We always said if we could push them into the winter months – we’d have more time. To the folks at Toronto Hydro – my heartfelt thanks to you for giving us more time to defeat you.

Toronto Hydro Energy Services employs some of the dimmest lights I’ve personally encountered at the ‘Director’ or ‘Vice President’ level. These foolish individuals who’ve flatly refused to do any sort of meaningful environmental assessment have failed to understand the conditions, and had them moving their construction barge all over the general area looking for a place they could install the device.

Guildwood residents are quick though and pushed back whenever it appeared not to be in the correct spot. We now have emails from Joyce McLean stating on two occasions the construction barge was at the right coordinates at which point it moved again, and she once again confirmed it was in the right spot, and then it moved again. Once again – something she says simply can’t be true.

Many of us had that ‘kick in the stomach’ feeling watching this barge try and figure out how to anchor something in the sand bar off the Bluffs, worried and wondering about the anemometer or possibility for turbines in the future. Seeing this play out, and being able to literally hear the voices, the songs on the radio, and the sound of a generator running from the barge have shown how the sound will travel over water – something that will only strengthen community resolve.

Toronto Hydro Energy Services is in for one hell of a fight. Residents will not back down until Toronto Hydro’s proposal is defeated and disgraced. Not a single turbine will be going off our shores, and those who want to keep pushing the idea have my sincere pledge that we, residents of the area will fight you and will never give up until this horrible idea is gone, and our lakes are protected from the untold environmental degradation involved in installing these things.

Toronto Hydro took a big step forward in their defeat by backing off on this proposal. Something they claimed would take a month took nearly two and ended in failure. Just like this whole proposal will soon enough.

Residents have a lot of work to do to convince our City Councillors who have been slow and ineffective, the City of Toronto and Toronto Hydro Energy Services to stop this proposal.

I don’t agree with what Sandra from Toronto did. I understand that as a fervent member of Toronto City Council’s establishment on the left, she felt duty bound to defend the record of the Mayor who made her less obscure and acted on many of the things the two believe. I get that as his former Deputy Mayor, and the current City Speaker, defending Miller and attacking a possible mayoral candidate who would likely undo much of what Miller has done made sense to her. But the tactic and approach was all wrong, and even her reaction to her bizarre call in, makes the depth of her lack of judgement appear even deeper than her first appearance did.

Personally speaking, I don’t think you slug someone for trying. One thing a guy like John Tory, or anyone else who has run for public office going for them is the right to say they’ve tried to act on the convictions they hold, and for anyone to try to use electoral failure as an attempt to silence someone else to me (as someone who has failed electorally)seems like a pretty bad thing to do in a democracy. We need opposition to those who govern if we are to maintain a vibrant exchange, accountability and the ability to not get stuck in the status quo. We need incumbents to lose to ensure change for good or bad happens. That’s how our system works. When he is a candidate, hit him for what he says, positions he holds and plans he has – that’s all fine with me, but slamming a guy for holding true to his convictions and sacrificing from his own life to advance his ideas, especially considering he lost in doing so – is totally wrong. If folks of diverting opinions don’t butt heads before, during and after elections, the actual voting part is meaningless and soon so do is the governing.

As difficult as it may be for Bussin to accept, she could be the poster girl for the status quo at this point. She represents the problem with politics at City Hall. She has been a City Councillor since 1997, and given the opportunity I would ask her whether she believes her 13 years on Council have been productive in shaping the City, and the community she represents. When she said yes (as I expect she would), my follow up would be, after 13 years what do you still believe you have to contribute that you haven’t in this particular role. If she seeks re-election will 17 years be enough time to get it done? or will she need 21? or 25 years to get whatever it is she set out to do in 1997. It’s clear I don’t accept the idea of career City Councillors, but I’ll stop here on this as although I think it’s a problem, its a discussion for another time.

Before I continue condemning what Sandra from Toronto/ Councillor Bussin did, I’m going to explore how I think she could have done it better, recognizing that what she was trying to do if it wasn’t so poorly executed and haphazard could have been part of a broader political strategy of progressives to weaken John Tory.

Progressives do have an interest in painting Miller as an icon and guys like Tory as a bad, scary, failure. It makes perfect sense why they would like to do this. Let’s accept that Sandra from Toronto/ Councillor Bussin’s actions were based on furthering this legitimate attempt of the left on Council to shore up support for their next candidate and tear down what they see as the greatest threat.

If you’re Sandra Bussin and you want to roll in the mud on this – do it as Councillor Bussin, not Sandra from Toronto. Sandra from Toronto can’t make news nearly as effectively as Councillor Bussin can. She also doesn’t have the weight to frame an argument as effectively either. If Councillor Bussin decided to wish John Tory luck, to tell him that she expects he will fail and opted to blame it on how strongly his views differ from David Miller, who is probably the most brilliant municipal politician in Canada – that would make news. She could have said almost everything she did, and likely set the agenda for the ‘should John Tory run’ story that will be ongoing until he decides what to do. She couldn’t have been as rabid about it as Sandra from Toronto and been effective, but had she have calmed down before going off at the mouth, she really could have framed the issue. The frame of the story would have been Councillor Bussin takes strip off wannabee Mayor. Not Councillor Bussin screws up huge, critics question judgement in light of bizarre attack on John Tory.

Sandra from Toronto screwed up. She weakened Councillor Bussin, and damaged the ability of progressives to go after someone they will need to if they seek to control to control City Hall.

If Councillor Bussin wanted to be evasive on air, – which is wrong and should never have been done, she should have been smarter about it. My first suggestion would be not to identify by ‘Sandra’ as there is a Councillor Sandra Bussin who is publicly very much a fan of David Miller, who also happens to be from Toronto. My second suggestion would be not to split hairs on who you work for. Councillor Bussin’s income comes from the Corporation of the City of Toronto, her letterhead carries that corporation’s symbol, as does her business card. Her email address directs people to email her at the City of Toronto, and her website calls her ‘Speaker of Toronto City Council’. Yes, ideally Councillors work for their constituents, but they are still very much employed by the City of Toronto in doing so.

My final suggestion would be don’t do it because it is really stupid, dishonest and inappropriate.

I don’t agree with Councillor Bussin or Sandra from Toronto did and think what she said was poorly thought out. Her defense was even worse. This ‘give me my own show bit’ is truly crazy stuff. But at the same time, I do understand why someone with her views would want to frame an argument on the topics she attempted to. Sandra from Toronto messed it up so badly though that it not only backfired, but it got Councillor Bussin pretty good too.

My personal view on any statements I give, is that I only say things I am prepared to stand behind. For me, its just a matter of integrity and sort of a check I have on myself to ensure everything I am saying is honest, and provable. In doing so I am prepared to stake my reputation on the words that come out of my mouth (or fingers). If I were an elected official I imagine that would continue to be the same, particularly because the ability an elected official has to direct media attention on an issue.

Had Sandra from Toronto been thinking rationally and not lashing out in anger as it is clear in her voice and temperament she is, Councillor Bussin could have done a lot of good in trying to frame the argument for a progressive replacement to David Miller, but in failing to do so, she called in an airstrike on herself and left her opponent on the high road, looking down on her perplexed.

как снятся в порно фильме

Blaming it on a software error is not only an epically weak excuse, but it fails to recognize the serious repercussions of the error. Consider for a moment that between this, and the LRT deal this Council signed during the strike, they added $600 million dollars in future expenditure (read budget shortfalls for later) in less than 30 days. The LRT financing was something the City developed and voted on in less than 24 hours, adding $400 million dollars in totally unplanned spending to the capital budget. These actions are simply irresponsible and demonstrate a lack of appreciation for what it is they are tasked with doing.

Consider that each additional $30 million of revenue this Council adds to the expenditures, a 1% property tax increase is needed. This Council is already facing a staggering $500 million dollar budget shortfall in 2010. In 2003, the City of Toronto had a $6.4 billion dollar operating budget, by 2009 the annual operating budget is $8.7 billion dollars. This is a 35% increase in annual operating expenses over six years, with little or nothing by way of service improvements to show for it.

