Web Toolbar by Wibiya

So, to sum up #TeamFord’s assault on civic life this week … | #TOpoli

First they lie about interfering in the civic appointments process.

Then they demand proof beyond “hearsay.” 

Then when the proof is revealed in the form of a list of preferred candidates, they huff and puff and shout insults and try to dismiss the revelation as politically motivated.

All the while, pursuing a petty and vindictive campaign for revenge against the city ombudsman.

Rules? What rules? We don’t need no stinkin’ rules.

And it’s only Wednesday.

Related posts:

Instead of the decent thing, Mr. Ford is doing what he always does when under attack: shoot the messenger. “It’s all political. It’s just nonsense,” the mayor told reporters on Thursday. He wants to get rid of the integrity commissioner, the ombudsman and, for good measure, the lobbyist registrar.

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford ramps up war on public servants - The Globe and Mail

@marcusbgee on the latest embarrassment at City Hall.

Once again, the Ford boys show their contempt for the rules.

What’s the point of winning an election if we don’t get to do whatever the fuck we want?

They’re special, you see. They don’t need no stinkin’ rules.

It seems that a lot of former Ford voters are feeling a bit of buyers’ remorse. One wonders how this will affect it.

Related posts:

Source: The Globe and Mail

@JohnLorinc and @GraphicMatt on Rob Ford and conflict of interest | #TOpoli

Two important and necessary takes from two of the smartest and most thoughtful observers in Toronto politics.

Matt argues that while Rob Ford’s record doesn’t exactly look good on him, this conflict-of-interest kerfuffle shouldn’t trigger his removal from office. He rightly points out that the law leaves no middle ground: 

As it stands, the law is set up with little room for sway: either Ford is guilty and he’s removed from office or he’s innocent and he walks away cleanly. It’s kind of like if the only possible criminal penalties for petty theft were nothing or death by firing squad. 

By contrast, John points out that

… the mayor, in the past, seems to have been familiar enough with the municipal conflict laws, and attentive enough to council debates, to know when to stick his hand up after the speaker asks for declarations of conflict.

I can certainly understand the argument that Rob Ford won the election, and that regardless of what we may think of him, he’s entitled to serve out his mandate to the best of his ability. Because Matt’s right in more than one sense: previously, he’s argued that engineering Ford’s  removal via this conflict-of-interest process is going to look like “sore losers” to some of his supporters.

It’s a compelling argument, and in an ideal world, I’d find it hard to disagree with his contention that if Rob Ford is to be removed from office, it should be because someone else manages to persuade more voters to support his or her vision of the city. Ultimately, though, I think Matt’s analysis founders on the Can’t Have it Both Ways shoals. As I suggested on his site:

You’re right, it’s disturbing to think that there’s nothing in between skating and removal from office, and there’s a very strong argument that there should be. By the same token, though, you’re also right to point out that there’s no middle ground between flagrant disregard or staggering incompetence either. I’d be more sympathetic if it were just the football thing, but when the guy actually stands up at council and argues, essentially, that the rules shouldn’t apply to him, the wiggle room disappears.

So which is it? If there’s no middle ground on the offence, then why should there be a middle ground on the penalty? Rules are rules, and they’re there for a reason. Yeah, the droolers of Ford Nation will lose their shit, but when did they ever not?

Related posts:

From Campaign 2010 to Campaign 2014: framing the #TOpoli narrative

1024election

It may be conventional, as we near the halfway point of Team Ford’s mandate, to expect a raft of think pieces, assessments, sententious analyses, and windy “Whither Toronto” wankfests. But enough about me.

Regular visitors to this little corner will be familiar, I think, with your humble servant’s fascination (obsession? - ed.) with framing, storylines, and narratives. It’s nothing new, of course; I harp on it because discourse - the words we use to talk to one another, the stories we tell each other, the themes we use in making sense of current events, the implicit assumptions - is at the very basis of civic engagement. It’s the most essential currency of citizenship. It’s from the basic discursive tools that everything else in the Citizen’s Toolbox - critical thinking, a sense of the public good, an appreciation for complexity - arises.

That’s part of the context for a discussion that developed earlier this afternoon on the Tweetr (kids these days). Regardless of what I may think of Team Ford’s approach to governance, you have to agree that the municipal election of 2010 was pretty much defined by the Ford campaign’s success in establishing and controlling the narrative. The messaging was so effective that with the exception of Joe Pantalone, all the other major mayoral contenders ended up buying into it to some extent. 

