Some babe that Jane Pitfield is. Imagine a politician, a mayoral candidate for the City of Toronto no less, talking about "phasing out unions" in Toronto! That's akin to Howard Moscoe wanting to apologize for the stupid things he says. It's akin to David Miller wanting to save taxpayers money or Dalton McGuinty telling the truth!
Imagine what a novel concept we're talking about here. Jane Pitfield is actually suggesting that some of the work currently being done by members of municipal unions be put up for tender to the private sector in hopes of saving taxpayers money. That's counter to one of the key planks in incumbent Mayor David Miller's platform. He's running on a promise to raise taxes, raise wages of unionized workers and reduce the quality and quantity of services delivered to Toronto taxpayers. Last time around the rubes of Toronto went for it and the Toronto media seems to think that given Pitfield's position, she hasn't got an ice cube's hope in hell of winning the mayoralty.
What's Jane going to add to her platform as Election Day approaches? Will she propose a law that makes panhandling illegal? Will she promise to get all those homeless chaps off the streets and into a productive life? Will she present a plan for actually cleaning up the city? Will she find another way to deal with gang violence other than attempting to buy off the gangs by dumping mounds of tax money into community groups to help gang members feel "included"?
Pretty radical stuff for Toronto where the usual fare dished up by council includes wonderful sounding platitudes that absolve council of any responsibility for anything they do. Remember the shootings in downtown Toronto and Mayor Miller's assertion that it's all the americans' fault due to their lax gun laws and that it wasn't fair to put responsibility onto the perpetrators because, after all, our society created them? Remember Miller's assertion on radio last week of how Toronto is "much safer" than New York City?
I have a theory. In thinking about the rate at which the city of Toronto is slipping into ignominy, a rational person couldn't possibly believe that the Mayor and his council are doing a good job. Yet none of them seem to be too worried about losing their jobs as they come up for grabs this November. This could be indicative of a serious problem with Toronto's drinking water. It's that fluoridation the right-wing nutters used to rant about in the ‘60s that has robbed Toronto voters of a grasp of reality, turning them into tax slaves for socialist politicians.
Or maybe it's the same thing that keeps Torontonians from being concerned about a terrorist attack, despite the uncovering of an alleged non-ethnic, non-religious terrorist plot to blow up the TSX and CSIS headquarters and to behead Stephen Harper. Stuff like that can't happen here, so why worry?
In that vein it's very likely that Jane Pitfield's quest to gain the Mayor's office is doomed as the kind of things she might be promoting just don't happen in Toronto. Certainly, the city can't get anything done, unless those doing the work belong to a union and the union dictates how long it should take to do the job and how much it should cost. Certainly saving taxpayers money isn't something that happens in Toronto, as we've seen these past three years with his blondness at the helm. Certainly the idea that homelessness could be a thing of the past is preposterous, given that homelessness is a $300 million industry in the City of Toronto. and cleaning the city up would just rob it of its quaint multicultural charm, you know the thing that makes this country so unique and wonderful: a touch of Mogadishu, just a hint a Port au Prince and a dash of Calcutta and presto, you have Toronto today.
I admire politicians who dare speak the things that many of are afraid to say, but alas, their quest is likely to be doomed by all the vested interests' fingers in the pie. Still, I can't help but think that Jane Pitfield is some babe! Her apparent belief that municipal unions have been basking in the sun on the taxpayers' dime for too long gets my wholehearted support.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement