Tuesday’s headlines

City seeks new integrity boss [ Toronto Star ]
T.O. forced to look again for integrity poobah [ Toronto Sun ]
City watchdog set to probe coffee giant over lobbying [ Globe and Mail ]
Will Miller’s legacy be rubbish? [ Toronto Star ]
City Hall supports Pan-Am bid [ Toronto Sun ]
Oakville loses bid to limit billboards [ Toronto Star ]

Developers win deferral of debate on increasing development charges [ National Post ]
Councillors march to condo king’s tune [ Globe and Mail ]
Don’t kill condo cash, developer urges [ Toronto Star ]
City beefs up inspections of apartment buildings [ Globe and Mail ]
‘More housing’ for the money driving some of GTA’s largest hikes [ Toronto Star ]
Toronto officials to target 186 slum buildings [ Toronto Sun ]

GO Transit makes nice [ National Post ]
Drivers face blitz [ Toronto Sun ]
Presto, it’s coming [ Metro ]

Library’s new look an old story [ Toronto Star ]


  1. In “Drivers face blitz” isn’t it time police begin enforcing traffic laws written to protect pedestrians more regularly? Waiting for a blitz to cross the street safely is ridiculous, no?
    This needs to be extended to protect bicyclists from aggressive drivers. Passing too closely, cutting off and right hooking are far too common. But then again in that uncanny ability the police have in warping reality Burrows will find a way of blaming cyclists for being run over.
    Who is more credible? The one smugly sitting in their motor weapon crying “they suddenly jumped out in front of me” or the body lying in a crumpled heap in the roadway?


  2. re: geoffrey’s comment “Who is more credible? The one smugly sitting in their motor weapon crying “they suddenly jumped out in front of me” or the body lying in a crumpled heap in the roadway?”
    Depends on the situation…there are a lot of motorists who drive as if they are oblivious to those around them…but there are a lot of cyclists who seem to drive the same way, looking to cut corners where ever they can. The big difference though is that the errant cyclist is far more likely to cause injury to themselves than to others (though I have twice almost been knocked down exiting a streetcar by cyclists who didn’t bother to stop when the doors opened). We need to make our roads as safe as possible for all (and I agree with you that Toronto Police need to do this on an ongoing basis, not just during periodic blitzes)… but I don’t see any value in trying to determine a priori who the blameless parties will be. Personal injury isn’t an indicator of credibility or blamelessness. Plenty of people end up in a heap (or worse) because of their own failure or unwillingness to take necessary precautions. Witness the recent example of the young woman who was killed when her and her friends ignored a train crossing arm. The fact that she is a victim doesn’t mean she is not at fault.

  3. Any such “blitz” should be year-round. And it should be extended to cyclists and pedestrians who also ignore the rules of the road, endangering themselves and others.

  4. Why would developers run to the 905? Even with the proposed increases Toronto’s fees will be less. This is nothing more than an attempt to protect the value of the assets they already hold in the city. If fees are increased they will get capitalized into the prices paid for land. Is it really that easy to pull the wool over council’s eyes?

Comments are closed.