Toronto Mayoral Debate

The Empire Club Presents

Olivia Chow and John Tory: Toronto Mayoral Debate

September 26, 2014

Head Table:

Distinguished Guest Speakers:

Ms. Olivia Chow, Toronto Mayoral Candidate

Mr. Ryan Doyle, Host, The Live Drive on Newstalk 1010 Mr. John Tory, Toronto Mayoral Candidate

Guests:

Ms. Tina Arvanitis, Vice President, Government Relations and Communications, Ontario Energy Association; Director at the Empire Club of Canada

Mr. Doug Ford, Toronto City Councillor, Ward 2 Etobicoke North

Mr. Ted Griffith, Principal, Campbell Strategies; Chief Strategist, The Fixers Group; Vice President, Empire Club of Canada

Capt. Daniel Saugh, QY Rang Regimental Chaplain

Mr. Tim Smitheman, Manager, Government and Public Relations, Samsung Renewable Energy Inc.; Director, Empire Club of Canada

Mr. Michael Wilson, Managing Director, North American Public Transportation and Canada Corporate Citizenship, Accenture

Ms. Andrea Wood, Senior Vice President, Legal Services, TELUS; President, Empire Club of Canada

Welcome Address by Andrea Wood, President, Empire Club of Canada

The candidates have participated in a draw to determine the order in which they will appear on the stage. I will call them up in that order and ask them to move to the appropriate podium starting from the audience’s left. First, Mr. John Tory. Second, Ms. Olivia Chow. And Mr. Ryan Doyle. Thank you. Please, join us as moderator. Thank you very much for having agreed to moderate today’s event.

John Tory, Olivia Chow & Ryan Doyle

Good afternoon, to both of you. Good afternoon, to everybody in the audience this afternoon. The debate format is pretty straightforward. Both candidates have drawn and John Tory will receive the first question. Following that, Ms. Chow will get a rebuttal to that question, and then both candidates will debate the issue on hand for two minutes.

Also, as part of the draw, Ms. Chow got the first closing argument, so she will make her closing statement later on when we are set to conclude. As I mentioned, each candidate gets two minutes. I hope that both of you will respect that, and away we go.

Mr. Tory, the first question is to you. Most job creation comes from economic growth, and mayors have very little power over that. Even prime ministers and premiers overinflate their influence over the business cycle, and they have far more power than mayors. Yet this campaign has been filled with job promises. Are these false promises, or do you truly feel you can deliver? If so, how?

JT: Well, Ryan—and thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, for having us here today. I am sorry we have one colleague missing. But I think a mayor has a lot to do with attracting jobs and investments to the city—not so much creating the jobs but attracting jobs and investment to the city. And I think one of the problems of the last four years of division and that kind of thing has been that our reputation has suffered, and that it has distracted the mayor and others on the city council from one of their most fundamental tasks, which is to attract jobs and investment to this city. I hope that one of the things people will focus on as we enter the last weeks of the campaign is which candidate they think is going to be best able to understand the kinds of decisions that businesses are going to make from Alberta or from 905 or from Arkansas or China or India when they are looking around the world at the different places they could invest and create jobs.

Now, what could we do about it here? There is a very definite role beyond being what I view the mayor’s job to be which is the chief ambassador and chief sales person. First of all, I think we have to consolidate our efforts and our organizations within the city. We have a patchwork quilt of organizations that are out trying to attract jobs, and make this an attractive place for people to do business.

Secondly, I think we need much more federal, provincial and regional cooperation. It is city regions that are often competing for these jobs, now more so than cities or towns themselves. I have put forward something called a “One Jobs Plan,” which uses some of the tax tools we do have in our somewhat limited arsenal to actually create jobs, say, for example, around the Scarborough subway, where Scarborough has not had its fair share of jobs. They are more attracted to downtown, oftentimes, and I think it is time we tried to do things to encourage people—start-ups and other kinds of businesses to locate around the city.

I think we have to look at the regulatory burden, and I have made a pledge to reduce that regulatory burden in a targeted way so that we can make it simpler for people to do business with the city. We have to look at taxes and continue to make sure this is a favourable place for business to be located from the standpoint of taxes. And I would continue with the program that has started to take a little bit of the burden off business in terms of our taxes, and, finally, build transit which connects people to jobs.

