zapplez posted:

holy gently caress i can't wait for the pc's to get hosed in the next election.

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/ford-government-announces-one-percent-annual-wage-cap-on-public-sector-workers/

PT6A posted:

In Spain there’s also homeless entrepreneurs who will buy cold beer in a store and then sell it to you in the park, it’s pretty great.

vyelkin posted:

yeah and if you go to a park everyone is drinking beer and then just leaving their empties laying on the ground because homeless people will come and pick them up and return them for the deposit, and they see this as progressive charity instead of lazy littering

infernal machines posted:

They do that here too. It's not legal but no one except the police care.

Leofish posted:

Real, now deleted, tweet from the MPP for Haldimand-Norfolk.

zapplez posted:

holy gently caress i can't wait for the pc's to get hosed in the next election.

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/ford-government-announces-one-percent-annual-wage-cap-on-public-sector-workers/

Furnaceface posted:

Reminder: Ontarians voted overwhelmingly for this.

e: Ford and his merry gaggle of idiots, not necessarily the public sector pay freeze.

vyelkin posted:

Well, 40.5% of them did anyway

infernal machines posted:

Four out of ten people you meet every day voted for this.

Think on that

infernal machines posted:

Four out of ten people you meet every day voted for this.

Think on that

Postess with the Mostest posted:

Ahhhhhctually, 4 out of 10 registered didn't care enough to vote.

Postess with the Mostest posted:

Ahhhhhctually, 4 out of 10 registered didn't care enough to vote.

Furnaceface posted:

I count those as votes for Ford.

infernal machines posted:

Uh, I think you'll find they're the "silent majority"

Wistful of Dollars posted:

If you bet on seeing this headline on the NP, well, we all did.

What happened to missing and murdered Indigenous women was horrific, but it wasn't genocide

quote:

Ford government to rewrite Toronto’s development plans to allow taller buildings in more of midtown, downtown

The Ontario government’s move to allow more and taller buildings in Toronto’s midtown area wrecks a more balanced original plan for growth that would have allowed the city to keep up with schools, parks and other infrastructure, city councillor Josh Matlow says.

"This is a giveaway to the developers at the expense of the local community," said Mr. Matlow, one the neighourhood's local councillors, after The Globe and Mail reported that Municipal Affairs Minister Steve Clark was rewriting two major official plan amendments submitted by the city, in order to loosen rules for developers and allow for more housing units near public transit stations.

Mr. Clark told The Globe he intends to make major changes to the city’s plans for its midtown area - whose councillors include Mr. Matlow, an outspoken critic of the Progressive Conservative government’s recent housing plans - and for its downtown, to increase “flexibility” and get more housing units built to address Toronto’s housing crunch.

Both original plans took years of consultations with residents and work by city planners, and were approved by council last year and submitted under the previous Liberal government's planning framework. Just before a deadline that would have seen them punted to the province's Local Planning Appeal Tribunal for it to make the final decision on any changes, Mr. Clark said he intended to send rewritten unappealable versions back to the city that reflected what he described as his government's recent policy changes and its very different vision for growth. As of Wednesday morning, the details had yet to be made public.

As an example of the scope of the changes, Mr. Clark said that at the corner of Bayview Avenue and Eglinton Avenue East, the city's plan called for a maximum height of eight storeys. He says the province's changes would allow 20 to 35 storeys at that location, as it is the site of a station on the Crosstown tunnelled light-rail line, which is under construction.

Mr. Matlow, while acknowledging he had not seen the details of the new plans, argued that adding so much more density there now would only further fill up the overcrowded Yonge subway line, which will be fed by the Crosstown. But he said that perhaps in future years, once other transit lines such as the downtown relief subway line are completed, greater density could be warranted at that site. He said the government should be consulting the city and residents instead of unilaterally changing the plans.

The councillor said allowing more residential development than planned for in midtown, which has already been the site of numerous battles between residents and high-rise developers, will make it impossible for governments to add the required schools, childcare centres and parks: "It has got to be done in a way that recognizes reality."

Mr. Matlow also noted that the plans would allow for increased density on top of the city's subway stations, ownership which the province intends to take over.

The councillor has also been a vocal critic of the Ford government's housing legislation, known as Bill 108, which he and other critics warn guts endangered species protections to help developers while lowering the fees builders must pay for new parks and other infrastructure. The bill also restores some of the sweeping powers of the former Ontario Municipal Board, which critics long characterized as too friendly to developers. The Ford government says the moves are needed to get more housing supply onto the Toronto area's tight market. Mr. Clark says he will consult municipalities on the new system for making developers contribute to community benefits.

Spokespeople for Toronto Mayor John Tory and the city's chief planner, Gregg Lintern, said Wednesday morning they not yet seen the details of the province's changes to the midtown and downtown plans. The mayor was notified Tuesday evening that the changes were coming.

Downtown City Councillor Joe Cressy, a frequent critic of Premier Doug Ford, said he has been told the downtown plan known as TOcore, which he worked on for years and was meant to guide growth for the next quarter century, is basically finished.

"It's like the Wild West for developers. I've never seen anything like it," Mr. Cressy said Wednesday.

Internal provincial government memos summarizing the province's changes to the plans, obtained by The Globe and Mail, say city council reduced the densities first proposed by the city’s planners before approving its midtown plan. The memo says the province would scrap the midtown plan’s current height limits, and consider a larger, 200-250-metre area around transit stations as ripe for intensification.

The changes would make both plans more flexible, and remove “prescriptive process requirements” such as access to sunlight, allowing such criteria to be evaluated on a “site by site basis,” the memo reads. And while the province would maintain the city’s requirement for units with multiple bedrooms, it would scrap the minimum square footage requirements in the original plans. The changes to the downtown plan, the memo says, would recognize the need for “larger floorplates for some employment buildings” as well as the need for residential uses near university campuses.

Mr. Clark told The Globe on Tuesday that the additional density near transit stations is needed to “leverage” the government’s $28.5-billion plan for public transit in Toronto, for which the province has so far committed $11.2-billion. That plan includes a second subway extension north into York Region, and major alterations to the city’s proposed downtown relief subway.

The province’s rewriting of the plans comes amid a controversy over municipal funding cuts, and after Mr. Ford unilaterally chopped the number of Toronto city councillors almost in half last summer.

Femtosecond posted:

YIMBY supply side activists have been asking for provincial intervention against municipal councils they feel are too NIMBY influenced for a long while. This sort of provincial intervention could potentially be a good thing, but the devil is in the details of what is being proposed here. Most progressive YIMBYs are probably interested in this sort of intervention in order to end the prohibition against any and all development in wealthy single family home areas, however from this article it doesn't appear that this policy from Ford goes that far. It appears that it is simply raising the allowed heights of high-rises that will be built on various brownfield lands already set aside for redevelopment. Good news for the big developers that hold those lands.

Alizee posted:

IMO Canada has done lots of genocide to indigenous people, but the MAMIW is more regular racism playing out through systematic oppression.

Pinterest Mom posted:

What the report does is frame MMIWG through the lens of genocide, not say that MMIWG would be sufficient to be qualified as genocide if it were the only thing that happened.

Square Peg posted:

That nuance has been completely (and deliberately) overlooked by the media surrounding the reports. All I've heard on CBC is that the missing and murdered indigenous women constitute genocide, which has every honky knee jerking to "well, actually..." about it. To say nothing of the more right-wing media.

quote:

There is nothing more important to society than the raising of children, for its very survival requires it.

Homosexual unions are by nature contradictory to this. There is no complementarity of the sexes. Two members of the same sex may use their God-given free will to engage in acts, to cohabit and to own property together. They may commit themselves to monogamy. They may pledge to remain in a loving relationship for life. In that sense they have many of the collateral features of marriage, but they do not have its inherent feature, as they cannot commit to the natural procreation of children. They cannot therefore be married.

odiv posted:

And this is why I'm banning marriage for post-menopausal women, men with erectile disfunction, people who - hey where are you going?

Mr Luxury Yacht posted:

RBC posted:

I know I'm preaching to the choir here but let's all take a moment and remember what Andrew Scheer said when he voted against same-sex marriage in 2005: https://openparliament.ca/debates/2005/4/5/andrew-scheer-1/only/

vyelkin posted:

cool good to know Andrew Scheer thinks my heterosexual marriage is illegitimate because we neither have nor want children

vyelkin posted:

lmao

https://twitter.com/suntooz/status/...ctor-workers%2F

Wistful of Dollars posted:

If you bet on seeing this headline on the NP, well, we all did.

What happened to missing and murdered Indigenous women was horrific, but it wasn't genocide

MikeSevigny posted:

This along with the flood of editorials about how <National Post columnist X> would love to help the natives, they really would, such a shame there, but sadly the report was TOO MEAN and therefore the recommendations will be ignored. There’s just nothing the entire editorial staff of the NP can do about it.