brad Sallows (30 Apr 2020)

>But what politician is going to go against the medical experts even though they have no idea when or whether there will be an improvement.

The smart ones are also listening to their economic and fiscal experts, and seeking the advice of those who have multidisciplinary expertise in public health and economics.

>These experts only have computer simulations to go by and they haven't the foggiest whether the data going in is the right data or not. 

The accuracy of the data can be refined by observation, but it hardly matters; there is no reason to believe the models (the process by which the inputs become outputs) are accurate.  Models of complex phenomena are just educated guesswork with a lot of coarse assumptions and approximations.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (30 Apr 2020)

Perhaps location/geography is playing a role in perceptions of what is at the forefront of the Premier’s focal points, but it’s appeared quite clear to me via several news conferences and articles that the economy is of extremely high concern. Not once have I ever gotten the impression that Ford downplayed and/or wasn’t concerned about the necessity of maintaining the status quo as much as possible, as evidenced by how many businesses remained operating practically as normal when the first round of closures was announced. It wasn’t until the extent to which cases were spreading (because people weren’t adhering to the social distancing protocols) and the healthcare system in this province was clearly being affected that it was decided the closures needed to be more inclusive. 

Since then, he has often discussed the state of the economy and expressed his desire to initiate a plan to get things going again, but has also explained that it will need to be methodical and well-executed in order to prevent another serious bout of cases within a short time frame and in large numbers. 

Of course he needs to take into account facts and figures coming from the health-care professionals immediately surrounding him (and others). He is not educated in medicine and he’s not pretending to be. He has struck a fair and transparent balance between what he feels is best for the province from the business aspect, as well as the healthcare aspect. What else do we want here?


Jeezuss, if someone would’ve told me a year ago I’d be defending Ford...


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (1 May 2020)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> damned if you do, damned if you don't.  I'm old enough to remember both the Hong Kong and the Asian Flu pandemics.  Both had death tolls exceeding this one (so far) and that was with a much smaller population base.  We lived or died and went on with life.  There was no lockdown although a number of businesses had to reduce shifts and go slow because of staff shortages.  People developed immunity.  With this thing, we still may end up with it but it spreads it out over a much longer period of time at a horrendous cost.



Time will tell, but I anticipate the death toll from those epidemics will be far less because they didn't take away people's jobs, ruin the supply chain, etc. during those epidemics whereas this has been done today. All while people are not developing immunity because they're "sheltering in place". It's going to be ugly hence why I can't get on board the "Ford is a great leader" bandwagon.



			
				YZT580 said:
			
		

> But what politician is going to go against the medical experts even though they have no idea when or whether there will be an improvement.



A politician who is a good leader would listen to a variety of experts and balance all the competing interests to come up with a plan that mitigates the overall harm rather than focussing just on one area which is what has been done. In my view, Ford took the "easy way out" and just did what everyone else was doing so he wouldn't be criticized. 

In my view, the real leaders are people like those in Sweden who made the tough decision to keep things open and eat the initial media outrage. Now that they've weathered that storm they are starting to look like geniuses because their medical system hasn't "collapsed", their economy isn't in tatters, they don't have people dying because of skipped surgeries or unemployment-induced-suiced, and they are developing immunity. 

The smart ones are also listening to their economic and fiscal experts, and seeking the advice of those who have multidisciplinary expertise in public health and economics



			
				YZT580 said:
			
		

> These experts only have computer simulations to go by and they haven't the foggiest whether the data going in is the right data or not.



Which is all the more reason why you don't completely annihilate the economy and deny people the basic right to earn a living. You don't really need computer projections to know self-destructing the economy will be bad. So why hit that detonator switch when you have no clue whether the data supporting that move is right?



			
				YZT580 said:
			
		

> Come election though and the inevitable I told you so's would sound the death knell for the leader if they contradicted the experts.



On the contrary, if Ford had the intestinal fortitude to go with a Sweden-type approach, by the time the election rolled around he'd be looking like the guy who saved Ontario while everyone else suicided their provinces, in my view.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (1 May 2020)

BeyondTheNow said:
			
		

> Perhaps location/geography is playing a role in perceptions of what is at the forefront of the Premier’s focal points, but it’s appeared quite clear to me via several news conferences and articles that the economy is of extremely high concern.[./quote]
> 
> Actions speak louder than words -- this is what fuels my perception. Sure, Ford has SAID that he has high concerns about the economy and that "no one wants to open the economy up more than me" but what his ACTIONS are has been to shut everything down and ruin the economy. He didn't hesitate at all to take away millions of Ontarians' livelihood away from them and prohibit them from the basic human right of earning a living. We're only seeing the very tip of the iceberg here of the economic ramifications, but it's going to get a lot worse, I'm quite sure.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (1 May 2020)

LittleBlackDevil said:
			
		

> Which is all the more reason why you don't completely annihilate the economy and deny people the basic right to earn a living. You don't really need computer projections to know self-destructing the economy will be bad. So why hit that detonator switch when you have no clue whether the data supporting that move is right?



Lots of jobs, I think every senior/group/ shelter home in Ontario is hiring right now.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (1 May 2020)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Lots of jobs, I think every senior/group/ shelter home in Ontario is hiring right now.



They are not doing a good job of advertising this or of recruiting. That said it's something worth looking into.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (18 May 2020)

It’s interesting noting the uptick in different types of support for Ford during the last weeks.

I find it particularly and curiously enjoyable (referencing myself as well here) when others really, reeeally don’t want to admit that he’s been doing an overall good job (mainly because many still recall previous actions and initiatives that keep them wary—and with justifiable reason), but through gritted teeth and clenched fists manage to utter a (sometimes back-handed) compliment—or two—in one area or another. 

So this article gave me a good chuckle. Obviously written with an intended tone and effect, but humorous. There’s some tongue-in-cheek, and some eye-rollers through-out, but it had some laughs for those who can relate to how the writer framed this particular piece. ‘Not meant to illicit any serious debating of viewpoints or ideologies, just a bit of a laugh. 


*Ontario Premier Doug Ford has flipped my world*



> He’s not the only politician to have achieved this during the pandemic but he’s the one whose energy and education policies offend me just as much now as they did when he was first elected.
> 
> On the other hand, he has a dreadful, beautiful cheesecake recipe his late mother got from her sister Wendy, he learned to make it when he was 10, and the result has clogged my heart with sweet, sweet love.
> 
> ...



Link:

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2020/05/18/ontario-premier-doug-ford-has-flipped-my-world.html


----------



## Remius (18 May 2020)

BTN, 

I totally see myself in that article.  But I am not reluctant to credit Ford.  I’ve even defended his trip to his cottage.  

Strange times...


----------



## BeyondTheNow (18 May 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> BTN,
> 
> I totally see myself in that article.  But I am not reluctant to credit Ford.  I’ve even defended his trip to his cottage.
> 
> Strange times...



Agreed! I’ve defended him a few times myself. 

It’s probably most fitting to describe myself as a bit left of centre. I’m not so engulfed in any of my political standings that I’m unable to see/acknowledge issues with either major party, and I hold personal ideals that fall into one side or the other depending on the particular issue. But as touched on in one of my posts further back, I was...very disappointed, shall we say...when Ford won. (Reasons are sundry.) But for where Ontario is right now, I’m pleased with where things are. Perfect? No. But no politician can make anyone 100% content at all times when conditions are _normal_, let alone what we’ve been wading through these last months.


----------



## Remius (18 May 2020)

The Ontario Liberals had to go.  I voted NOTA.

When he mishandled the Franco file I vowed to never vote for his party after that.  They%u2019ve walked a lot of that back though. 

I don%u2019t agree with everything he%u2019s done but he has shown great leadership in all of this.  I only hope the federal conservatives are watching.  Doesn%u2019t look like it though sadly. 

He%u2019d have a solid  chance at the federal level if he were to make that jump.

Spelling edit.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (18 May 2020)

Absolutely. I wasn’t impressed with Wynne, and I’m not sorry that she’s not leading the province through this. 

Unfortunately, I don’t think they are either—or rather, if they are, only passively. They need to get themselves figured out and are too occupied with that. Bluntly, the federal Conservatives are a disaster...but I agree he’d hypothetically have a reasonably competitive shot also, and he’s loosely teased about that path.

For now, though, before I can make any concrete decisions as to the absolute level of confidence I’m ready to place in him, I’d like to see how he leads and the decisions he makes post-pandemic. The effects of this will no doubt impact the structures of some of his previous policies/agendas. So I’m curious to see how that will all play out. Of course, it’s going to be quite some time yet before any of this slows down and Ontarians are well-situated into our new ways of life.


----------



## mariomike (18 May 2020)

A double culinary delight for Ford Nation fans. Mikey in, what looks to be, the same kitchen.