I do believe government spending can be positive and targeted in a way to have a demonstrated value for residents.But ,I become very concerned when I look at staggering numbers like this and realize that through the irresponsible spending we’ve watched at the municipal level in Toronto, we now have a chronic budget shortfall, no real service improvements to point to in exchange, and quite likely some service cuts on the way.

City Council needs to get real, and recognize they are putting Toronto on the path to bankruptcy. They need to actually think before the spend, to revisit previous priorities and announcements to determine if funding and projects are meeting their objectives and if not, make some decisions about deployment of resources. If we start the process now, it doesn’t need to be painful, but if Council waits until the situation is entirely out of control, they will be forced to cut deep into both the operating and capital budgets in ways all citizens will feel.

Toronto Island Ferry service has been restored in time for the long weekend.

I wrote Friday morning urging Councillors to act responsibly and not attempt to cause a management lock out that would have deprived Torontonians of services for an undetermined length of time and cause a more expensive arbitrated settlement. Watching 17 Councillors take a politically opportune but disasterous public policy position in trying to defeat the collective agreement was unfortunate. 

They weren’t the only ones looking bad however. It was David Miller who turned the sick pay issue into such a big deal. Two months ago, most Torontonians had no idea workers could bank sick days. Miller educated residents, sought their overwhelming public opinion against this system, promised to end it and failed to. He failed because he could not have ended it anyways and it was a bad promise to make. His opponents on Council should be wise enough to understand they too could not hope to end the sick pay bank – and fighting blindly against this would result in an arbitrated deal that would see the status quo in place. 

Miller did better at the negotiating table than could have been done at the arbitration table, but the bizarre left/right politics at City Hall has resulted in both sides being dishonest or misleading with the public about their positions. 

Miller’s talk of millions of dollars in savings is based on a hypothetical raise of 3% annually, something the City had never intended to go for. It was money never spent, it was money that was never going to be spent making it an argument that isn’t rooted in fact. 

The fact that six Councillors didn’t feel the need to attend the meeting is scandalous. This is probably the most important decision this Council had to make so far in 2009 and these individuals, duly elected, did not appear to have their voice or the voices of their constituents heard. There names are : John Filion (Willowdale); Gloria Lindsay Luby (Etobicoke Centre); Giorgio Mammoliti (York West); Cesar Palacio (Davenport); Kyle Rae (Toronto Centre Rosedale)

The following Councillors voted in favour of a management lock out: Paul Ainslie (Scarborough East); Brian Ashton (Scarborough Southwest); Mike Del Grande (Scarborough Agincourt); Mike Feldman (York Centre); Rob Ford (Etobicoke North); Cliff Jenkins (Don Valley West); Norm Kelly (Scarborough Agincourt); Chin Lee (Scarborough Rouge River); Peter Milczyn (Etobicoke Lakeshore); Denzil Minnan-Wong (Don Valley East); Ron Moeser (Scarborough East); Frances Nunziata (York South Weston); Case Ootes (Toronto Danforth); John Parker (Don Valley West); Karen Stintz (Eglinton Lawrence); Michael Thompson (Scarborough Centre); Michael Walker (St. Paul’s)

A Councillor voting against the agreement, is in fact voting for a management lock out. It is plain and simple. Voting against the agreement means that you’d like it to fail, if you’re a Councillor and you want it to fail, its because you want a lock out. Let’s hope that the Councillors who disagree, at least are wise enough to slam the Mayor and company during the debate, but not vote against the agreement. Leave the Chamber if you have to, but don’t demonstrate irresponsibility by fanning the flames in favour of a management lock out. 

Citizens need their services back, they need garbage pick up, daycares open, pools, rec centres and parks open, clean and safe for children. Voting against what is a done deal won’t make it any better, and risks making it a lot worse. 

We’ll find out today what Councillors decide to do, let’s hope its the right thing. 

There are over 600 workers who crossed the line who need the City to protect them from expulsion proceedings that would see them lose their jobs for crossing the line, but the City seems prepared to risk the jobs of those individuals to go after some militant strikers. 

What the City should have done is called the police if there was objectionable behaviour happening on the line that they wanted addressed. Waiting until the strike has ended to decide to go after workers who misbehaved seems to me like a bad idea that both risks serious and irreversible harm to the City’s allies in both CUPE 416 and 79 and the City’s relationship with unions. 

I think all Torontonians want this strike to end, we want our workers back at work and our Council to get the job done – the City needs to get out of the way and let it happen. 

Let’s go guys, shake hands, agree to move forward together, and repair the relationship through a mutual protection of those each side would otherwise seek to punish. 

His threat to walk away from the table if the City didn’t get serious within 48 hours was well played for a number of reasons. One, it forced the City to get real and budge (to the degree we do not know). Two, even if it had failed, CUPE 416 stepping back from the table would have made it easier for McGuinty to step in and force arbitration as a lack of negotiations means the parties can’t solve it on their own. 

It was clear that Miller and the Union both recognized the City’s position was indefensible at arbitration, so Ferguson setting things on course to find it’s way in that direction represents the kind of arm twisting it often takes for an adversarial round of negotiations to come to an end. 

It is good news that CUPE 79 followed shortly after CUPE 416 penned the basis of an agreement earlier yesterday morning. My hope now is that Wednesday’s ratification among workers will go well, and end with a clear result. 

I do have a warning for Councillors who also need to ratify the agreement – if Councillor’s act out against the Mayor and try to defeat the agreement during their ratification vote, I expect the damage that has been done to the Mayor would largely be reversed as trying to lock the workers out after a 36 day strike would result in a total electoral revolt I expect against all current elected officials, the left for causing the first strike and the right should they defeat the agreement forcing a lock out. 

Everyone is going to need to act like adults, allow for things to get back to normal and for a process that will allow labour relations in this City to return to normal. An adversarial relationship between the City management and Union leadership can only serve to hurt Torontonians in the future and both sides have put residents through enough for many years to come with what has become the longest strike in the City’s 175 year history. 

CUPE 79 continued to negotiate throughout the weekend, but did not threaten to walk away if talks did not result in a deal. They still do not have a tentative agreement reached, but it stands to reason that CUPE 79 will follow CUPE 416 and allow for the strike to end within days. 

I have not seen the text of the tentative agreement, but it is promising that all members of the CUPE 416 negotiating committee voted unanimously to accept the deal. 

The next step is ratification, which would take place by allowing CUPE 416 members to vote to accept or reject the deal. Union management now needs to sell the deal to its 6200 members, and hope that a majority vote to allow the agreement to be ratified and return outside workers to work. 

I got an email from David Miller’s Director of Communications that was sent to all registered media who cover City Hall saying the Mayor will not comment on today’s developments until both unions have collective agreements. That in itself is promising as to me at least it seems like CUPE 79 will likely follow with an agreement of their own within a day or two, considering much of the inside workers leverage is gone when outdoor services resume. 

This is good news for all residents in Toronto. 

For Miller the strike is about economics, for the workers its about fairness. Miller has a chronic spending problem, and for political reasons will not use his new powers under the City of Toronto act to correct them. As a result he relies on handouts and now beating up on unions to make his a bizarre fiscal arrangement work. Spending has gone up $2.2 billion per year under this Mayor. That’s 34% in five short years. Workers didn’t do that, and this sick pay bank didn’t do that – this was the Mayor and his Council.

While I hope the City and CUPE 416 can strike a deal and get everyone back to work, should they fail to, I hope the Premier at least will call the legislature back and issue back to work legislation. Worker’s cannot go forever without a cheque, many are probably unable to pay their bills as it as. Residents deserve their services restored and because we have a Council unable and unwilling to properly manage our City, the time is here for the Province to step in, and at least referee this current fight until residents can do something about their Council next year.

If you have a story you would like to to share with me, please click Contact Me.