Martin: Ill-conceived ideas will cost councillors
 

Chip Martin of the London Free Press has thrown down the gauntlet and is telling Londoners he thinks London's mayor and councillors are doing a terrible job, even going to so far as to suggest they are royally incompetent by calling some of them "rookies".

He starts off by saying, OK, Chip. Fine, you're entitled to your opinion, it's a free country. But where is the evidence that it is 'costly and ill-conceived'? Are you a professional urban planner or civil engineer who can speak from a position of authority on the matter? Have you done studies costing hundreds of thousands of dollars that support your position?

London's share of the project is only $130 million, or about $6 million annually if amortized over the life of the construction project, which is expected to take about 20 years. The city will spend far more on projects of far lesser utility in the same time-frame.

Then he goes on to say that most of the newcomers on city council have come from " 'Pints and Politics and Urban League of London groups, whose millennial activist members promote bicycling, transit, environmentalism and other causes in echo-chambers of the like-minded. They are seeking a new champion.' "

Well, Chip, this is how democracy works. Enough people in London liked what they offered enough to vote them into office. Hardly what I would call an echo-chamber of the like-minded.

The BRT plan has not been rushed through or rammed. It was announced several years ago and in the time that has elapsed since then, the city has held numerous public education and input sessions and is continuing to hold them. On top of that, part of mayor Brown's mandate was to build a RT system for London. If Londoners didn't want a better transit system and didn't want to spend the money, they wouldn't have voted him in.

The city has a valid business case for a RT system. It didn't spring up overnight; it's the end result of a decade's worth of research and investigation.

BRT isn't nearly as divisive as Chip would have you believe. What we've seen so far is a few isolated pockets of malcontents and axe-grinders who think they alone should be able to decide whether London gets improved public transit, regardless of what the voters as a whole have said on the matter through the ballot box.

Yes, some businesses will be negatively affected by BRT construction. But the same negative effects happen any time major road or sewer repairs are needed, or road or other infrastructure improvements are required. Sometimes these projects can be lengthy and there is simply no way to speed them up to minimize or offset the economic losses of businesses that are affected. As the saying goes, 'you have to break a few eggs if you want an omelet.'

If we vote for Cheng or Paolotto, two things will likely happen: the BRT system will never get built, or the glacial pace involved in continuing to study it to death will mean London will lose the opportunity to build it, just like it did with the in-city expressway it should have built over 50 years ago.

In fact, if London chooses to further delay implementation of a RT system, the province could very well decide that London isn't serious about improving transportation in the province and in turn decide that London should not get a high-speed railway station, if the HSR system gets built. The economic consequences of London not having such a stop could be quite major, and the repercussions for London's future equally grim.

Better public transit and a RT system for London have already been extensively studied, so why are further studies needed? Will those studies be likely to naturally come up with a conclusion that BRT should not be implemented, or will they be packed with cherry-picked facts and specious arguments that reach the pre-determined conclusion that you want to see?

Londoners already had the final say on BRT at the ballot box during the last municipal election, so why is a referendum needed on the subject?

Does this mean that anytime the city wants to do something radical or forward for the benefit of all Londoners, the matter should be decided via referenda? Even though no legal mechanisms for permitting such referenda exist anywhere in current Ontario municipal or city government legislation?

Such referenda alone are sufficient to be an election issue and not something that should be implemented afterwards.

Demanding more studies and a final referenda (after the city has already spent millions of dollars planning for BRT) is just another way to try to kill the project.

Suggesting that such demands are anything but that is highly disingenuous and an insult to the intelligence of all Londoners.

Chip, you surprise me with the low opinion you have of Londoners in general.

Then again, should we expect different op-ed pieces from a pro-conservative, pro-business bird cage liner like the London Free Press?

The entire article can be seen here: http://www.lfpress.com/2018/02/23/martin-ill-conceived-ideas-will-cost-councillors

I don't trust anyone that goes by the name "chip". Typical name for a mouth-breathing wrong-wing populist rabble rouser. dime a dozen. Leftists at least pretend to care about other people. Conservatives only care about themselves.
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/3320464/images/o-ANGRY-OLD-MAN-facebook.jpg
huffpost

The LFP is indeed bird-cage liner. Especially the letters to the editor published on the weekends.

What a bunch of bird-brained crap. Crabby blue-haired whiny conservatives and their "I got mine and fuck the rest of you" selfish mentality. And dogmatic Jesus freaks.

I am a fully blue conservative. Could carless about chip. I think this argument started about rapid transit. Harper funded KW rapid transit line and also the new subway addition to Toronto. There are liberals against London's rapid transit plan to. Liberals have a lot of infrastructure promises but everyone keeps waiting in traffic. What's with that?? Liberals have been in for how long? If the provincial liberals wanted to ease congestions and build infrastructure they would have done it by now.

Oh yeah and Trudeau is another world. Sometimes I think he thinks he's in the movie Willy Wonka and the chocolate factory or the show Care Bears. Doesn't have a clue what is going on in the real world but then again he is just has drama teacher experience lolll. Trudeau in his election promise's was to provide massive infrastructure funding. Did he lie? Haven't seen to much work being done. NDP never get in because they make horrible election promises so I don't have much to say about them.

I'm pretty sure Wynne just canceled GTA west thinking no one will use cars. WRONG. You're adding a million people to the GTA in 10 years you will need more highways... and rapid transit lines on top of it.... A lot of talk about high speed rail. Can the Liberals even afford high speed rail with all the money they waste on stupid things? Didn't they want to build a GO train station in one of there own liberal ridings that doesn't even need one just to get votes in that area? Thank God the Liberals flip flopped and canceled that.

Well, I am not a fan of Wynne and her liberal government. I am staunch social liberal, and a relative fiscal conservative, but the latter in the sense of a having a strong belief of investing in infrastructure (physical, but also educational, social programs) that will pay future dividends.

I personally have quite a low opinion about the incumbent political party, but so far it has been more than matched by the bottom-of-the-barrel conservative campaigns of late. I abhor Tim Hudak, who was a complete caricature of the asshole-as-tight-as-a-snare-drum conservative populist jerk, scapegoating teachers and public sector workers as the cause of all that is wrong with Ontario. Mike Harris's nonsense revolution, Ernie Eves worthless platitudes. Patrick Brown is morally repugnant and intellectually bankrupt.

Any party that starts talking about God and religion (a thin veneer for divisive identity politics, and where so-called "Christian values" are anything but) is a party that is not going to get my vote.

Nor will bullshit pandering to the lowest common denominator, a la Ford Nation. Guaranteed I will always vote against hypocritical bullshit artists like Rofo and his hash-dealing, lizard of a brother.

One thing that has amazed me about this country (and I've lived in Canada all of my life) is the fact that we actually had a crackhead drug-dealer running a world-class city like Toronto who somehow managed to avoid getting arrested for his uh, extra-curricular activities.

I personally am centrist when it comes to politics. I avoid the extreme left and right ends of the political spectrum. As to Tim Hudak, all I can say is that he was an absolute peckerhead. Good friggin' riddance, please flush!

I remember reading a news article or something similar (maybe online?) and killing myself laughing because Hudak was likened to looking like a Japanese carp because of his facial structure. It fit. After all, what are carp but bottom-feeding fish?

I also believe in funding social welfare for those who genuinely cannot work and support themselves through no fault of their own. I also support good infrastructure funding.

Where conservatives ever get the idea that more poverty is better and that austerity works is beyond me. They truly do live in their own delusional little worlds.

loll You're to funny. Get your facts straight! When did we say more poverty is better? I can't believe you would call conservatives delusional. Liberals think Canada and Ontario will never have recession again racking up that amount of debt. You must be someone that loves debt eh? Honestly how is this province even running with how much debt we have. All this debt but people are waiting for crowded subways, on crowded roads, and bad train service. Steveo where did all the money go? You're for infrastructure. Did it go to help drug addictions? Don't think so. Did it go to help poverty? Don't think so. Maybe it went to hospital... HMMMmmm but wait hospitals are over crowding.

We think poverty is better but Liberals had more then a decade to clean it up. I think we are also little short on public housing but in you world the liberals cleaned up all the poverty....

I do believe in some things you and Molson Export said in his last comment except bashing conservatives when the Liberals have so many problems

Can we all agree that both parties may carry some or not at all some equal and centrist ideals that benefit some, and hamper others?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f1/b6/01/f1b6014cec980c6bdfbab5d32c68aa4c.jpg

I don't think we need to fund social welfare more. My best friend has a brother who cannot walk or do things for himself and he gets a generous amount of money from the government and on the care help.