----------



## Xylric (18 May 2020)

The cheesecake my twin brother and I made for Mother's Day (as we have been living with our parents for a number of reasons during this pandemic, the largest being the fact that my father is a cancer survivor with other health issues) was simply the no-bake jello mix with fresh homemade whipped cream and strawberries. The real gift was the chicken wings she requested. It's very nice that the restaurants I used to work at all said the same thing when I moved on to other things - I was welcome to any of the recipes I wanted, if I could reverse engineer them from taste alone. So far, I've only succeeded with a total of three things, all sauces. They got used.

So, as a baker, I appreciate the effort of Ford to make himself seem more typical an Ontario resident. There were times where I idly wondered if he'd been abducted and replaced, either by aliens or the illuminati (possibly both).  :rofl:


----------



## mariomike (10 Jun 2020)

mariomike said:
			
		

> A double culinary delight for Ford Nation fans. Mikey in, what looks to be, the same kitchen.



In today's news,

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1280&bih=641&tbs=qdr%3Aw&sxsrf=ALeKk03A7rtKi4CjiQ0Gsq9OSsxUccim6w%3A1591816540012&ei=XDHhXqUt9aXK0w_KmpbgBA&q=%22michael+ford%22+doug&oq=%22michael+ford%22+doug&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzIFCAAQxAIyBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB46BQgAEIMBOgIIADoECAAQAzoECCMQJzoKCAAQgwEQFBCHAjoHCAAQFBCHAjoECAAQClD9dFixf2DVhAFoAHAAeACAAawCiAHgB5IBBzAuNC4xLjGYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwily6jb-vfpAhX1knIEHUqNBUwQ4dUDCAs&uact=5#spf=1591816559502

Doug Ford and Christine Elliott tested for COVID-19
https://www.thestar.com/politics/provincial/2020/06/10/premier-doug-ford-health-minister-christine-elliott-tested-for-covid-19.html


----------



## OceanBonfire (21 Jul 2021)

> Before the Ford government was elected, college enforcement officers made thousands of visits annually to construction sites, automotive garages and body shops to validate the credentials of skilled tradespeople.
> 
> Government officials admit enforcement stopped, even though the law remained in place.





			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-skilled-trades-enforcement-doug-ford-college-1.6109825


----------



## PuckChaser (22 Jul 2021)

I feel like there was some sort of intervening event in there...


----------



## brihard (22 Jul 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> I feel like there was some sort of intervening event in there...


Not for nearly two years. The legislative dismantling started mid 2018.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Jul 2021)

There's  a major point people are missing about Ford's response. Not only did he do a great job, but he was responsible for sheparding approx 40% of Canada's  population through this. 35 million total pop/ 15 million from Ontario. That, right there is a major feat he can be proud of. He sailed through where provinces, with almost negligible populations in comparison, floundered and failed about like fish in a forest. He struck a pretty good balance between gut and science. Let's also not forget that a lot of the stuff the Premieres mandated were following what the Fed was ordering them to do.Want to blame someone? Blame Tam and Hadju, whose marching orders come from Trudeau. Probably the last three people in the world anyone should take pandemic advice from. Ford was one of the very few that stood in front of the cameras and said "The buck stops with me. If you want to blame someone, blame me." Seek out and accept responsibility.😉


----------



## brihard (22 Jul 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> There's  a major point people are missing about Ford's response. Not only did he do a great job, but he was responsible for sheparding approx 40% of Canada's  population through this. 35 million total pop/ 15 million from Ontario. That, right there is a major feat he can be proud of. He sailed through where provinces, with almost negligible populations in comparison, floundered and failed about like fish in a forest. He struck a pretty good balance between gut and science. Let's also not forget that a lot of the stuff the Premieres mandated were following what the Fed was ordering them to do.Want to blame someone? Blame Tam and Hadju, whose marching orders come from Trudeau. Probably the last three people in the world anyone should take pandemic advice from. Ford was one of the very few that stood in front of the cameras and said "The buck stops with me. If you want to blame someone, blame me." Seek out and accept responsibility.😉


Sorry, I’m not tracking the connection to the near total halt to enforcement of skilled trade licensing since 2018.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Jul 2021)

OceanBonfire said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-skilled-trades-enforcement-doug-ford-college-1.6109825


I was intimately involved with this. Prior, the responsibility for this was part of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Licenses and training were investigated by the Min of Labour OHS Inspectors during routine inspections or complaints. Wynne wanted to expand the PS so they developed a plan to hire hundreds of people whose job it was to walk in and check the license and training records and leave. They looked at nothing else. Great, high paying, full benefit jobs with minimum energy expenditure while removing an investigation tool from the Labour Inspectors. The whole thing was a gift to the Wynne/ Horvath alliance, union base. Ontario taxpayers were already paying for this service, done by OHS Inspectors. It typically took less than 10 minutes to check that aspect during an inspection. MOL did not ask to lose this tool. It was taken from us to hire a more OPSEU employees. Simply return the responsibility to the MOL. Hundreds of vehicles, every 4-5 years, real estate, resources, not to mention the approx $70,000/yr wage, per inspector. It is as simple as saying to MOL, "You guys got this back." Those five words could save Ontario taxpayers millions.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Jul 2021)

brihard said:


> Sorry, I’m not tracking the connection to the near total halt to enforcement of skilled trade licensing since 2018.


On this page alone, there are posts about both the job Ford is doing during the pandemic and a separate subject of Colleges and Trades(#357). I simply answered both points.


----------



## brihard (22 Jul 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> On this page alone, there are posts about both the job Ford is doing during the pandemic and a separate subject of Colleges and Trades(#357). I simply answered both points.



Gotcha. I replied before your second post.



Fishbone Jones said:


> I was intimately involved with this. Prior, the responsibility for this was part of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Licenses and training were investigated by the Min of Labour OHS Inspectors during routine inspections or complaints. Wynne wanted to expand the PS so they developed a plan to hire hundreds of people whose job it was to walk in and check the license and training records and leave. They looked at nothing else. Great, high paying, full benefit jobs with minimum energy expenditure while removing an investigation tool from the Labour Inspectors. The whole thing was a gift to the Wynne/ Horvath alliance, union base. Ontario taxpayers were already paying for this service, done by OHS Inspectors. It typically took less than 10 minutes to check that aspect during an inspection. MOL did not ask to lose this tool. It was taken from us to hire a more OPSEU employees. Simply return the responsibility to the MOL. Hundreds of vehicles, every 4-5 years, real estate, resources, not to mention the approx $70,000/yr wage, per inspector. It is as simple as saying to MOL, "You guys got this back." Those five words could save Ontario taxpayers millions.



Thanks for this. That's a pretty reasonable explanation for part of it. Was that power ever returned to the MoL and funding reallocated to continue with inspections? Given that they were finding more than 4000 people working unticketed in trades a year, that would suggest a serious enforcement gap if Ford slashed what was put in place without at the same time shifting that responsibility back to someone and properly resourcing it. Am I missing something here or was nothing put back in place to achieve the same objective?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Jul 2021)

I'm retired, so I haven't  been involved for awhile. You, as well as anyone, knows about chronic offenders. You also have a chronic problem of people working under the table. 4,000/yr in a province with our population is not that much IMHO. When you look at the amount of nail shops around, I'll bet you could almost get that amount on those alone. The job was previously done by MOL so it should only cost a couple of days refresher training, for MOL to resume the job. It was a small, part of our overall job. A tiny box check on items to inspect. The Wynne government turned it into a specialty requiring specialists to do it. When it was all coming down a bunch of us questioned the wisdom. Our union steward warned us all to be quiet and not fight it. Of course management was all behind it at the time also.


----------



## brihard (22 Jul 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> I'm retired, so I haven't  been involved for awhile. You, as well as anyone, knows about chronic offenders. You also have a chronic problem of people working under the table. 4,000/yr in a province with our population is not that much IMHO. When you look at the amount of nail shops around, I'll bet you could almost get that amount on those alone. The job was previously done by MOL so it should only cost a couple of days refresher training, for MOL to resume the job. It was a small, part of our overall job. A tiny box check on items to inspect. The Wynne government turned it into a specialty requiring specialists to do it. When it was all coming down a bunch of us questioned the wisdom. Our union steward warned us all to be quiet and not fight it. Of course management was all behind it at the time also.


Right, makes sense.

I could really give a rat's ass about a nail salon... Lot more concerned about stuff like the guy working on my brakes or my furnace. I would have hoped this would have been prioritized towards 'high consequence' breaches where there's a real public risk to unlicensed work?


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Jul 2021)

brihard said:


> Right, makes sense.
> 
> I could really give a rat's ass about a nail salon... Lot more concerned about stuff like the guy working on my brakes or my furnace. I would have hoped this would have been prioritized towards 'high consequence' breaches where there's a real public risk to unlicensed work?


But its hard to catch those mechanics and furnace guys. Nail salons are much easier. Just my opinion and that`s not worth a hill of beans


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Jul 2021)

brihard said:


> Right, makes sense.
> 
> I could really give a rat's ass about a nail salon... Lot more concerned about stuff like the guy working on my brakes or my furnace. I would have hoped this would have been prioritized towards 'high consequence' breaches where there's a real public risk to unlicensed work?


Everyone is equal under the law, right?😉😆


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Jul 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> But its hard to catch those mechanics and furnace guys. Nail salons are much easier. Just my opinion and that`s not worth a hill of beans


Backyard mechanics for sure. Ones working in a shop, not so much. I checked one place, where the supervising mechanic had his shingle in about 8 different garages. Supervisor is supposed to be on site to check the work of the non licenced. Hard to be in 8 places at once, checking on kids who are just parts changers. Gotta step away and get some shit done. Cheers.


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Jul 2021)

Part of what protects consumers is reputation.  A sterling reputation is needed in highly-competitive endeavours.  A licensing scandal would be death to reputation.  (If you want a rough measure for highly-competitive, pick up a hardcopy yellow pages directory if you can find one and see who is buying double- and full-page ads, or space on the front/back covers and spine.)

A bit similar to the old emissions inspections scheme in BC.  Purpose-built installations, staffed by well-compensated people doing only one (not particularly complex or demanding) thing all day long.  Based on fee, hourly rate was more than what I paid at shops with highly-qualified and versatile automotive mechanics.  I suspect "private enterprise" could have filled the gap, maybe with some initial loans/subsidies to businesses willing to devote or add a test bay.


----------



## lenaitch (22 Jul 2021)

Successive Ontario governments love writing regulations; they're not big on enforcing them.


----------



## RangerRay (22 Jul 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Successive Ontario governments love writing regulations; they're not big on enforcing them.


I think most governments are guilty of that!


----------



## mariomike (2 Dec 2021)

Readers who follow Ontario politics may, or may not, find this of interest. 

Presumably party strategists do,


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1463574372942241798


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (2 Dec 2021)

mariomike said:


> Readers who follow Ontario politics may, or may not, find this of interest.
> 
> Presumably party strategists do,
> 
> ...


Look at all that toxic masculinity 😄

I thought gender was just a social construct and shouldn't be used to make decisions?  🤔


----------



## OceanBonfire (4 Mar 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1499057618043781128

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1499429019833585665


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (4 Mar 2022)

Sounds good to me....


----------



## Furniture (4 Mar 2022)

Here is the lest sensationalist version directly from the report.

Financial Accountability Office of Ontario | Publication

Actual Spending vs. Planned Spending​
The Province spent $119.9 billion over the first three quarters of the 2021-22 fiscal year, which was $5.5 billion (4.4 per cent) less than planned.
Most sectors spent less than planned, led by *‘other programs’* ($2,285 million), *health* ($1,293 million), *children’s and social services* ($1,206 million), *interest on debt* ($438 million), *postsecondary education* ($391 million) and *education* ($212 million). Only the *justice sector* spent more than planned over the first three quarters of 2021-22, at $305 million.
Key programs with lower-than-expected spending as of December 31, 2021 include the following:
In the *health sector*, the Province spent $999 million (39 per cent) of the $2.5 billion revised budget for the COVID-19 Response program. There was also lower-than-expected spending on payments to physicians, provincial drug programs and hospital capital projects.
In the *education sector*, the Province spent $733 million (43 per cent) of the $1.7 billion budget for the School Board Capital Grants program and $252 million (38 per cent) of the $661 million budget for the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program.
In the *children’s and social services sector*, the Province spent $334 million (56 per cent) of the $600 million budget for the Autism program and $1.6 billion (62 per cent) of the $2.7 billion budget for the Ontario Works – Financial Assistance program.
In the *‘other programs’ sector*, the Province spent $28 million (four per cent) of the $630 million revised budget for municipal transit projects and $204 million (16 per cent) of the Ministry of Infrastructure’s entire $1.2 billion revised budget.

Spending information for all of the Province’s programs by ministry is available on the FAO’s website at: https://tinyurl.com/y8vy3jf9.

4.4% under the budget in the middle of a pandemic, with rotating lockdowns... Seems rather reasonable to me.


----------



## Edward Campbell (5 Mar 2022)

OceanBonfire said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1499057618043781128
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1499429019833585665


There's an election coming up this year. Highways are popular.


----------



## suffolkowner (5 Mar 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> There's an election coming up this year. Highways are popular.


Yes popular but we already have too many and we constantly build new ones and dont maintain the ones we have


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Mar 2022)

None of that money is the government's. It belongs to taxpayers. They are the source of that cash.
Any party or politician that only spends what they need to and doesn't  blow the rest because they can, or pass it under the table to influence unions, has got my vote.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Mar 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> Yes popular but we already have too many and we constantly build new ones and dont maintain the ones we have


Quebec: has entered the chat


----------