RD: Ms Chow, the same question to you.

OC: Yes. I believe the city government has a role to play in three areas. Number one, we can create jobs by making use of our capital budget. When we are investing in infrastructure, for example, we can leverage that money and say to the big corporations that are actually doing businesses with the city of Toronto that they would sign a Community Benefits Agreement. Any big contracts that are over $50 million and that together we can create 5,000 jobs in the next four years. This has been done extensively in the States, this Community Benefits Agreement methodology. It has been done in Vancouver when they built the Olympic village, where they created a lot of local jobs. It has been done in the City of Toronto when Regent Park got revitalized. Five hundred jobs were created for young people and some apprenticeship programs there, too.

Number two, in terms of how we can create jobs, is we can sell the city a lot better. Right now, when we promote ourselves outside this country, we speak in very many different voices. I plan to bring everyone together, form an agency called “Global Toronto,” where the Toronto Economic Development Division and Investment Toronto would come together with the Toronto Region Board of Trade, the Financial Services Alliance and different GTA mayors. We can come together and sell Toronto with one voice. I saw that happening in Vancouver when I represented the city and Canada in Beijing, and I saw how the Vancouver mayor did it. We can do that, too.

And, thirdly, we can keep property tax low for small businesses, cut red tape for them and help small businesses flourish, especially, when it comes to newcomers. They can start their business a lot easier. That would create jobs also.

RD: Now, I am going to give the opportunity for the two of you to debate that issue.

OC: Mr. Tory, I would love to see an actual commitment of the number of jobs that you would want to create. It is important to create a target because if you do not have a target, it is hard to say that, you know, in four years’ time, I would be able to support a certain way. Would you actually support the Community Benefits Agreement, which is happening in Alexandra Park now, for example, with the Tridel? It is something that has been proven to work. Would you join with me and say that, “Yes, this is a good plan and, yes, we can create some jobs, especially, for young people.”

JT: Let me just say two things. First of all, you measure these things by virtue of the job that the government itself is going to mandate to be created or the government itself is going to create. I look at it a bit differently, and I look at that as a part of it, and you know that I have said, for example, that with respect to the City of Toronto’s leading youth employment program, I will double the number of companies, not in four years but in one year, that participate in that program. And that, of course, will dramatically increase by hundreds of positions each year—the number of kids that are helped by that program.

But, you see, I am looking at this a little differently than you are. I am looking at this as something we have to do to attract new people to come here from around the world and from around the country and from around the region, and I think the big stifling hand of government that you are going to lay on a lot of things in order to try and get that done is actually going to have a counterproductive effect.

I think we have to make this an attractive place to do business, and I think a lot of the stuff you talked about is going to cause people to pause and say, “I’m just not so sure I want to go down there and get involved with more and more of these kinds of programs you have that involve more people filling out more papers and accounting to more government bureaucrats.”

OC: Mr. Tory, allow me to just—so you are saying that you would not support what Metrolinx is doing, what Daniels Corporation is doing, what Tridel is doing— that you are going cancel all of these very successful models because you do not want to see it happening because you know that—

JT: Go ahead.

OC: Why would you say no to something that worked— JT: I am not saying no.

OC: —in this city?

JT: I am saying that you are—

OC: Especially, the Toronto Community Housing Corporation?

JT: I am saying you are…

OC: It is something that is proven to work. RD: Finish your last thought, but time is up.

JT: All right. I am saying that you are a one-trick pony that says government does everything.

OC: Oh, that is—

JT: And I am saying that what we have to do is we have to create an environment here in which people from around the world are going to want to come here and create jobs because they find this an attractive place to do business. And, no, I would not cancel those things, but what I would—

RD: Ms. Chow, the next question is for you, and we will have more of an open debate as we go through here. The second question is for you, Ms. Chow. A newly released report from RBC shows that 81 % of people across the GTA—be they downtowners or suburbanites—want to live in a walkable, transit- friendly neighbourhood. In fact, they would be willing to live in a smaller home so they could be part of a community served by rapid transit. What will you do to combat gridlock and make accessible transit a reality, and how, specifically, will you fund that plan? Two minutes to you.

OC: Thank you. I have been very clear and honest about how I would build transit in this city. Faster, cheaper, better transit now. Let us start with the downtown subway relief line. The LRTs that we have spent four, five years studying. There are three lines, the Finch, the Sheppard, and the Scarborough one. Let us start the construction now because they are ready. They have even signed the contract with Bombardier to purchase the trains. Let us do it, now and let us invest in bus services so that we can see immediate improvement now.

And, of course, the province is going to electrify GO trains, so it is a comprehensive model. It is designed by experts and other newspapers like the Star, which said it is the best plan of all the candidates. And I am very honest about how we can pay for it. Yes, through property taxes but also through a bit of increase in the land transfer tax—one percent point for those that are purchasing a home, a condo, that is more than $2 billion. I have been very clear, and I think it is important that Mr. Tory and Mr. Ford be very clear and start being honest to people. We cannot build public transit; we cannot improve public transit without actually paying for it, and that is the public transit part. And, lastly, on the question of a better traffic plan, let us ask the construction companies and the developers that are blocking lanes to do construction. Give them a graduated feed. The longer they block the street, the more we should charge them. Right now, it is a flat rate. There are no financial incentives for them to open the lane faster. Let us do what Chicago does, and we can do that by asking them to not have a flat rate. That is a city policy that I would use that would clear up the traffic a lot faster.

RD: Mr. Tory, same question to you.

JT: Well, I think we have to start by getting traffic moving, and, you know, there are a lot of public transit vehicles sitting in the very same traffic jam that a lot of people are sitting in and a lot of trucks trying to business. And I put forward a list of I think ten or 11 or 12 common- sense measures, most of them, frankly, drawn from city reports that have been written and not acted on— things like coordinating construction. It does not take a genius or a lot of high technology to put together a simple spreadsheet that loads into it the Blue Jays schedule, the construction schedule, the marathon race schedule, the TTC repair schedule and so on and have some red flags get kicked up when there are things that are going on all the same time. It does not take too much to enforce the law so that you do not have trucks, delivery trucks and shredding trucks and all kinds of people parking in lanes of traffic at rush hour and blocking hundreds and hundreds of people from going about their business.

The second thing I would address after the traffic, and, as I say, I cannot really list all those measures now that are in my platform, but the second thing is address the reliability of the existing service. I cannot tell you how many people tell me across the city about sitting on subway trains that are stopped, and they do not understand why—or that are waiting for a bus for 12 minutes, and then three buses come all at the same time. This is a management problem, and I think we have the skills in place with Mr. Byford to get it done, but if he needs more tools, then we should darn well give them to him, so we can have a reliable system.

Thirdly, I would build the Scarborough subway. I would build the Scarborough subway. It will be a good long-term investment, and, importantly, I think, ladies and gentlemen, all three levels of government have agreed it should be a subway and put up their money—and, in this country, they hardly agree very often on what day it is, all three levels of government. I would get on with it whereas Ms. Chow will reopen that discussion and re-decide and re-debate it, and we will do what we do so well in this city which is nothing because we are sitting around re-deciding and re-debating.

And, finally, SmartTrack. We should have been building one subway every year for the last 22 or 25 years, and we have not done it. This is going to give us a chance to have 22 new transit stations, trains every 15 minutes by and large on existing GO train tracks. It just makes sense.

RD: We are going to allow for two minutes of open debate on the transit issue.

OC: Mr. Tory, you are asking people to wait at least ten years before we see any transit improvement. You will not tell people how many houses, the libraries and the community centres around Eglinton and Weston, where your tracks, where the GO train does a dramatic 90◦ turn, and you would not tell people how many kilometers of tunneling this track would take and how much money would it take because you first said that you would not do any tunneling. You said that it does not require any going underground. Now, you said it does, and then you will not say how many kilometers because, last I checked, one kilometre of tunneling is about $300 million, and that $8 billion price tag does not include any tunneling cost. So how many kilometres do you need to tunnel, and how much extra money would it cost?

