“It’s the same people who seem to be coming out to these meetings, the same interests … the same people who want us to do the same things,” he complained of those annoying people who, you know, engage in municipal politics.
“What’s great about what’s happening at City Hall is there is a vision,” he continued. “The vision is to not do things the same way that we’ve done it in the past.”
I can see it now! Wait, no I can’t. All I see is David Miller looking sad. Still, Mr. Mammoliti perfectly encapsulated the Rob Ford era. People still insist on deriding him as some sort of conservative ideologue, but ideologues are predictable, and he’s all over the shop. If you had to describe his mayoralty in one word, it’s just different. Mr. Miller lays down bike lanes on Jarvis. Mr. Ford paints over ’em.
This isn’t a great way to reinvent a city. The Mayor’s executive committee will consider KPMG’s suggestions next week, including dozens of potential service cuts that Mr. Ford promised not to make. And this is before the efficiency review — which was supposed to find the gravy that would make cuts unnecessary — has even been released. It’s all going at breakneck speed, and under threat of a $775-million shortfall which is no less real for Mr. Ford having made it larger.
We’re talking about major changes to city services: in some cases to the manner of delivery (selling the zoo or the parking authority), in other cases to costs of them (recreational programs like swimming lessons) and in other cases outright abandonment (funding for festivals like Pride and TIFF). What are these committees for if not to debate these matters?
And yet, as Councillor David Shiner told Inside Toronto, “the tough decision in the end will be made by the executive committee.” Contingent on the continued support of his allies, Mr. Ford is going to do what he wants.
There’s been considerable hostility to the KPMG reports. But I’m pleased to have all these choices laid out in black and white. If we weren’t in such a hurry, they’d be an ideal framework for discussion — and can still be in future. Does the city need to be in the business of daycare or long-term care homes, when the vast majority of people receive those services from the private sector? Does it need to employ garbage collectors directly, when so many other municipalities don’t? Do EMS and fire have to be separate departments? Do we need this many police officers? I’d say no to all of the above. The smaller the government, the less can go to seed. I doubt people would even notice many such changes.
Conversely, many of the potential changes on heartstrings issues — parades, swimming lessons, library hours — are notable for their impermanence. If the next mayor wants to reverse these decisions, all he has to do is find the money and sell the choice. Assuming Mr. Ford makes the city at least somewhat more efficient — not a slam-dunk, I’ll grant — it might even be an easier sell. I’m not saying people should tune out or cheer up or stop fighting for their vision of the city. But right now, “different” rules the day. It’s the vision thing.
Origin
Source: National Post
No comments:
Post a Comment