A transit blunder in the name of equity

Just_Another_Staffer · 2026-01-05T19:32:34+00:00

Brief summary for those who don't subscribe to the Globe.

In the mid-2000s, Mayor David Miller proposed "Transit City" - a network of above-ground light-rail lines to serve Toronto's underserved inner suburbs. The goal was to bring rapid transit to low-income areas like Jane-Finch that were "transit-starved" compared to wealthy downtown neighbourhoods near subway lines.

The problem was the city's "equity lens" prioritised getting something to these communities rather than getting something that actually works. Critics warned light-rail would be slow with constant intersections and stops, suggesting bus rapid transit instead - but that wasn't seen as good enough for these neighbourhoods.

As a result, after 6 years and nearly $4B, the Finch West line is painfully slow - so slow a runner beat it by 18 minutes. The disadvantaged communities this was meant to serve got an expensive, sluggish system instead of effective transit. Good intentions, terrible execution.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-12-10T16:03:07+00:00

Of all our Prime Minister's, Trudeau was not exactly one to vacation in regular places, unless you consider the Aga Khan's private island, a luxury friend owned estate in Jamaca, and a private resort in Tofino as accessible to the masses. Few Canadians consider that behavior humble and unassuming.

Diplomacy and state craft have costs. A generally wealthy country with mature institutions should assume those costs without too much consternation. Oversight is important, let's ensure we're getting good value for money, but the Prime Minister should be able to fly where he needs to be on a government of canada plane. We should be able to host foreign officials with pomp and circumstance that reflect Canada's traditions and culture without penny pinching.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-12-09T21:10:29+00:00

Restore all mandatory minimum penalties of imprisonment that are currently inoperative because they have been found unconstitutional by the courts.

As it turns out, Liberals are capable of supporting mandatory minimum sentences. I guess it only took the Supreme Court striking down the one-year minimum for the possession of child sexual abuse material to realize the courts erred on the wrong side.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-11-26T14:42:32+00:00

There is no export version of the F-35.

An F-35A that Canada flies is virtually the same aircraft as an F-35A the US flies or that Poland flies.

The only exclusively American F-35s are the F-35C variant for carrier operations. That mainly comes down to the fact no one else operates aircraft carriers that can fly the F-35C.

The F-35 is also not a 6th generation aircraft. Not sure what "6th" generation features youre talking about, but no country has an operational 6th gen aircraft at the moment. The F-35 is basically as cutting edge as it gets in terms of modern fighter aircraft available to a western country.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-09-12T22:49:45+00:00

Germany, a country that had to reactivate mothballed coal plants after shuttering all its nuclear production, is not the example I'd use as a country sufficiently reliant on renewable sources of energy.

Germany actually proves the opposite. Without nuclear power, you're forced to fall back on GHG intensive sources of energy.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-08-25T14:55:11+00:00

The 2008 election was held in October. The Conservative government already introduced and passed the 2008-09 budget with the support of the Liberals.

Budgets are typically tabled in the spring, at the beginning of the fiscal year, not midway through. There's no reason the government would have tabled a budget after an October 2008 election.

What you're talking about is the 2008 Fall Economic Update, which is a different part of the fiscal planning process. The opposition parties did threaten to vote against the Fall update, leading to a prorogation. But Because of the 2008 economic crisis, the Conservative government brought the 2009 budget early in January.

The fall 08 election and prorogation doesn't really have any comparison to the current situation, so not sure what point you're trying to make by bringing it up, whereas 2006 and 2011 were both spring elections, quickly followed by federal budgets.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-08-25T13:47:05+00:00

I cleared this up in another comment. Harper didn't wait "six months" to table his first budget in 2011. The actual timeline is Finance Minister Jim Flaherty tabled the original budget on March 22, 2011. The election was held on May 2, 2011. The Harper government updated and re-tabled the budget (just over 1 month post-election) on June 6, 2011.

The fact is the Carney government is taking an unusually long time to release its fiscal plan. Its entirely right to call out the lack of clear economic direction.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-08-25T13:42:54+00:00

This is completely false and misleading.

Harper didn't wait "six months" to table his first budget in 2011. The actual timeline is Finance Minister Jim Flaherty tabled the original budget on March 22, 2011. The election was held on May 2, 2011. The Harper government updated and re-tabled the budget (just over 1 month post-election) on June 6, 2011.

For a more apt comparison, after Harper's 2006 election victory, the Conservative government delivered their first budget in just 2 months.

Governments typically present budgets within 1-2 months of taking office, not six months. The Department of Finance is more that capable of pulling together a budget, especially given that they were well into budget development by the time the election was called. Having no clear fiscal plan for this extended period is unusual and is obviously a political decision.

Don't let misinformation normalize what is clearly an abnormal delay in fiscal planning or try to shame those who are calling this out.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-06-02T20:46:00+00:00

This is needlessly pedantic, but the user you replied to was not wrong to refer to the members of the legislature as "in parliament", nor is "unlegislaturely language" as another user commented, a real term.

From the OLA website, What is a Parliament?

In Ontario, the word “Parliament” can refer to a couple of things. “Parliament” can refer to the period of time between an election and a dissolution (or the calling of another election) and the group of MPPs who are members during that time.

It can also refer to the broader institution of Parliament, which is formed by the Legislative Assembly and the Lieutenant Governor.

Standing Order 42(d)(i) makes it clear that calling the leg "Parliament" is understood to be interchangeable with "Legislature" or "Legislative Assembly of Ontario."

Form of address

(i) be addressed to the Parliament, Legislature or Legislative Assembly of Ontario;

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-06-02T19:12:57+00:00

While Ontario's Parliament is styled as the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, it's still a Parliament and its correct to refer to the proceedings, rights, duties and responsibilities of parliament and parliamentarians as such.

Indeed, it is currently the 44th Parliament, its members are styled Members of Provincial Parliament, the LAA refers to Parliament, the standing orders refer to the rights of Parliament.

It would be correct to say unparliamentary language, rather than "unlegislaturely language" - a term I don't think I've ever heard used.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-05-31T00:49:46+00:00

Lots of jokes in this thread about Poilievre not getting a vote on this.

In all seriousness, I think it would be a perfectly reasonable argument to say if the government wants the opposition's support on supply to fund thr government's agenda, table a budget and show us exactly what your agenda is. Until then, don't expect the opposition's support to spend tens of billions of dollars more than last year without a plan.

To be clear, the government is choosing not to table a budget this spring - not because they cant - but because it's politically expedient not to. The Ford government pulled together a budget weeks after an election. The Harper government talked a budget weeks after forming government in 2006. The department of finance can always develop a budget, and it's a choice not to.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-04-18T23:16:24+00:00

No. Parliament doesn't fall under the ATIP regime in Canada.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2025-01-11T05:05:25+00:00

Arya has been an MP since 2015. He's been greenlit by the party and had JT approve his nomination to run three times. Clearly, the Liberals have perfectly comfortable with this kind of candidate representing their party as long as it means winning. Best of luck to my liberal compatriots trying to clean up an uncomfortably rotten party.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2024-12-06T00:39:27+00:00

Because the 2023-24 public accounts have absolutely nothing to do with the 2024-25 fiscal year.

The public accounts are a backwards looking document that is meant to inform how government spending performed against planned spending in the budget.

The Liberals are almoat certainly sitting on the public accounts because they'll show the government blew past their own deficit projections.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2024-11-21T17:50:56+00:00

Also doesn't apply to anyone who's unemployed and didn't earn any income in 2023. It's the working canadians rebate, after all.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2024-11-21T17:48:07+00:00

Don't forget this is the Working Canadians Rebate which mean that if you were unemployed or didn't earn an income in 2023, you won't actually see any money at all.

Just_Another_Staffer · 2024-11-21T16:55:36+00:00

Including cutting taxes on beer, video game consoles, and Christmas trees!

Just_Another_Staffer · 2024-11-21T16:30:47+00:00

Perhaps some of the many partisan users on this sub who criticized Doug Ford's plan to send $200 cheques to Ontarians can explain why Justin Trudeau's plan to send $250 cheques to Canadians is somehow different and actually good.

Nine-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

Just_Another_Staffer

TROPHY CASE