JT: So, Ryan, I do not want to interrupt Ms. Chow, and I think that is up to you. She is now used half the time, so will I get the other half?

RD: Feel free to have the other half.

JT: I will have the other half. Okay. You just used half the time, and I will use the other half and, you will let me speak. I have let you speak uninterrupted.

OC: You tried.

JT: I mean this is what you do, and you try to find all kinds of reasons not to do something and to say, “Well, you know, this is impossible. There might be some solid rock we will find.” You know what? If it was you building the Yonge Street subway in the 1950s when they hit, as they did, a huge patch of solid rock, you would have given up and just said, “It’s okay. People can walk down Yonge Street.” They did not give up, and I am not going to give up on SmartTrack because it is urgent. We have put off doing something for 25 years. This is going to provide 22 new stations of transit in seven years, not the 17 of what Ms. Chow talks about. Seventeen years. She will tell you about a bus plan. She was alluding to it. Well, ask her how she reconciles what she is saying about that bus plan with the fact that the head of service for the TTC says there are no buses. Do you believe a politician, anyone, including me versus the guy who is in charge of the buses at the TTC? I do not think so.

OC: Well, Mr. Tory, you did not answer the question. You notice you did not say how many kilometres. You did not answer the question at all.

RD: You both had a minute on that issue, so let us switch to question three. John, this question is for you: In the final meeting of city council this year, there were motions and debates over issues like regulating energy drinks, e-cigarettes, a call for a national inquiry into missing and murdered aboriginal women and a proposal to make the words of the national anthem more gender neutral. In your mind, are these municipal issues, and would you refocus the city’s priorities as mayor? Your time starts now.

JT: Let me say this. I would not sort of say all those kinds of things should be excluded. I think City Hall is sort of the essence. It is the heart of democracy of our city, and there are times when those kinds of things where the city has to have a voice, but I will tell what concerns me more in a way about that very same meeting. You probably read at that very same meeting that, in that one single meeting, they approved 750 stories of new development. Now, I am not saying this is a bad thing in and of itself because it shows people want to invest in the city. It shows that we are growing as a city because we have to grow. There are 85,000 people, thank god, coming here from around the world seeing this as a beacon of opportunity.

But I am asking myself when you were taking the time to have the debates about all those different things that you mentioned, at the same meeting as you were approving 750 stories of new development, were you spending enough time asking the questions What about schools? What about parks? What about transit? What about hydro? What about sewers? What about recreational facilities? What about libraries? And so I think what we have to do is spend more time focusing on getting people results because what we do in answering those questions is we ask them, and then they are often answered by sort of saying, “Well, we’ll deal with that later.”

And, of course, I think what that has ended up creating is a city that is still a great city, but if we want it to stay great we are going to have to answer—ask and answer—those questions at the same time. I think what people want to see—they would be happy, I think, Ryan, to see us having all kinds of debates on resolutions about the national anthem and all those other things if we also, at the same time, produce results, so they got transit, and jobs were attracted to the city, and programs were put in place for kids and families, and affordable housing was getting built and all those different kinds of things they expect from their city government. But they have not been seeing that. What they have been seeing—and I think this is the clear choice you have, ladies and gentlemen—is they have been seeing chaos and division, not even because of those resolutions but because of the leadership style of the Fords. And that is the real question I think people have to answer: Do they want four more years of that chaotic, divisive leadership style, or do they want a breath of fresh air at City Hall that gets results?

RD: Ms. Chow, same question to you.

OC: I believe the City of Toronto should have a policy on whether there should be an inquiry for murdered and missing aboriginal women. Absolutely. And I do not shrink from that. In that report, in that final council meeting, was also a very important item. The TTC, the Commission, unanimously said that they want to make sure that the services, whether its buses or streetcars, can be improved immediately, and there was a massive plan. Mr. Tory said, “Well, they shouldn’t have approved it.” I do not agree. City council did not agree. What city council did was say that we have to restore the bus services and the streetcar services that have been cut in the last four years because Mayor Ford stood in front four years ago and said that he would cut the gravy. Instead, what happened when he arrived was that he cut the TTC budget. As a result, TTC fares have gone up. People are waiting longer for their buses, and it is more packed like sardines, and people are being left behind. In this election, neither Mr. Tory nor Mr. Ford would commit to invest in TTC’s operating budget immediately so that we can reverse those cuts so that we can immediately get improvement.

