crazed monkey

Chris S posted a summary of upcoming and ongoing public works projects within the city. One item he neglected to mention is the Four Seasons Centre For the Performing Arts under construction on Queen St. West between York and University. It is this project which is forcing the Hummingbird Centre, now the home of the Canadian Opera Company, to be rethought.

With all the construction, development and planning occuring, it appears that Toronto will finally be developed into the sophisticated little city we’ve always thought it to be. Yet, despite all the impending evolution, I can’t help but think that there’s something that’s lacking our attention. If you could make a suggestion to improve Toronto would would it be?

I have always thought that Toronto needs automobile-free zones where entire streets act as a public square. Several city councillors have supported a motion to create car-free zones in the Kensington Market, Yorkville, and Chinatown areas. I think it would be better if there were car-free zones closer to the downtown core, however.

When the south-east and north-east corners of Dundas and Yonge were razed, I had thought it would be nice to have a square straddle a closed-off section of Dundas. A small park to the north would be filled with shade trees which would also line the streetcar tracks. This could still be implemented, now that the plans for the cineplex on that corner have been shelved. However, I doubt that the same people who came up with the dreary Dundas Square have the ability to attempt something as refreshing as an automobile-free zone in the downtown core.

The upcoming projects Chris mentions are a good start. I just think more could be done to make downtown Toronto more vibrant and conducive to community and culture.

Posted on September 5th, 2003 in culture - No Comments »

Many of you in Ontario might remember this little ditty regarding same-sex marriage which Premier Ernie Eves proclaimed a few weeks ago:

“In my personal life, I have always believed that marriage was a union between two heterosexual people, a male and a female,” Eves told reporters.

The Premier followed this up by saying that he didn’t believe he had the right to impose his views on others. What a kind-hearted and clear-headed logical gent this Ernie Eves is!

Yesterday, Ernie rapped with the press and threw out this statement on the death penalty:

“My personal opinion is that, on certain premeditated crimes, especially with respect to children, and premeditated crimes with respect to law-enforcement officers, that the presiding judge, and/or jury, should have the ability to prescribe the death penalty when they see fit.”

Let’s ignore for the moment that if one is considering premeditated crimes (and by this, I assume that Eves means murder and rape) against children and law-enforcement officers, that person is so far gone that the threat of death would not be much of a deterrence.

Unfortunately for Eves, both marriage and capital punishment are federal jurisdictions and so his opinions, dealt at an important time in provincial politics, are little more than hot air. The only purpose they serve is to give the illusion of a tough political platform designed to appeal to voters who are at odds with the Conservatives numerous gaffes but still appreciate a good social conservative. At the same time, these statements won’t scare away the fiscal conservatives who may have a laissez-faire attitude towards social policy.

Watch for more of The Fabulous Mr. Eves And His Empty Statements this election campaign. These could include such gems as:

• “I personally believe that everyone has the right to own a gun, unimpeded by a bureaucratic registration process.”
• “I have always been of the opinion that we should curb immigration and impose tough entrance requirements.”
• “It has been my lifelong ambition to stop foreign fishing trawlers from pilfering our eastern fish stocks. Arr.”

Fun for the whole family!

Posted on September 4th, 2003 in ontario, politics - No Comments »

The Globe And Mail has an online poll which asks visitors who is most to blame if the “road map” for peace fails. When I viewed the results of the poll this morning, the numbers were almost evenly split between Palestinian militants and Israelis. At current writing, an overwhelming 70% would blame the Israelis if the peace plan failed. Those figures alone are perplexing and could warrant some investigation. Instead, I would rather focus on the construction of the poll.

Like many polls, this one has its faults. To start, this is an online poll, prone to ballot stuffing, and so its results should be taken with a rather large grain of salt. Second, although this poll splits the Palestinians into “Palestinians” (presumably the citizenry) and “Palestinian militants”, it does not do the same with the Israelis. In this split, the largely right-wing Israeli coalition, which holds a slim majority in the Knesset, is lumped in with the Israeli citizenry. Anyone who might think the Israeli administration is largely to blame is forced to make an option which puts the blame on all Israelis. Finally, there is no “All of the above” option. Personally, I would have preferred an option encompassing both the Palestinian and the Israeli administrations, but even that would have been too simplified an option. This lack of choice meant that I opted out of the poll.

I usually enjoy The Globe And Mail as it, unlike other national newspapers, keeps its opinions and bias squarely in the opinion and comment sections where they belong. However, sometimes some opinion seeps through where it plainly doesn’t belong.

Update: The above poll has over 30000 votes cast so far. Compare that to the previous week of polls which average less than half that many votes. Either half the website’s readership was offline last week or the ballot box is stuffed.

Posted on September 2nd, 2003 in politics - No Comments »