Ford's Pipe Dream and Toronto's Transit Needs

Or I guess I should say tunnel dream. For those of you who are uninitiated in the Toronto's transit woes. Here's the deal. The old mayor of Toronto, NDPer David Miller, wanted to build a whole bunch of above ground light rail train lines all around the cities periphery along with one buried LRT line along Eglinton. The new mayor, gravy train hater, Rob Ford, wants to abandon the above rail LRT lines and finish the infrastructure project of the last right wing mayor, Mel Lastman: namely, the Sheppard Subway. See, Ford actually has a point. The current Sheppard line is a joke. It runs a total of five stops and connects with just one other line. Logic would seem to dictate that is should at least connect to the University/Spadina line stop at Downsview if not the Scarborough RT. The problem is subways are bleepin' expensive.

This is why we really, really can't afford tax cuts like the GST cuts made by Harper. Canada's big cities have a colossal infrastructure deficit. Toronto doesn't need just the Sheppard line. It need two or three new lines. There's a chicken and egg argument to be had about subways and population/demand. Opponents of subways on Sheppard say that the population doesn't warrant the expense. That may be true... right now. Anyone who has lived in this city can tell you though that Sheppard, particularly the section along the subway route, has been a major locus of new Condo/Apartment construction in the last decade. People want to live on the subway. This city is expensive to begin with, parking is a nightmare and expensive in and of itself and the traffic, well, you can't get much worse. Many people if given the choice of commuting by subway or by car will choose subway. That doesn't apply necessarily to buses and streetcars that involve waiting outside in sub-zero temperatures for erratic service. There is a certain element of "if you build they will come" with subways.

In some cases, this city already has the population to warrant a subway. I'm going to make a case for one that doesn't get talked about. Have you looked at the Toronto skyline lately? Do you see all those towers west of the CN Tower? That is called population density: new population to be specific. Exactly the kind of thing that would justify a lake shore based subway line. Anyone who has tried to get on the King or Queen streetcar at rush hour knows the problems that exist trying to get east/west in Toronto. It's only going to get more crowded with the opening of the west don lands and more and more condos along king and queen. Think about the areas and attractions (this would be a great line for tourist) a lake shore line could cover with only a fraction of the stops on Bloor.

1. Start with a stop in the east with the lovely but inaccessible Beach. Parking is a nightmare out on Queen East for both visitors and residents, a subway with below grade stations would preserve the neighbourhood feel while granting access to the rest of the city.
   
2. Up and coming Leslieville could also get a stop east of the river.
   
3. Cross the river and head down to King and Parliament for a stop in burgeoning Corktown
4. Followed by a stop for George Brown College and the St. Lawrence Market at either Sherbourne or Jarvis.
   
5. Links with the Yonge-University-Spadina line at Yonge and
   
6. University would integrate the system and provide further access to attractions like the Rogers Centre and CN Tower downtown.
   
7. From there, you could either go down to Harbourfont Centre or head along King and to trendy King West and the new TIFF Lightbox.
   
8. King and Bathurst would pick up the rest of King West
9. King and Dufferin for the burgeoning Liberty Village and easy access to the Exhibition and Ricoh Colliseum, and BMO Field.
10. From here, follow the lake and the towers. One or two more stops out west would draw people off the Gardiner, and ease congestion downtown.

Building subways in Toronto's core is a rough political sell these days but if we're going to spend money on a subway, this is where the people are and are going to continue to be.

Bev Oda's Saramago Moment

The late Jose Saramago, the Portuguese Nobel winning author, wrote a book called The History of the Siege of Lisbon. The book centers around the decision of a proofreader to edit the book and history by inserting a tiny little "not" at a crucial turning point of the siege. The book evolves into a punctuation deprived story about it never being too late for love. It is really quite excellent. Go read it. Anyway, there's a political point to the book report. When I heard about the absurd Bev Oda, CIDA thing I immediately thought of Saramago's book. Saramago makes the point quite eloquently that it is the little things, the "not's" of the world, that make all the difference. It is the little things that make Stephen Harper a poor Prime Minister.

Harper has avoided the major political blunders. He's made some bad decisions for the country (hello, GST cuts) but he has avoided the big political decisions that make people get angry and stay angry. The Harper government has been defined by the insertion of a bunch of little negatives into Canadian life. Extending the mission in Afghanistan? Not really a major change in policy (10 years or 12 years, it's a long time). The Quebec nation resolution? It's just a resolution. Waiting for the Americans on climate change? Well, it would have been tough to go it alone. It's been a subtle shift, not the soldiers... in our streets... with guns that Paul Martin warned us about. This has proven a challenge for the Liberals in opposition. We can only hope that getting caught red-handed on something like this will help to turn people on to the slow drip of disaster Harper has been unleashing on this country.

Is Bill C-12 About To Die of Old Age?

While the house is still on vacation, it is not, for once, prorogued. That means there are still bills waiting for them when they get back. One of those bills is Bill C-12 which the Tories are calling the Democratic Representation Act. This is the one that would give increased representation in the house to large provinces like Ontario, Alberta and BC which have seen large population increases. Interestingly, the language of the bill if not amended could make the bill completely ineffective for 10 years if not passed soon.

The readjustment of the seats in the House of Commons happens after each decennial census (the ones ending in 1). That's not new. However, the Democratic Representation Act is only to take effect following the first decennial census completed AFTER its passage. In other words, if parliament doesn't pass the bill soon, it would only be effective after 2021 census. Of course, the Tories could amend the bill to fix this problem, but don't bet on it. More likely, they'll use the excuse to shelve the bill and come back with an even less effective plan that appease Québec more.

Strange Weekend News

Quick run down of things catching my eye this weekend:

• Revolution in an Arab North African country... this could be really good or well, awful
• On a lighter note, archaeologists appear to have found Noah's stash. No I don't think this is actually a biblical cave but it is eerily close to Mount Ararat.
• John Stewart's pick for the RNC Chair has won election. Frankly, this may be a poisoned chalice. The RNC hasn't been able to fundraise effectively for about five years. The GOP's inability to get cash may be the most under-reported political news story out there.
• I didn't know it was possible to not be able to sell real estate in Vancouver.
• Is it me or is Rob Ford starting to like the taste of gravy, or at least the sound of trains?
• With the French Socialist party a fading force and Sarkozy increasingly unpopular, this is scary.
• Andrew Coyne wants the government to track your every movement. Apparently, Big Brother is way better than a little bit of traffic.
• When you cry wolf too often, you tend to lose some sheep. I'm increasing convinced that the World Health Organization may be a detriment to humanity.
  

Walks Like A Duck, Talks Like A Duck, Statistically: Chicken

I turned on The Agenda on TVO last night and saw U of T prof David Hulchanski talking about his much publicized report on what he perceives as a growing income disparity in Toronto. It reminded me personally of why I never pursued post-graduate work and also how much I disagree with his report. Dr. Hulchanski received a mandate from a poverty-activist type place to do a report on income disparity in Toronto. Shockingly, the report says there is a problem and its getting worse! AHHHH! Sound the alarms! Lou Dobbs was right! The middle class is dying... sorry... I forgot to disable the panic button.

The problem with Dr. Hulchanski's report is that the numbers are rigged in his favour. Every elementary school child is taught the difference between a median and a mean. That child could tell the Dr. Hulchanski that a bunch of very big numbers in a group can really throw off a mean. That's essentially what has happened in Toronto. It's not really that there are a whole host of poorer Torontonians, in fact if you ran the numbers a different way you might even say people are generally a lot more comfortable than they were forty years ago. No, the biggest difference is how much money is being at the made at the top. According to the report, the top 20% earned about 55k per capita in the 1970's and 104k per capita in the 2000's. That growth in the earnings of the top percentages of Canadians is not exactly news to anyone. It completely distorts the numbers on the rest of the report. For his 70's baseline, the top group, those earning more than 40% above mean wages, was about 13% of the total pie. For his sky is falling modern numbers, the same group represents 36% of the total pie. The number of people represented in this group has gone from 7% to 13%. In other words, this group has about a 50% larger disproportionate effect on the mean today vs the baseline.

If you look at the report, the middle class has primarily eroded into the group 20 to 40% below the mean. That group in 1970 when, remember, there was likely only one person working in the household, was $22,300 per person. The so called middle class number was $29,800. Now, when there are likely two people working in a household, the number is $28,000. The question is as a household, would you rather have 30k a year in 1970 or 55k a year in 2005? While the 30k forty years ago is probably preferable, it isn't as much as a slam dunk as the authors of the report would like you to think.

Taking percentages off a mean can do really strange things. For the final graphs, the ones plastered all over the newspapers, they took three groups: people within 20% of the mean, people 20% or more above the mean and people 20% or more below the mean. So what does that actually equate to in dollar-terms? Your average middle class household straddle the narrow band between $32,500 and $48,840. Anyone making more than 49k is sent into the upper class and anyone making less than $32,500 is all of a sudden a pauper. Remember: this is per capita. So, if you are a successful professional making $150,000/annum and you support a spouse and three children alone on that income: your household is in the dreaded "third city" because per capita your household only makes 30k. By the same count a single TTC driver making 50K is in the first city. When your statistics are yielding that kind of crazy result, it's time to consider changing your methodology. Maybe household income would have been a better measuring stick? Maybe a median would have proved more accurate? I am generally pretty down on modern academia and this report only emphasizes the problem. Any system where this kind of statistical manipulation can not only pass as legitimate but be promoted and celebrated is fundamentally broken.

10 Events to Watch in 2011

Not sure what 2011 holds in store for political geeks? Here's a quick rundown:

10. Prairie Punch-ups: Manitoba and Saskatchewan will both go to the polls this fall. Premier Brad Wall will face the voters in November trying to win re-election for the Saskatchewan Party. Wall's popularity and power seem to be at all time highs making an NDP win here highly unlikely. Over in Manitoba, Greg Selinger, who may be the least known premier in the country, will try to win his first election after taking over for now Ambassador Gary Doer. The NDP may have a tougher test on their hands this time around as early polling shows the PC's under Hugh McFadyen ahead. There is a long list of first ministers who have taken over while their party was in power and have subsequently lost their first election. Selinger's name might get added to the list in October.

9. The King is Dead, Long Live the Queen?: Danny Williams made a national name for himself as premier, his successor has big shoes to fill. They won't have a long time to work out the blisters as Newfoundland and Labrador head to the polls on October 11th. With Kathy Dunderdale seeking the PC leadership, there is a possibility of having an election where the leaders of all three major parties are led by a woman. If it happens, Chantal Hebert will probably complain that Newfies rejected two female leaders.

8. Rand Paul Turns Into a Pumpkin at Midnight: The Tea Party will have its biggest test early this year as Tea Party sweethearts like Ricky Rubio and Rand Paul will have the opportunity to literally stop the US government from taking on more debt. The Congress actually has to pass a law in order to raise the debt ceiling. A filibuster from Paul or Rubio could theoretically derail the US government and much of the world's economy. Governing can do some strange things to principles and this vote will put it to the test.

7. Endless Federal Election Speculation: You can make an excellent case that now is as good a time as any to hold a federal election. You can also make an excellent case that there's absolutely no point in holding a federal election right now. Which one of these arguments holds currency with Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff this year will determine whether or not we have an election. With four provincial and two territorial elections scheduled for the fall, expect the spring budget debates to be the focal point of the speculation.

6. Can a Sudanese House Divided, Stand? Southern Sudan will hold a referendum in 2011 to decide whether or not to become independent of Khartoum. The answer is widely expected to be yes. The bigger question is would such a result be accepted peacefully by the government in Khartoum. If the answer to that question is no, the dormant civil war may erupt anew. Why should you care? Well, the price of gas will likely rise if the people in the south vote yes.

5. AKP, 1,2,3?: June 12, 2011 is the date that Turkey will elect a new government. More realistically, they will re-elect the current AKP government led by Prime Minister Erdogan to a third consecutive term. Turkey's new natural governing party looks to be finally free of any constitutional opposition to it governing. The AKP or Justice and Development Party is on the one hand in favour of a more public place for Islam in Turkish society and on the other hand a major proponent of accession into the EU. Expect the future of both those burning issues to be discussed at length in the run-up to this vote.

4. 1 and 2 and 3 Canadians: Yes, 2011 is a census year. That means the first ever voluntary long form census. Oh the statisticians are going to be angry. Perhaps, more consequentially the clock is officially ticking on the Tories plan to get the House of Commons to look more like Canada. Elections Canada is going to start redrawing electoral boundaries once they have the 2011 census numbers. The process of getting the data and then turning it into electoral districts usually takes a couple of years. Presumably the Tories have until the census data is tabulated to get the house in order.

3. The Politically Windy City: Why is a mayor's race in Chicago so interesting? Well, first of all nobody named Daley is running. Second of all, former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel is running in his old boss' adopted hometown. Finally, competitive elections in Chicago always bring out the worst in politics. This should be a bloodbath.

2. Dalton's Swansong: The obituaries are already being written for the Liberal government of Dalton McGuinty. However, the voters don't get a chance to officially kill the government until October. Tim Hudak certainly has to be the favourite at this early point but campaigns do usually matter. Just ask John Tory. Hudak is playing his cards close to the vest at this point. It will be interesting if he is ever forced to show just how right wing a hand he really has. Expect a lot of Mike Harris references from the Grits.

1. Sarah Palin's Iowa: Yes, technically the Iowa Caucuses are in 2012 but most of the campaigning will take place this year. Sarah Palin will likely be involved which will ramp up the media coverage to an unprecedented level. To my mind, Iowa is a must-win for the former Alaska governor as she may end up an afterthought in New Hampshire. There are other potential candidates beyond Palin, lots of them. How many of them can find any oxygen with media darling Palin in the race, is anyone's guess. Haley Barbour, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Bobby Jindal, John Kyl and even Ricky Rubio are on the long list of presidential hopefuls. CNN may need to build a bigger stage for the early debates.

11 Policies For Canada in 2011

People keep saying that Canadian politics are stale and boring. Michael Ignatieff needs some ideas just to get people talking. So, here's a quick list of 11 things that likely won't get done in 2011 but should be done:

1. Raise the GST to 6%. This one is fairly straight forward. The government needs to close the deficit hole and the faster the better. The GST cuts made in the last five years were too expensive. Hike the GST. It's the easiest way to raise taxes without damaging the economy to severely.
   
2. Start a high-speed rail connection for the Quebec City-Windsor corridor. Yes, this will add to the deficit but much like adding an addition to a house is a good reason to bump up a mortgage, high sped rail in Canada is worth the debt burden.
3. Double the number of foreign student visas available by 2020. Why? Well first, it would really piss off Maclean's. Second, foreign students pay 2 to 3 times more for university than Canadians. That means universities have more money and don't need to hike tuition for Canadians or ask the government for more money. Finally, with US student visas becoming harder and harder to come by, the world's best and brightest are looking for somewhere to study. Why not Canada?
4. Make the House of Commons as rep by pop as constitutionally possible. Being a nation, doesn't mean you're more important. Either that or pass a resolution in the house declaring English Canada a nation.
   
5. You know what would save more money than eliminating the penny? Eliminating the senate.
6. Raise the GST to 7% and give the extra cent on the dollar to the city where it was spent. Cities are massively underfunded, particularly our core cities which provide services to non-residents while receiving no tax revenue in exchange.
7. Cut landing fees at Canadian airports. This would be a boost to tourism and business. Why is Canada the most expensive place to land a plane?
8. End the mission in Afghanistan. Why exactly are we training an army for Hamid Karzai? He's proven to be corrupt and two faced at the best of times. Do we really think he'll get better once NATO leaves?
9. Side the with the developing world in the Doha round of the WTO. Pledge to reduce or eliminate agricultural tariffs and subsidies, if the rest of the developed world comes around. All the foreign aid in the world won't do as much as opening the world's markets to their goods. Almost every developed country started with a strong export driven agricultural sector.
10. Get an inter-provincial agreement to make building codes more environmentally friendly. Maybe we don't need to go as far as a solar panel on every roof, but no new building should need to be improved on things like insulation.
11. Don't use the notwithstanding clause to uphold current prostitution laws. Even if you don't think a regulated prostitution industry would be safer for everyone involved, can you say tax revenue?
    

Europe's Growing Deficit

For once, I'm not talking about the fiscal mess Europe finds itself in. No, the biggest deficit in Europe these days is a democratic one. What am I talking about? Well, it starts with the EU, but that really isn't new. It is a growing concern as the panicked union attempts tries to contain a fiscal crisis that threatens the Euro itself. But that may be the least of Europe's worries. In Greece and Ireland, unpopular governments push through less popular austerity measures. This is not undemocratic in and of itself. The people elected these governments. However, it seems highly unlikely that the next government of Ireland or Greece will overturn the current decisions. There doesn't some to be anyway for the people to change the course of their government. That might not be bad economic policy, it is distressing for the state of democracy. This philosophical concern may be the least of Europe's democratic worries.

For the second time in two elections, government formation in Belgium is proving virtually impossible. Proportional Representation and a deep linguistic divide has paralyzed the seat of European power. This lack of government is all the more distressing as bond markets start to turn their eyes toward Belgian debt. Canadians complain about the seeming deadlock of our legislature. At least governments get sworn in around here. The political deadlock is exacerbating the economic problem in Belgium, which in turn won't make political negotiations any easier. A vicious cycle.

In Italy, the last week has shown how thin that country's grip on democracy has become. Silvio Berlusconi's time as Italian Prime Minister are not exactly a lesson in democracy. From his media control to his massive wealth, the Italian PM governs his country at times like the leader of a banana republic, replete with parties that would be the envy of most tin-pot dictators. Berlusconi may have reached a new low last week with accusations that he literally bought the votes he needed in the Italian lower house to avoid defeat. A sad state of affairs.

Finally, in Hungary the new government has taken an ominous turn. State control over all sorts of major institutions, including the media seems to be the order of the day in Budapest. This Hungarian government was elected in a landslide to get rid of the old horrible government. The old government was doomed by a leaked tape which had government leaders callously joking about lying about the nation's books in order to win re-election. The new government seems intent on not letting another such media leak bring it down.

White Man's Burden Protocol Should Die

The Kyoto Protocol ends in 2012. It has accomplished very little and deserves to die. The problem with the Kyoto Protocol is pretty straightforward: it blames the West for climate change, or more accurately the European world for climate change. Consider the following two countries:

Country A:

Population: 48 Million
Total GDP: 1.362 Trillion USD (PPP)
Member of the OECD
G20 Member
Carbon Emissions per capita: 10 Tonnes

Country B:

Population: 2.2 Million
Total GDP: 25.93 Billion
Not a member of the OECD
Carbon Emissions per capita: 3.66 Tonnes

Objectively, country A is far more of a target for environmentalists than country B. The Kyoto Protocol doesn't think so. Country A is economic giant South Korea. Country B is tiny Latvia. Latvia is bound by Kyoto, South Korea is not. There's a lot of European guilt on climate change. The science doesn't back it up. The fumes put out by Europe and North America during the 19th century did virtually nothing to the world's climate picture. The bend in Al Gore's famous (or infamous) hockey stick graph is in the twentieth century, somewhere around the end of WWII. The West didn't have enough time to do this alone. The white man is not solely culpable for global warming. It would be easier for some progressives if it were the case. But it isn't. This makes the "Europe +" Kyoto Protocol all the more a joke. The Kyoto Protocol includes no gulf oil producing states. It includes Japan but not South Korea, Singapore or Taiwan. Oil producers Russia and Norway received sweetheart deals. Even so, Russia now wants out. If we are to do anything about CO2 emissions, it will require a global effort. The EU and a couple of friends cannot change the course of climate history. As long as the mindset of differentiated responsibilities outlined in Kyoto survive, the world will continue to fail in this fight. Real environmentalists should be cheering the death of this joke of a treaty.

Potash Deal Hits the Wall

"No matter who controls the company, however, the damage to Canada’s reputation as a place to do business is done. Now that the Conservatives have joined the protectionist bandwagon, investors have lost their chief ally in Ottawa. Other countries will doubtless be more welcoming."

The Economist

There was a time when Stephen Harper actually stood for something. The decision by the federal government to kill the potash deal is proof that those days have long since past. We'll never know if the deal BHP was offering for Potash Corp was good for Canada or not. We do know that it's dead. We also know that this so-called conservative government is responsible for the only two rejections of foreign takeovers under the existing legal framework. Brad Wall's provincial concerns about the coffers of his rentier state should not come above national interest. Saying no to foreign direct investment in the midst of a major recession is reckless and endangers the future economic welfare of this country. If I were BHP, I'd be asking the government of Australia to take this to the WTO as it seems to be a clear violation of the principle of national treatment. The Mayor-elect of Toronto boasted that Toronto is now open for business. Under Stephen Harper, Canada is now closed.

The Fighter Jet Farce

There's a lot of squawk from the right about the virtue of paying billions of dollars to have fighter jets constructed somewhere else. The argument seems to be a) Chretien scrapping the helicopter deal cost us some money, therefore don't scrap the jets, b) we've already put this much in we may as well keep going or c) the Russians are coming! These arguments don't hold water and they hold even less ice.

In order to justify buying 65 fighter jets, you need someone with an air force to fight. The Taliban may be a menace, but there's no red baron in their midst. Future missions in places like the Democratic Republic of Congo would be similarly free of significant air-to-air challenges. Thus, we have Stephen Harper's great Russian canard. "Arctic sovereignty" is a wonderful idea. It gets political scientists all hot and bothered. I mean how can you be a country if you can't protect your own borders? Logical? Maybe, but completely irrelevant. The people we would have to theoretically protect our "sovereignty" from are the Russian Federation and the United States of America. In case we've somehow forgotten, they are nuclear powers. Canada is not. Let me get this scenario straight: The Russians send fighter aircraft into the Northwest Passage to prevent... well I'm not quite sure... maybe us bombing their boats? (This is a naval passage after all, you can fly over the pole right now.) Anyway, there are Russian fighter jets in the northwest passage. Are Conservatives actually suggesting we threaten to shoot them down? Are we going to unilaterally declare war on Russia? The answer is of course no. A policy of "shoot down the plane and hope they don't retaliate" is almost as stupid. There are almost no conceivable scenarios where a top of the line jet fighter would protect our "arctic sovereignty".

So, if there's no purpose to these jets why are we wasting taxpayers dollars on it? It costs money to cancel any program. I don't hear Conservatives decrying Rob Ford's attempts to stop Transit City, in spite of the cancellation fees involved. Yes, cutting government waste long term may have short term costs, but our deficit, thanks to Tory tax-cut and spend policies, is a long term problem. This is pork at its worst. I don't care who originally signed the deal. It needs to end.

Finally, the sea king ghost. Canada's military actually does need helicopters. It also needs armored personnel carriers. We could probably use some more air lift capabilities if you want to spend the money on the RCAF. If you don't want to cut the military budget because that's somehow sacred, spend it on things we actually need. Fighter jets have got to be just before inter-planetary spacecraft on the most needed list. We can debate whether or not ending the misconceived helicopter contract 20 years ago was a good idea or not. There are two sides to that argument. It is not relevant to the current discussion.

Mayor Ford... Ugh

Quick thoughts from a quick election night:

• I'm putting the over/under on strike days during Rob Ford's four years as mayor at 150 days
• Toronto's political scene is going to have a giant hole without George Smitherman around
• Jack Layton, leader of a federal party and would-be Prime Minister, spent his morning at a subway stop campaigning for a city council candidate in one of the smallest wards in Toronto. Yes, Mary Fragedakis won (thanks to a huge vote split from Jane Pitfield and Jennifer Wood), but really? Layton doesn't have better things to do?
• Apparently, Jim Flaherty doesn't have anything better to do either. He was hanging out at the Ford victory party. Can we stop the charade and just have political parties in municipal politics in Ontario?
  
• Sandra Bussin was humiliated. Some good news.
• Paula Fletcher escaped. Not good news
• Chantal Hebert should probably visit Mississauga. Hurricane Hazel is back. If you want to limit yourself to three cities and not count the two female mayors Toronto elected back-to-back in the 90's... Well, gosh darn, there are no female mayors.
• Ms. McCallion was punished by the voters for her ongoing scandals receiving a paltry 76% of the vote.
• Oh and Ms. Hebert forgot to mention that aside from Mme. Marois and Ms. James (who are near locks right now), Danielle Smith is seen as a strong contender to be the next premier of Alberta. So, if Alberta, BC and Québec all elect female premiers, will Chantal complain because Andrea Horwath loses in Ontario?
• We need more women in politics but it doesn't help the cause when columnists make transparently weak cases for it.
  

Six Cities, One Mayor

In a couple days, Toronto will elect it's third Mayor since amalgamation. Six cities with different political cultures merged over a decade ago, but the differences still linger. It's too simplistic to say that this is a race between Rob Ford's suburbs and George Smitherman's downtown core but there are elements of that. Rob Ford comes from Etobicoke: the western edge of the city sandwiched between Toronto and Mississauga in more than just geography. Ford's tax fighting approach has always appealed to his constituents who have looked enviously west at Hazel McCallion's thrifty city for years. Etobicoke has 13% of Toronto's population but 20% of its landmass making it more less dense and therefore more suburban, then the packed condo towers of downtown.

Ford's surprising strength among ethnic minorities may come in large part due to Etobicoke's eastern cousin Scarborough. Toronto's much derided Eastern half is a majority minority inner suburb with whites making up just 32% of the population. Still, as demonstrated in Calgary, people don't need to vote for someone who looks like them. Particularly, if they are speaking to their issues. The TTC is a joke in Scarborough, with 600,000 people served by just 6 LRT stops and patchwork maze of buses. Scarborough is an excellent portrait of the new Canadian experience: semi-successful, semi-peripheral. City Hall can feel a long way away when you're standing on the banks of the Rouge River and Ford speaks to that and hey, at least he acknowledges that they work hard (okay, yeah, a lot of political analysis is trying to explain the inexplicable and trying to explain Ford's success among visible minorities is one of those moments). There may be some Torontonians who like to forget Scarborough and Etobicoke exist but they do and electorally, they matter.

A lot of people may have forgotten the tiny borough of East York ever existed. Just 100,000 people call the former borough home and East York covers just 21 square kilometers. However, it has its own political dynamic. East York was always a tiny, slightly right wing version of the bigger city. It produced right wingers like the retiring city councillor Case Ootes, deputy mayor to Mel Lastman and right wing NDPers Beaches-East York MPP Michael Prue who served as its last mayor. East Yorkers are proud of their corner of the city and local issues have always been top of mind in this part of the city. From wealthy Leaside to the poorer Thorncliffe Park, tiny East York is not homogeneous by any stretch. It may surprise some outsiders to know that the borough is over 12% Muslim and about half of it's population is foreign born. In 2003, the three wards which contain the former city, voted for Miller over Tory by a margin of about 5:4.

East York is not the only former city to have faded from the memory banks. The old city of York, sandwiched between North York, Toronto and Etobicoke, is often similarly forgotten. In 2003, John Nunziata carried his only ward in York where his sister, Frances Nunziata (now on city council) was wrapping up as York's last mayor. York is far too familiar with crime making law and order an issue here. Almost as small as East York, at just 120,000 residents, York's electoral impact may not be as large its neighbours like Etobicoke, and North York.

North York provided Toronto with its first mayor in the post-amalgamation era and much of what we are talking about today has something to do with Mel Lastman. The political juggernaut from North York brought his populist sound bite brand of driven brand of politics to new city hall. Whatever Mayor Mel did or didn't do, he was certainly a big enough personality for the new big city. Lastman's North York is famous for its high level of service, for not a lot of taxes. How to deal with some of those legacies (like city-shoveled sidewalks) has been one of the challenges for the new mega-city. North York straddles the rich and poor divide like no other part of the city. It encompasses the ostentatious Bridle Path and the troubled Jane and Finch. North York is almost as large as the old city itself and neither Ford nor Smitherman can afford a poor showing in North York.

The old city of Toronto, generally seen as Smitherman's strength is a strange political animal. The NIMBYism which saw Miller's opposition to a tiny bridge to the island airport is part of the dynamic here. But the champagne socialism of Miler has not gone down all over the old city. The dense townhouses and semi-detached houses made for resistance to Miller's new garbage bins which often have to be left on front porches for lack of options. The money made on Bay street and enjoyed in Rosedale is part of the mix too. The old city may be what most outsiders think about when they think about Toronto, but it is a small part of the city. It's voters may find themselves on the outside looking in if Rob Ford is able to win.

Garbage Fallout 2010 Rocco Rossi Edition

Rocco Rossi has finally realized that he has no chance of becoming Toronto's next mayor. Rossi's campaign was highlighted by excellent media savvy and lots of ideas (ranging in quality). Problem was nobody really knew who Rocco Rossi was. With Smitherman and Ford now apparently deadlocked in the polls, Rossi's departure from the race makes the race a lot simpler. Torontonians can vote for George Smitherman, they can vote for Rob Ford or they can throw their vote away and vote for Joe Pantalone. I think the choice is pretty obvious. Smitherman has been a men amongst boys (and Sarah Thompson) in this race and is the only person capable of leading Toronto into the next decade. You can vote for anger and vitriol or you can vote for a man of substance and character.

Harper Wins Win-Win Scenario

Stephen Harper is not a tactical genius, but he did pull off a tactical victory in this whole UN mess. Really, he couldn't lose. If he had gotten a seat at the security council it's a diplomatic feather in his cap. Canada's at the big boys table etc. etc. However, he always had the other side to play. The UN is not a very popular organization among the core of the Conservative Party. It's even less popular with the pro-Israel wing of the Conservative party who view it as a fundamentally anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian organization because of the numbers the Muslim world can bring to bear at the General Assembly and other UN bodies. Harper couched his withdrawal by making it about Israel.

I don't think he expected to have to force the issue as much as he did by conjuring up some story about deepening and expanding the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA). However, it did the trick. Harper comes off to his base as 'a friend of Israel who wasn't willing to sell himself to the evil UN just to win a seat at the ineffective Security Council'. Of course, Harper already made nice with most of the same Muslim leaders when he was still trying to win the seat, meeting with leaders like Pres. Abbas, but pay that no mind.

What really gets my goat professionally is seeing him talk about expanding free trade after allowing the Colombian and Jordanian FTA's to die not once but twice on the order paper. All those wonderful things they were telling that we're getting out of CIFTA we could be getting out of trade with those two countries as well. Harper, of course, preferred to prorogue parliament than do something good for the country. CIFTA, of course, was brought in by Jean Chretien's government back in the mid-90's. It was deepened slightly in the last years of Chretien's government. How exactly you make it any deeper is anyone's guess. There are some goods that it could probably apply to in each country that are currently not on the list but this is not a weak FTA. There's not a lot of room for big economic gains there... at least without touching the agricultural sacred cow... all puns intended.

Garbage Fallout 2010: Sarah Thomson Edition

For a blog called All Politics is Local I do a piss poor job covering municipal politics. My life has gotten in the way of blogging the last few months anyway, but Toronto's mayor race is starting to head into the home stretch. In a lot of ways, the campaign starts next week. That's when lawn signs will start dotting the streets of Toronto. The ban on signs is lifted Monday October 4th at 12:01 so expect some hammering in your neighbourhood Sunday night/Monday morning. The mayor's race got a lot more interesting when Sarah Thomson dropped out and gave the semi-conscious George Smitherman campaign a needed jolt. Smtitherman is the guy that is supposed to win this thing by all logic and reason. Thomson's endorsement may be enough to solidify him as the only guy capable of avoiding the Fordcalypse.

I've been skeptical of Ford's numbers to begin with. I think part of it is I admittedly don't want them to be true. However, I think there is some reason in my thinking. Municipal politics don't generate a lot of attention from the public and those that do pay attention tend to be those who are the most pissed off. Thus, early on in a race (and we're still almost a month to E-day) the people most willing to commit in any poll are those who are angriest in this case Ford supporters. Another thing to consider is that people are much more likely to say they'll vote for a third, fourth or fifth place candidate in a poll a month out then they are on election day. Municipal polls are also terrible because nobody actually knows who to poll. There's no way for a pollster or analysts to look at the results of a poll and say "that's not right". There's just not enough data to compare it to. Miller was, according to one poll, at 70% the week before the vote in 2006 but ended up with 55%. I think we're in for a tight race. I honestly don't have a clue who wins.

Far-Right Kingmakers Following Swedish Election

For proponents of proportional representation all over the globe, Sweden has always been held up as a paragon of virtue. Stable majority coalition has followed stable majority coalition. The fact that Sweden has become a de facto two party system (with The Alliance and the Red-Green Coalition being the only choices) is largely ignored by PR's advocates. Yes, there are seven different ways of choosing one or the other but at the end of the day only two people could become prime minister after yesterday's vote: the incumbent New Moderate Fredrik Reinfeldt or Social Democrat Mona Sahlin. The winner last night was Reinfeldt's alliance which won government with fewer votes than the Social Democrats, because he is part of a larger coalition. However, Reinfeldt has a major headache in the form of the upstart Sweden Democrats. The far-right party broke through the low 4% threshold which kept them out of parliament in 2006 and look to hold 20 seats in the Riksdag. With The Alliance 3 votes short of a majority, the Sweden Democrats hold the balance of power in their xenophobic hands. While they are apparently vowing "not to cause trouble," what Reinfeldt will need to do to either get their support or the opposition's support will be interesting to say the least.

The Sweden Democrats earned no more than 11.2% in any region of the country. Their largest support came from areas in southern Sweden with high levels of immigration from Muslim countries like Somalia and Iraq. Still, with such low levels of support, they would never have won election in a single member plurality (or what is dismissively known as first-past-the-post) system. A proportional system, like the version of MMP used in Sweden, encourages the growth and continued success of these small fringe parties. Once elected, you can never guarantee that the electoral calculus won't break down like it has in Sweden: with the radical fringe holding the country's future in its hands.

Sweden Votes 2010

This Sunday Swedes will head to the polls to elect a government. Swedish politics are a fairly static business, or at least they used to be. Until 2006, the Social Democrats and their allies had held power for all but seven of the proceeding seventy years. So when Fredrik Reinfeldt and his New Moderate led Alliance won in 2006, it was a major victory. Like the previous centre-right government it looked like Reinfeldt was going to be doomed by a terrible economy. However, Reinfeldt has proved more resilient and a week out the opinion polls show that he and his allies have opened up a significant lead. Of course, this is all academic depending on what happens on election day. All the drama will revolve around the 4% threshold to hold seats in the Riksdag, the Swedish parliament, under Sweden's PR-based MMP system. Three parties seem to be hovering around that number and how many of those parties reach the threshold will likely determine the stability of the Riksdag.

Sweden has traditionally been a seven party system with two stable coalitions. The Social Democrats currently led by Mona Sahlin are supported by the Left Party (Communist) and the Green Party. The New Moderates led by Reinfeldt are supported by the Liberal Party, the Centre Party (a farmers' party reminiscent of the old Canadian Progressives) and the Christian Democrats. The Centre Party and the Christian Democrats have fallen on hard times, in spite of being in government, and are perilously close to political oblivion. Should either party fail to reach that threshold, the Alliance may fall short of a majority in the Riksdag if the Swedish Democrats are able to break the threshold and crash the party. The xenophobic, nationalist Swedish Democrats are politically radioactive for the mainstream parties but should they win seats, they have a very good chance of holding the balance of power. If that happens on Sunday, the normally consensus-driven Riksdag may find itself at an unprecedented impasse.

US Senate Preview 2010

With just over two months left until the US midterm elections, a quick preview of some key races for those of you just tuning in:

Florida: Sen. Mel Martinez' (R) somewhat unexpected retirement has left Floridians with an open senate seat. The early consensus is that Gov. Charlie Crist (R) would just walk into the role, but a funny thing happened on the way to the senate. That funny thing is named Marco Rubio (R). Rubio became the darling of the tea party movement and ended up so far ahead of Crist in primary polling, that Crist decided to save himself the embarrassment of losing a primary, and just run as an independent. All of this should mean good news for the Dems but they've been making lemons out of lemonade all year. Rep. Kendrick Meek (D) ended up winning a stunningly nasty nomination battle with a billionaire opponent but is widely expected to be an also ran in a Republican v. Republican battle with many Dems preferring the centrist Crist over the lesser known Meek.

Kentucky: More Tea Party fun in Kentucky, where Rand Paul, son of Ron, swept the Republican nomination out from under the feet of the establishment candidate. Now, what was supposed to be an easy hold for the Republicans (Jim Bunning (R) is retiring), may become more interesting if enough people in Blue Grass country can't warm up to the radical Rand Paul. The Democrat who could benefit from a Republican implosion is state AG Jack Conway.

Nevada: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is about as popular as a card counter in Vegas these days. In fact, many had him as the first domino to fall in a Democratic collapse in November. However, the Republicans have once again made their lives difficult by nominating walking gaffe-machine Sharron Angle. This woman has to be seen to be believed.

Colorado: Barack Obama raided the Senate benches extensively to form his cabinet and that is noticeable in some of the elections this year. Colorado is one of those place as Sen. Salazar's move to the cabinet table has left an open seat. Appointed senator Michael Bennett will try to defend the seat for the Dems, he will face yet another Tea Partier, Ken Buck. Buck like Paul and Rubio knocked off the establishment candidate in his primary.

Delaware: Blue Delaware is the likeliest of the Democratic seats to fall victim to the Obama cabinet table. Vice-President Biden's seat was supposed to be passed on to his politicking, army serving son, Beau. However, Beau surprised the Dems by not wanting the job. That left long-time Rep. Mike Castle (R) a golden opportunity to move into the senate. A chance he will likely take at the expense of Chris Coons (D).

Arkansas: Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) is about as popular as mud in Arkansas these days. The Dems know this and tried to replace the fall-through-the-mushy-middle Lincoln with Lt. Gov. Bill Halter in the primary. Lincoln held on by the skin of her teeth. The beneficiary of Lincoln's narrow victory will likely be Rep. John Boozman (R) who won the Republican nod.

Pennsylvania: A revolt by both parties' bases has forced Arlen Specter into retirement. The long time moderate Republican was in for a thrashing from Republican candidate Pat Toomey and he knew it. So, in order to serve Pennsylvania and save his own skin, he crossed the aisle. The Democrats knew this stunk to high heaven and gave their nomination to former Admiral current congressman Joe Sestak. Both parties have happier bases than they would have with Specter on the ticket, independents may have less to choose from.

Alaska: Sarah Palin made her maverick name by knocking off incumbent Gov. Frank Murkowski in a Republican primary. Now, Palin has helped do the same thing to the Governor's daughter (who he appointed to the Senate). With Lisa Murkowski gone, the race may be closer than it would have been. However, this is Alaska which is so red it only narrowly defeated the disgraced Sen. Ted Stevens and kept the disgraced Rep. Don Young last time around. All this is bad news for the Democrat, Scott McAdams.

Other races to watch:

• Obama' seat in Illinois (no longer for sale)
• Clinton's seat in New York
• Evan Bayh's seat in Indiana
• The cursed seat currently held by Richard Burr in North Carolina
• Almost Obama senate appointee Judd Gregg's old seat in New Hampshire
• David "DC Madam" Vitter's re-election bid in Louisiana
• Robin Carnahan's bid to exorcise some family demons in Missouri (her father died in a plane crash weeks before the 2000 election and won from beyond the grave; her mother ended up taking the seat temporarily)
  

Sun "Snow Fox" Media Continues to be Fair and Balanced

I don't read 24 Hours, one of Toronto's two free daily newspapers, on my subway ride to work in the morning. Principally, that's because it has almost no news in it. To boot, it's a Sun Media paper. So when I did come across a copy lying about yesterday I shouldn't have been surprised to see this story about Toronto's mayoral race and right wing standard bearer Rob Ford. Well, the link is the only permanent version I could find (from the Toronto Sun). The 24 Hours story (which you might be able to find here) which was on page 5 of the August 23rd edition is significantly worse. Both papers have apparently taken to printing the Rob Ford campaign's latest press release as straight news. Yes, shockingly the Ford campaign thinks that the scandals which dogged the campaign last week are behind them. Breaking news: the Ford campaign also believes that Rob Ford is awesome. How Sun Media can think that qualifies as news is beyond me. When you see 'journalism' like this, it is easy to see why there are so few journalists left.