Nothing new or revealing there, of course. But as the subsequent two years have shown, there’s a big difference between campaigning and governing. Campaigning can be very effective when the messaging is straightforward and easy to grasp. Whether it’s truthful or constructive is another matter. Once you get into the nuts and bolts of governance, things get a bit more complicated. Either way, though, discourse and narratives matter. Words matter. Definitions matter. Connotations matter, because they’re all essential in establishing the terms whereby we communicate.

That’s not exactly a new insight either, and I’m not the first to suggest it, but I’d humbly suggest that it’s a lesson well worth repeating and establishing as one of the dominant memes for 2014. (I’m not tipping my hand or anyone else’s with this, I trust.)

It’s instructive, therefore, to read the tweets from Nick Kouvalis. Anyone tapped into Toronto politics knows about his role in getting Rob Ford into the mayor’s chair; as I’ve said before, regardless of what I may think about Ford’s politics and approach to governance, there’s no denying that Nick ran an effective and successful campaign. He knows about messaging and about mobilizing voters, and as the following collection of tweets shows, he’s got some insights we would do well to learn from. (Nick, why can’t you use your talents for niceness instead of evil?)

Perhaps it’s too soon. We don’t know what’s going to happen in two years. But I can’t help thinking that the difference between campaigning and governing is going to be central to almost every attempt to define and describe Team Ford’s record. 

Narratives, folks. Fasten your seat belts.

Related posts:

Video: @TOMayorFord dodges questions about voting against community programs | #TOpoli #TeamFord #PublicGood

I don’t normally enjoy pile-ons, but in this case, how can I not?

The really awful part is, there are people who think this is just fine.

I know I go on about generosity of spirit, and building collaborative relationships, but at the risk of restating the obvious, this guy is in over his head. He doesn’t have the wherewithal to realize it, and he’s simply not capable of growing into the job. His performance in the wake of the Danzig shootings should remove any lingering doubts about that. It’s not even a question of waiting until 2014 any more. Toronto simply cannot afford to let him flounder about and continue to damage the social fabric.

Really, Rob. Time to try something else.

Related posts:

#TeamFord’s two-years-and-change horizon, and a proposed two-track strategy | #TOpoli

My friend @cityslikr’s got another fine piece at Torontoist today. In it, he neatly dissects the discrepancies between Team Ford’s apocalyptic predictions of fiscal disaster and the fact that our benighted city somehow manages to return an operating surplus year after year.

Matters aren’t helped, of course, by The Brother’s inexplicable characterization of Toronto’s financial condition as bankruptcy. JM McGrath’s already picked it apart for factual inaccuracy, and in terms of formulating a reasoned and measured response, I think Ed Keenan’s shown us the way. 

(Aside: while I like and respect Ed a great deal, I’m not sure I can commit to two years of daily Keenans.)  

Well, what is there to say, really? Can’t argue with Daren’s analysis, and since I can’t really add much to it, maybe it’s time to step back and, as I do from time to time, try to put this in a larger context. (Christ. There he goes again.)

That Rob Ford’s grasp of the workings of municipal governance or the basic principles of citizenship is somewhat, er, limited isn’t news by now. And it’s fairly straightforward to suggest that we should work to limit and contain whatever damage he can do between now and 2014. Council’s already doing that on several fronts: working with him when possible, working around him when not.

But that’s not all, because if we’re really interested in the good of this city, we need to pursue a two-track strategy. The first is already clear to most of us. The second — and this is where it gets tougher — is to do whatever we can to encourage him, to reinforce him, and to enable him in anything that helps him act like a better mayor. And that’s regardless of whether we think he merits a second term. (Kristyn Wong-Tam is showing us the way in that regard, too.)

No illusions. He’s going to backslide. He’s going to disappoint. He’s going to make us all want to do a Keenan from time to time. And this two-track strategy is a difficult path to walk. It demands much more of a commitment to civility, generosity of spirit (I keep going back to this piece wherein Hamutal Dotan sets the benchmark for that), and the greater good than anyone on Team Ford has displayed thus far, or is likely to display in the months to come. If it helps, perhaps focusing on the long view might make the day-to-day cringeworthy stuff a little more palatable.

Related posts:

@DavidHains on undermining @TOMayorFord’s enabling mythology

Rob_ford_pensive_890941artw

Over at The Clamshell, David Hains has written a trenchant and persuasive piece on how to undermine the narrative upon which Rob Ford’s power depends.

Not only does it expose the false assumptions at the base of his campaign and governing narratives, it sets out a road map for the construction of a powerful alternate storyline that has the potential to stop his thoughtless, destructive rampage. It’s part of the basis for an easy-to-grasp, emotionally resonant series of arguments that carry the added advantage of being true.

More on that to come shortly.

It’s the kind of post I wish I’d written. Go read now.

Related posts: