Skip to content

Canadian Urbanism Uncovered

JOHN LORINC: The Blunderbuss Strategy

Read more articles by

As this space serves as an excellent soapbox, I’d like to use my column to signal my intent — subject to various and sundry considerations — to run for mayor, and I can reveal here that my candidacy will focus on only one promise: the introduction of road tolls.

According to the usual well-placed sources, I also understand that my esteemed colleague and Spacing publisher Matthew Blackett intends to run for mayor next year, on a platform that focuses exclusively on the need to implement beautiful urban design elements into every infrastructure project.

As conscience-bound lefties, we are both encouraging Councillor Gord Perks in his apparent decision to run for mayor, and we are led to understand that he wishes to use his candidacy to promote the cause of social justice.

Our collective candidacies, in turn, will complement those of TTC chair Adam Giambrone, who will attract the votes of those individuals concerned about the need to invest in transit, and the urbanist maven Glen Murray, who appears to be positioning himself as the Barbara Hall of the 2010 election.

Lest we neglect those communities located beyond Bloor/Danforth, we are relieved to learn that Councillor Shelley Carroll is said to be thinking of establishing a committee to study the possibility of her seeking some higher public office in or around 2010.  It is reliably rumoured that there are progressive voters in the pre-amalgamation suburbs, and surely they also need someone to vote for next year.

Thus configured, the 2010 election will feature left-of-centre mayoral candidates for every subset of the city’s fragmented left-of-centre electorate — a kind of one-stop shopping approach for progressive-minded Torontonians.

Now that my tongue is no longer planted firmly in cheek, my point, of course, is that the unseemly spectacle of a race that includes some combination of Murray, Giambrone and Carroll leads directly to a John Tory victory. The Conservative-Liberal coalition that backed Tory in 2003 is reassembling. Its backers are working hard to ensure their candidate won’t share the ballot with Michael Thompson or Karen Stintz, who will, in turn, be rewarded for their political forbearance.

Does the centre-left have that kind of discipline? Right now, the answer looks to be no, because the centre-left has no centre.

If I’m Tory, I’m laughing at the musings of Murray and Giambrone. Murray, like Hall, is seeking to resurrect a political career that ended with a thud many years ago. Giambrone, with his undisguised NDP connections, has absolutely no chance at winning, as his purchase on midtown or suburban homeowners in post-Miller Toronto is non-existent.

The centre-left’s primary challenge in this election will be to make a persuasive case against retrenchment. The pendulum is swinging back. A divided left will simply give that wrecking ball a helpful push.

photo by Miles Storey

Recommended

16 comments

  1. I wonder just how passionate about city beautification, heritage, architecture, and public space the “mainstream centre” candidate(s) will be.

  2. If we vote for the Mayor with a single transferable vote we wouldn’t have this problem. I don’t know why no one is talking about that.

  3. I like the article. It makes me think that if we were still just old Toronto we would have centre-left in the bag.

  4. You scared me! Then you came to the same conclusion that I did and thenkfully it was ‘tongue in cheek’. However, people like Giambrone are so wrapped up in themselves that I fear the left WILL fragment the vote and we’ll see a ‘Mike Harris’ Toronto. All you have to do is listen to CFRB 1010’s Bill Carroll to hear all the whining about high taxes. Here comes ‘common sense revolution’ 2

  5. John,

    You imp. For the record: No way! Nope! Never!

    What I am doing is this: I am urging all of us (progressives) to spend the next few months thinking and talking about the City we want. In other words the what question myust come before the who question.

    Gord

    p.s. I think you and Matt would make marvelous elected officials.

  6. Yes, “some combination of Murray, Giambrone and Carroll” would certainly split the centre-left vote, but you’re assuming they would all remain in the race by election day.

  7. But I want to be mayor too! (Pout Pout)

    Seriously, folks, the left wing needs to lose a few prima donnas (and that’s a generic term with no sexist overtones) and unite behind one candidate.

    To paraphrase David Miller, the election should not be about “me”, the egos of all the mayoral hopefuls. It should be about ensuring that the city remains progressive. We could lose the mayoralty and a bunch of Council seats all in one go if everyone shoots for the big prize.

    Brilliant strategy that.

  8. I think it’s kind of disgusting the way in this article “NDP connections” are mentioned as though it equates to being a member of a satanic cult or something. There’s nothing shameful about supporting the NDP. The other prospective candidates have strong political connections as well but for some reason you’re willing to continue the narrative that being a liberal or a tory is respectable, whereas being a ‘dipper is something to be embarrassed about.

  9. Paul: : talk about projecting!

    As someone who votes for the NDP with regularity, I understand why you’ve got your back up, but I also fully grasp what Mr Lorinc is saying: in this current political climate, very strong ties to the NDP doesn’t help a candidate. Same goes for anyone with strong ties to Mike Harris. While Toronto is generally progressive minded, its mostly a centrist city.

    The population is rather upset at the unions holding a gun to the City’s head during the recent strike. In most people’s mind, unions=NDP support.

    More importantly, a mayor shouldn’t be a purely partisan political animal. City Hall is a co-op (in terms of its functions). Strong political connections doesn’t translate the same way at City Hall as it does at other levels of government.

  10. Paul,

    Adam’s the former party president, for heaven’s sake! The NDP label is not a scarlet letter, for sure. But Miller spent the better part of his mayoralty trying to play down his NDP affiliation — banning labour (and business) campaign donations, not renewing his party membership, putting the odd Liberal and Tory on his exec committee. Yet for all that, he still got branded as a lefty. The political reality is that Toronto is not a labour town, and never has been.

    JL

  11. John Tory has already demonstrated a talent for political misstep. He’s an ex-Rogers CEO… not exactly a popular corporation. He should be easy to beat.

    Well-reasoned and well-communicated political views and a love for this city will win the election. Would the “Left” please get it’s act together?

  12. One other element that could merit inclusion within that “divided centre-left” hypothesis is George Mammoliti; not that he’s terribly progressive, but the low-populist turf he’s staking is arguably another bite out of what the centre-left would like to claim as its own…

  13. I think any comparison of Tory’s and Murray’s electoral thuds looks better on Murray. I think Tory is either 1 for 3 or 1 for 4 now, and the one was a Tory safe seat in the 905?

  14. I don’t in principle disagree with you here John, but please do remember that this was supposed to be Tory’s path to victory in 2003. Miller was the darling of the downtown elite, but all he was really going to do was sap votes from Hall. He wasn’t really given a solid chance of winning. Until people realized he was a serious candidate with good ideas and support crumbled from Hall.

    I think the lesson of 2003 is that centre-left voters are quite capable on their own of figuring out who is a legitimate candidate. The problem with your approach is that it puts the decision in the hands of power-brokers and disenfranchises the electorate. The heads of CUPE 416 and the Toronto Environmental Alliance have no business telling me who would make a good mayor (nor, for that matter, does the CEO of the National Post). I get to decide that for myself.

    Maybe you should try giving the voters some credit (the election of Mel Lastman as mayor for 2 terms notwithstanding!).

    Your other flaw is the idea that people will vote solely based on platforms. Miller and Hall (and even more poignantly, Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton) had very little daylight separating their platforms. But Miller was a better campaigner (same with Obama). He was also in the right place at the right time, and so his message (remember the broom?) resonated with people.

  15. But it doesn’t matter. Toronto has few of the tax or legislative powers that it needs: the province has most, and the feds the rest. The bad news is that this city will blow until that’s fixed, which it is not in the interests of the other levels of gov’t to do. The good news is that it thus doesn’t matter if Tory becomes mayor.

  16. You can’t have progressive politics by using a conservative method of electing politicians. Scrap our winner take all electoral system and the voters will get what they want. .