October 31st, 2006
Kennedy, Vaughan spar at Ward 20 candidates’ debate
By Julia Lo // 7 Comments
Tensions ran high last night at the Ward 20, Trinity-Spadina, all-candidates' debate, as frontrunners Helen Kennedy and Adam Vaughan lobbed accusations back and forth.
This ward is being touted as one of the city's tightest races.
Kennedy first came under fire for supporting the use of Section 37 funds for the Bloor Corridor visioning study. (Section 37 of the Toronto's Official Plan requires developers to give money to the City in exchange for height or density variations. This money is typically used for community improvement projects.)
"We shouldn't be using Section 37 money for that," said candidate Chris Ouellette. Instead, he said that the government should fund visioning studies.
"Section 37 is not a dirty word," Kennedy said in defence, pointing to various community projects it had helped fund.
Vaughan jumped in and said that Section 37 had "undermined the neighbourhood" and was a part of an ad hoc planning process that needed to be disciplined and reformed.
Kennedy was further pressed when she admitted that she had opposed a youth treatment centre while on the East York Council. She argued that her opposition had been based on the community's desires and that the proposal had not been suitable for various reasons. When Vaughan started to argue, Kennedy snapped, "Get your facts straight before you make any statements."
Kennedy was heckled by a vocal pro-Vaughan crowd throughout the night, but Vaughan too had his controversial moments.
All of the candidates came out strongly against his idea of gated laneways. "People should be in laneways," said candidate Desmond Cole, who then suggested that Vaughan once wanted to ban the sale of spraypaint to kids under the age of 16.
Later, a resident asked whether Vaughan's "maverick" approach would actually work at City Hall.
Ouellette said, "The real issue is -- has Adam pissed off enough councillors in the past 10 years that none of them will be willing to work with him in City Council?"
"Of course I can work with people," Vaughan said defensively, noting that the group approach has not worked at City Hall.
Kennedy took the opportunity to remark, "If you're constantly on the attack, always in opposition, you'll never get anywhere."
Candidates Doug Lowry, Carmin Priolo, Devendra Sharma, and Joseph Tuan were also present. The debate, which took place in the Al Greene Theatre at Bloor Street West and Spadina Avenue, was hosted by various residents' associations and Business Improvement Areas.
Check out the Globe and Mail's Campaign Bubble blog for another take on this event.
Interact
Sorry, comments are
closed at this time.
Rate this post
Loading ...
Facebook
Twitter!
stumbleupon
Reddit
TechnoratiComments
Neither the author nor Spacing necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Spacing reserves the right to edit or delete comments entirely. See our Comment Policy.
I was astounded by how quickly Desmond Cole fell into the trap of hyperbole. Helen Kennedy simply lied about the Village by the Grange gates - which she and Chow intoduced. She seems to foreget the sidewalk that she and Chow sold to help the AGO.
Vaughan was simply the most honest of the crowd. Chris Ouellette had nice ideas and added to the debate. On Novemebr 13th Adam Vaughan has my vote.
Vaughan will say whatever he thinks people want to hear. If that qualifies as honesty, you're welcome to it.
Really Paul? In my opinion, Vaughan doesn't kiss ass. That happens to be a quality I really admire in a a person - in a politician it is an anomaly.
And re: Has Adam pissed off enough people that no one will want to work with him? PLEASE. Our City politicians are not two-year-olds (altho they may act like it sometimes). If someone is pissy and petty enough to hold a grudge over some campaign squabbling I don't want THAT person to be anywhere NEAR public service. thank you. We need people to break the mould and shake things up. I'm SO OVER the status quo - yawn.
Tammy, Paul's got a good point. Adam's made a career out of building ratings and public opinion as a mouthpiece for CityTV. That does not, in my view, give him many, if any, credentials to actually get his hands dirty and make a difference in the ward. Helen's been on the front lines of that ward for years, knows the right people and knows the facts and issues. I'm also through with the status quo, but we're not voting for Olivia anymore. Helen will hit the ground running; Adam will have a very, very steep learning curve and will quickly realize that he can't talk his way into the ward he claims to envision. While it would be nice if our politicians didn't hold grudges, they obviously do. Just try getting something done at a government office after whining in line - you won't move an inch.
Wow Steve - whose campaign are you working for? If none, then you should get yourself into politics - fast!
Seriously though, I do understand what you are saying. Helen was gracious and informative to me, personally, many times when she was working with Olivia. I just think calling Vaughan duplicitous is off base.
I also think the rules need to change at city hall so that councillors aren't kings and can't play a tit-for-tat game when they're mad at someone (to be said with pouty tone.) Sorry that isn't very technical.
I also think citing steep learning curves as a reason NOT to vote in new blood is pretty weak. If you are a spacing reader then you must have heard about a little thing called City Idol??
Haha, thanks Tammy! I should qualify my agreement with Paul - I'm not at all saying Vaughan is duplicitous. Far from it; he strikes me as honest and heartfelt. But, good intentions won't pave the way for change here. I truly believe Helen's got the intentions, ideas, AND the experience to get things done on council. Giving her the mic and the vote will let her put those into action and kick us up from the status quo. Besides, I'm totally in agreement with you on changing rules on council, and new blood is what we need. Helen IS new blood ON COUNCIL, and has a running start to boot. As for Vaughan, a steep curve isn't a reason not to vote someone in, but it's a factor. That coupled with off-the-wall ideas like gating alleys and restricting spraypaint sales make me very, very nervous about his credentials and his plans. As for your other point, I don't think I'd EVER want to get in deep with politics. Something about having your life blown open to the public eye is a bit much for me! Cheers 
No comment on how Desmond Cole stole the show?
Comment by Ben Wendt
October 31, 2006 | 11:10 am