Our new City Council has only had a few meetings since their November election, so I momentarily forgot how immature and dysfunctional some of our finest city councillors are. Yesterday, council was to have their group photo taken. The mayor and his executive committee were to take up the front row. But some of the most strident opponents of Mayor Miller (Case Ootes, Denzil Minnan-Wong, Rob Ford, and Mike Del Grande) showed up early and sat in the front row and refused to move when asked by the mayor and the photographer to vacate their spots. Makes you feel really confident in the people directing policy for this city, eh?
Here are some excerpts from the Toronto Star story:
The split between Mayor David Miller and councillors who have formed the unofficial opposition at city hall got so ugly that council’s official photo session was scrapped, as the politicians squabbled over who got to sit in the front row.
Councillors couldn’t even agree afterward what happened, much less who was to blame.
But most said that Councillors Mike Del Grande (Ward 39, Scarborough-Agincourt), Case Ootes (Ward 29, Toronto-Danforth), Rob Ford (Ward 2, Etobicoke North) and Denzil Minnan-Wong (Ward 34, Don Valley East) had objected to giving up their front row seats, when asked by the photographer to move. (Minnan-Wong denied he had been asked to move.)
When they wouldn’t budge, Miller called off the session.
…
Yesterday opposition councillors said they had to challenge Miller’s grab for “absolute control” of city hall.
“I don’t like to be pushed around, okay?” said Del Grande.
“I felt I was being pushed around, and I pushed back. I said, No. That’s the bottom line.”
Miller said that’s not the issue at all.
“My kids had their hockey photo two weeks ago,” he said. “They lined up where they were told. It was that simple.”
“Two or three members of council have deliberately chosen to misbehave,” he said. “Aside from calling their parents, there’s not much you can do.”
…
“I think we wanted to make a statement that, you know, the mayor’s trying to control every last detail of members of council,” he said.
“If he had come to me and asked me to move I probably would’ve, but he assigned a member of staff.”
Asked if it isn’t a black eye for council, Ootes replied: “Well, who’s the head of council? Who sets the tone? It’s the mayor, and he needs to change his attitude and have some respect for those who disagree with his positions … It’s about time people stood up and said, `We’re not going to take this anymore.'”
26 comments
That’s…embarrassing. I think this calls for a public apology – or maybe just a time-out.
It looks like a pretty sad state of affairs at 100 Queen West right now but I think by September we may start to see things shape up — a bit.
To continue the child-related analogies, I’d say this approximates the transition from the spoiled kid who never went to daycare that is now going right into kindergarten.
In this case, there’s the new set of procedures that has limited what the opposition can do to grandstand at Council. It’s frustrating playing by someone else’s rules that you don’t understand fully and are having trouble manipulating.
Add to that the Strong(er) Mayor system. The New Order has really changed the complexion of debate and decision-making by establishing a very easy to see chain of command. Kind of like the kid realizing that as opposed to their spoiled up-bringing at home, the teacher will assert their authority. It can be hard to digest at first.
Then, on top of that heaping pile of confusion and unrest sits Speaker Sandra Bussin (playing the role of teacher) who is doing her level best to learn and apply the new procedures firmly and fairly. Unfortunately her dry run with the Clerk’s staff to practice for the real thing is like a mock class in teachers college when your “students” act like angels. Sure you know the theory behind running a classroom but you’re still caught completely off-guard the first time you get infront of an out of control room of kids.
So I think that after a half-dozen council meetings the opposition will realize the rules are for real so they won’t be quite as petty as they’re being now and Speaker Bussin will have a reasonable amount experience under the new rules that she’ll lose the deer in the headlights look that undermines her presense in the chair.
That said, the easier way to fix this problem would have been for the wonderful Torontonians who elected the Dismal Dozen in opposition to have, well, not elected them.
What a bunch of retards. Del Grande and Ootes sound about as rational as your average four year old. Actually, I apologize – that last comment was an insult to four year olds. They’re much brighter than these clowns we have at City Hall.
and to think, we almost had Case Outta there!
The province changed the rules & now these losers are lashing out against the Mayor & those councillors who have the confidence of the voters of Toronto.
I think the fact that they needed to sit in the front row says all we need to know about their motivations. Good luck to their constituents!
As an elementary school teacher, I find the comparison of the behaviour to kindergarten unfair. Most kindergarten children understand who is in charge (the photographer in this case) and that procedures make things go more smoothly. Most importantly, unlike Mr. Ootes, they are not mistaken about the location of the axis of this planet (it is not them).
I think the first thing Miller must do with his new “powers” is to create a charge called “contempt of council”. Any councillor who intentionally disrupts council proceedings, thus wasting the taxpayer’s dollar, and everyone’s time – gets a time-out and a fine.
Barring that, he should hire that Super Nanny lady to send the brats to the naughty chair.
Ootes and Ford are such dicks.
Torontonians have put up with shenanigans in council long enough now with no mechanism for accountability, no recourse. What action can citizens take in response? What will be effective?
We could call the constituency offices of Messrs. Ootes, Ford, Minan-Wong and Del Grande to articulate clearly how unpopular this kind of obstructionist action is among voters. But it is possible that paying attention to this behaviour will only reward it.
Mr. Miller suggested we call their parents. This is a poetic solution, but this proposal won’t really change anything either. We, the city, geniunely have a problem here.
The Athenians encountered obstructionism in their assemblies too, and developed an exit strategy to remove persons from office. They called it ostracism, and if enough of the assembly voted against one man, he would be removed from public office (even banned from the city) for a period of time. It was demonstrably useful in stalemates among generals.
Could we not introduce an ostracism vote on municpal ballots? A petition of 10,000 signatures of citizens would be required to nominate a councillor, trustee or city manager for ostracism. All persons on the ballot with more than 100,000 votes against them will be banned from municipal office. Nothing personal, no seizure of property or exile from the municipal district, just a plain and simple exit from the public service.
Councillors like the four in question make this kind of proposal tempting, don’t they? It might actually restore decency and civility to our public institutions.
Over on Planet Terence-Corcoran, it’s the Mayorzilla that’s on a rampage:
Feh. The National Pest is a tabloid rag with broadsheet pretensions.
I think both sides are jerks.
Obviously the “opposition” Councillors should have made space for shorter Councillors at the request of the photographer.
But they were in a bad mood, and for good reason. The photo had been arranged so that Miller’s cabinet had all the front row seats. I think that’s innapropriate, and I’m glad that some Councillors are standing up and reminding us that Toronto is not run on a parliamentary system, and that Miller’s cabinet should not get preferential treatment when Council is doing anything as a whole.
Miller should be going out of his way to prove that the strong mayor system can work. Micro-managing the Council photo to hide his opponents was a bad judgement. I’m not surprised that one childish act lead to another.
Let me ask two questions:
When the mayor and other powers that be in this city press for an appeal of the OMB decision at Queen West, presumably knowing that their action will result in people continuing to occupy live/work units which (according to a consultant’s report) violate fire codes, does that not bother anyone, even a little? What answer does anyone have to the principle that the law should apply to everyone, without fear or favour? How about the concept that even if city officials ignore the odd “dead letter” on the statute books for the greater good, laws and regulations affecting the safety of life deserve a little respect?
When the Tasse report came out, did Mayor Miller show any respect at all to the federal government’s jurisdiction over transportation in this country? Did he even respectfully disagree with the government that represents Toronto residents, as well as the 95% of Canadians who do not live in Toronto? When the board of trade requested that he at least stop wasting the city’s time and energy in a futile battle with the federal government, I do not recall that he agreed. I have no objection to a request for mature accommodation with political circumstances. I just think it should apply to everyone, equally.
C’mon, Mezzo: its traditional in group photos to surround the mayor, or leader of anything, with deputies in the front row. Its the same as sports photos where the captains and assistants and coaches sit in the front row. It’s not micro-management, its usually par for the course. If the buffoons show up a half-hour early just to sit in the front row, they know the importance.
Stay on topic Spragge. Your complaints should be dealt with on an OMB post, though, nice job of twisting it back the subject.
While I’d like to argue your bizarre rationale, I won’t submit readers to it since this is not the place.
I wonder if we’d be hearing the same comments if it were a right winger in the big chair. It’s a strong Mayor system, not just a strong David Miller system. Miller won’t be Mayor forever; but we’ll be stuck with this system.
And right now it isn’t looking too balanced. (Not to mention that Bussin rode the rules way too hard and literally, though that may have been a deer in the headlights thing – some of the Councillors really were being brats).
Some right wingers are turning valid objections to major process issues in to an ideological thing- but the left seems perfectly happy to let them.
Why couldn’t Miller have just let people sit where the hell they want. Hasn’t he heard of “keep your enemies closer”? Unfortunately Ootes and the others are reacting (badly) to Miller’s playing of favourites in every area of Council. Hizzoner has obviously visited the Tony Blair school of control freakery.
Remember this is the mayor who gave a position of importance to Norm freakin’ Kelly so his eye for talent is hardly infallible. When Lastman got up to those tricks it was undemocratic, when Miller does it (with a smaller mandate than Mad Mel used to get) he’s being “a strong mayor”.
When the Tasse report came out, did Mayor Miller show any respect at all to the federal government’s jurisdiction over transportation in this country? Did he even respectfully disagree with the government that represents Toronto residents, as well as the 95% of Canadians who do not live in Toronto?
The federal government saying something doesn’t make it so. Toronto has jurisdiction over transportation in Toronto, and thank goodness Miller has stuck to that message.
And the federal Tories – which is who we’re really talking about when we talk about the Port Authority – actually represent just under 18% of Canada (though only if you include Toronto, 3% of whose population voted Tory).
Nice try though, I guess.
Matt, you can’t compare hockey to politics. Hockey isn’t supposed to be democratic. It’s a game, and a business.
City Hall hall is not only a symbol of democracy, it’s also the only level of government without parties. It’s important to remember that Miller isn’t the “leader” of anything.
We don’t have a party system where the public elects a party and then the cabinet sits at the front of the legislative photo. The City elected 44 Councillors, all equal. And one Mayor. Let the Mayor sit at the front, and let the photographer set-up the rest. It was wrong for Miller’s people to assume that they could set-up the photo with the handpicked cabinet at the front.
As I said, Miller should be going out of his way to show that the new system does not give him too much power. He did the opposite, provoking the immature right-wingers to play along.
Rob Ford is a fat, disgusting pig – and I say that as someone who *likes* fat pigs.
When are thet going to bring in term limits, two is enough.
Well done, Clide.
But of course, no law of that nature would make a difference when we live in the most gutless city in Canada.
Remember that in November we reelected every single incumbent running. This city deserves the council it has. Petty, pathetic and weak.
It actually is astonishing that the city continues to do as well as it’s doing, the buffoons running city council being what they are.
That so many people would get their knickers in a knot over a photo?
Good God.
Amen to that, Trev! well said
Check the law, Smitty. Under the Canada Aeronautics act, the federal government has jurisdiction over air transportation. The powers of Toronto City Council stops, literally, at the top of their heads (or the top of Toronto buildings). Likewise with marine transport– they call it the Canada marine act, not the Toronto marine act, for a reason.
And the parties that brought in the Toronto Port Authority (Liberal) and appointed the latest slate of member (Conservative) got a total of 66% of the vote. If the party of Olivia Chow had got in, we wouldn’t have a Toronto Port Authority, or a City Centre Airport; but her party go just under 18% of the vote.
Which brings us to the question: do we agree to accept rulings, laws, and constitutional arrangement that happen to go against us gracefully, and with respect, or do we whine, pout, stamp our feet, and insist it should have gone our way, and in the right kind of universe, it would have gone our way? I can live with either approach, although I prefer dignity and civility. But I don’t agree with applying one set of standards to Case Ootes, and another to David Miller.
Under the Canada Aeronautics act, the federal government has jurisdiction over air transportation.
Watch me care.
Watch closely, though – it’ll be over pretty fast.
do we agree to accept rulings, laws, and constitutional arrangement that happen to go against us gracefully, and with respect, or do we whine, pout, stamp our feet
I think you know those aren’t the only two choices. But, given your artificial dichotomy, I will gladly take the latter.
You have to ask yourself, these 45 yahoos are responsible for an 8 billion dollar a year corporation plus they are entrusted with the public good to run our city. I wouldn’t trust them to run my local donut shop, and we trust them to run our city (which has more revenue than Bell Canada???)
While Rome burns, they bicker over who stands where in their photograph. Wake up Toronto, its time we started taking ourselves seriously and it should start with a new Council (and senior staff, government structure, planning system/vision, etc…..)
I have to agree with Mez. The whole thing reeks of petty politicking. Miller has a tighter grip on this council, and in turn the City, than any mayor in recent history. His new-found (earned?) power should embolden him with a confidence to leave the arranging of a group photo to the photographer. That he and his staff are trying to manage these details indicates that he is not yet comfortable in his new more powerful role, or worse, that he is the control freak that the likes of Case claim he is. I’m hoping its the former.