Now, all the schemes that we talked about and that Mr. Tory and Mr. Ford talked about takes at least ten years to materialize. What is going to happen in the next ten years? Whereas my plan was very clear that the LRT construction, for example, can be done by 2020, which is a lot faster than ten years. So I am so glad the city council unanimously said that we have to invest in public transit right now, and that is the right way to go.

RD: I am going to open this up now to debate.

JT: So let us talk about that report because I think you have mischaracterized what happened. In fact, what I said was—this is a report, by the way, ladies and gentlemen, that involved a total expenditure and investment of $500 million. What I said was that report has to go to the budget committee because, to me, this is part of the problem in government today—all governments but including at Toronto City Hall. You cannot just put a tick mark as Olivia will do beside a report and say, “Yeah, I’m in favour of that,” when it is $500 million without knowing where the money is going to come from, and so I said it should go into the budget process where they make all of the allocations with the long list of things that people have to decide upon. That is what you are elected to do, and so that is exactly what I said. I did not say I opposed the report. I said we need to know where the money is going to come from as opposed to Ms. Chow, who stands here right today and says to you, “Tick it off. I’m in favour of that report,” without having any idea whatsoever as to where the majority of that money is going to come from.

OC: That is not true. I was very clear. I said earlier on that the land transfer tax, the extra 1% point, right? But Mr. Tory, when you mention $500 million, you are adding both the operating capital budget, and it is not just about one year—

JT: That is because money is money, Olivia.

OC: —no, the first thing that Mayor Ford did was to cut the operating grants, right? And you went, and yesterday you made a promise of $20 million on some environmental—

JT: Twenty-two million, actually.

OC: —on the trees. You promised all this money. You make these promises. You did not say where the money is coming from. You are not even promising a single penny of improvement.

JT: Here is the difference.

OC: Let me finish. You are not promising one single penny to go into the public transit area. How could you do that? How could you say that to those people that are left behind?

JT: The promise I made yesterday was to invest $22 million in smart energy monitoring, real-time energy monitoring equipment to be put in every single city building. We spend $250 million a year on energy. The savings will be 10%. It will pay itself back in no time. That is where the money is coming from. That is smart business.

RD: That is time on this segment, and the next question is for Ms. Chow. Ms. Chow, a recent stabbing at North Albion Collegiate Institute left a young man dead and left a lot asking what should be done to prevent this from happening again. Since the murder of Jordan Manners who was shot at his school in 2007, changes in high schools have included more student supports, breakfast programs, resident police and security cameras. Do you feel those measures are enough, or can more be done?

OC: Ryan, thank you for that excellent question. I was hoping that would come up. At the time when Jordan Manners was killed, I said very clearly that we need to invest more in after-school programs and food programs for children. I am glad we took one step on it, but it is not enough. It has been working because the youth crime rate has dropped. We know that it has dropped, but one murder is one murder too many. So, in my plan, I have said that what I would do is to increase after-school activities for children by hiring young people that are role models in their community. They can then teach children a skill so that they, too, can be the role model, and that we have seen work in many places. We need to expand that so that our children would not become latchkey kids, so they grow up smart and strong and stay out of trouble. We need to do a lot more than that. We also know that when children are hungry they cannot focus. If we provide better food programs for children—and I pledge to make sure that at least 36,000 more children can have good food programs in school—then they can be smarter. They can learn better. They can do better in math and reading and science. We know that. So all of those things. Of course, we also need to support the police so that there is a presence in the community. With all of those things combined, I am sure we can see a continual decrease of the crime rate in Toronto. I also want say one more thing. A lot of young men feel picked on if their skin colour is black or brown. We need to end racial profiling because that is so important. It hurts the psyche. We need to make them feel that they are not a criminal. So I think we need to stop racial profiling and also stop carding, and that would really help in those communities.

RD: John, same question to you.

JT: I think all of us in the city find racial profiling unacceptable, and it should not be any part of anything we do anywhere in the city. I wanted to say that I cannot imagine a more unspeakable tragedy than for a parent in our city, any parent, anywhere to lose a child in this kind of an incident. And I cannot imagine a place where people would find it less likely to happen than in the schools. I think everybody thinks our schools are supposed to be safe, but I think what we have to start on with this more so that anything else is with some honesty. I think that my experience in civic action and for years before that in these communities talking and more importantly listening to people suggests that we have not yet been honest about the fact that there are pockets in the city and that they are populated to a greater extent than other places in the city by people whose skin colour is not white but is maybe black or brown or by people who did come from somewhere else. They may be more likely to be single moms and so on. I think we have got to have an honest discussion about that and recognize, as a community, that that is a reality and that sometimes those people in those communities are facing struggles that are not the struggles that form part of the record of other peoples’ lives in the city.

Then I think it is, yes, a matter of government showing some leadership. I think right now what we have got is government showing lots of leadership but in a very uncoordinated way where you have governments of all levels all over the place doing things that in and of themselves are good but are uncoordinated. And best practices have not been adopted. I think that we have to take that government leadership and use it to engage people, more so than just people working for the government. We have to engage people in businesses. I think that where the opportunities are going to come from for a lot of these young people in particular is in small and medium-size businesses where it has been difficult for them to engage themselves and difficult for us to engage them in this task. I have been very much personally involved in doing this as a private citizen for the last number of years.

I think what we have got to do in order to have government be able to provide that role of leadership is, yes, invest city monies from taxes that we take from commercial and property taxpayers but also go and get our fair share of the provincial money that has just been allocated for this purpose.

RD: That is time. It is time for open debate on the issue of school safety.

OC: Folks, you would have heard that Mr. Tory has not given any concrete suggestions whether it is for after- school activities and any activities for young people. I think we need to invest. We also need to make sure that parents spend more time with their kids. That area is Rexdale. Right now, to get from Rexdale to anywhere takes hours, and it is not fair that we would not build the Light Rapid Transit. I am the only candidate that said that let us start building that Light Rapid Transit right on Finch right now so that those parents, all the young people that want to travel, let us say from Keele to Humber College, would be able to save half an hour per day, and the parents can spend more time with their kids. So, Mr. Tory, why would you not build that Light Rapid Transit right now because, previously, you said you wanted to wait until the SmartTrack is done, and that is ten years.

RD: Ms. Chow, allow him to answer.

OC: Why not build the LRT right now on Finch?

JT: Okay, so we have had half the time, so I will take the other half. That is fair. Okay. So what I have said, again—you have mischaracterized what I have said. Perhaps, you did not understand, but I have said I will build SmartTrack, yes, and I am going to get on with that right away because it is urgent that we do so we will have city-wide relief, 22 new transit stations in seven years, and it is going to provide relief for the entire city. It will get a lot of cars off the road and do a lot of good connecting people to jobs. And, you know that that schedule coincides roughly with the schedule of the building of the Finch and Sheppard LRTs, which I said I would proceed with that work, so I am not waiting, and you, absolutely, know that is not true, what you said. I am not waiting. I am getting on with both, but I have said my work plan has to be to get in and get SmartTrack going because it is a newer idea consistent with provincial policy, which is going to electrify the GO train tracks, and I will do both at the same time.

I think one of the things we could do that would not contribute to helping traffic or helping families for that matter is to pour more people on these new LRTs into the same Yonge Street subway line that is already overcrowded before we get SmartTrack in place at the same time that is going to provide some relief. It just makes sense to me, but I am not altering the schedule. I am saying I will proceed with it as scheduled.

RD: That is time. I am just going to ask that during the next open portion of debate you guys can talk to each other if you like, and you can have a debate with one another. Just want to encourage that.

John, this question is for you. A forum research poll of Torontonians conducted last year revealed strong support for council term limits. Some 61% supported a term limit for mayor, and 58% supported a term limit for councillors. Do you think there are too many career counsellors on council, and would you put an end-date on your own term?

JT: Well, the answer to that question is I am concerned about the same thing, and I am concerned about, frankly, in the corporate world, too. I think that if you serve too long in a given position, no matter how smart you are or how good you are, you are no longer going to be as likely to be an agent of change or a person who is as able to adapt to change because I think human nature is what it is. You get settled in. I can tell you right now—and my wife, Barb, is sitting here—I think that if I serve more than two terms as mayor, I would find myself after that period of time living in a small apartment by myself. And that does not seem to be a very appealing prospect to me, especially, living alone, and so I think that it is a good thing to have turnover in these jobs from time to time. I think that the public, generally, make decisions about that in a fairly wise way when they think people have had their time, and sometimes they do it after four years.

If you ask me, when I was asked this 11 years ago when I ran for mayor, I said, “No, the voters decide when people come and go from public office,” and I, generally, think they are pretty good at that. I think what happens, very simply, is that people who get settled in to their whole life being in public life begin to realize there is probably not much else in some respects they could do, and it is not their fault. They are away from teaching or law or computer science or this or that for a long period of time, and sometimes you cannot go back. But I think there is no question that that then begins to affect the way you make decisions because your concern is about self-preservation in an office, and I think that has got to be a bad thing, so I am more open to the discussion.

I think we should have a much broader discussion about issues of our democracy and how it works because the public are talking about this, too, and they are talking by not showing up to vote. That is how they are saying, “We don’t think this system is working very well,” so if you said am I open to that conversation, yes. Will I have a term limit imposed on myself by self-imposition? Yes, and if I was slip-sliding on that, Barb would make sure that I did not backslide.

RD: Ms. Chow, same question to you.

OC: I think experience matters, and we are dealing with a $12 billion corporation, and it is a very complex organization. Sometimes it takes a bit of time to have a complete understanding on how this system works, and I have watched some of the councillors, and I will even name them. If you look at council, Pam McConnell, she has been pushing to have a new community centre in St. James Town for many years. So a few years ago, she finally got it done. It is not because she did not try. She tried over and over and over again. It is difficult to get all the funding in place. And she wanted to revitalize Regent Park and, it took many years, and it took a lot of work, hard work, bringing different people together. Finally, we are now seeing the impact of this revitalization, and we are seeing the jobs being created there. So having experience, having that kind of passion and commitment—some things, especially, municipal government takes quite a while to get accomplished, and I do not believe there should be a term limit. There is no term limit in the federal member of parliament or the provincial arena. Why on municipal governments? So I believe experience matters. When people are not accomplishing anything, then the voters would then make a decision and say, “Ah, you have stopped being effective, then we will not re-elect you.”

And I have seen councillors—Howard Moscoe is another one. The kind of work that he did in TTC was phenomenal, and so there are people—they eventually retired. Mike Feldman. There are a lot of councillors that have done a lot of years and phenomenal work, and I do not believe we should set arbitrary term limits on them.

RD: I will open this to actual debate.

JT: I think what happens here, though, with some of these—and I am not referring to any individuals, but I will refer to two but not the ones you talked about. But it is that after you have been there for a period of time, yes, you have been around, but there also sets in I believe in my heart of hearts a certain sense of entitlement to be there, an entitlement to make these decisions, and I think exhibit one is what you see with the Fords, where they not only think they are entitled to sort of be there, but they can kind of pass the offices, these offices around within the family. I do not think that is right.

But I would put this question to you: If experience is everything, then with all the people that have been there all those years, some of which you did refer to, how come everything is in such a mess today? The traffic is a mess. The transit is not getting do ne. We do not have the jobs. Affordable housing is not getting built.

RD: Give Ms. Chow a chance.

JT: If all those people that have been there all those years, how come all those experienced people cannot get anything done?

OC: We got into a mess because four years ago we were told that you can get subways by not paying a penny for it, okay? That is actually what happened. We are seeing it again four years later. When Mr. Ford and Mr. Tory say, “Ah, don’t worry. We’ll build you something. Subway, for one. Tracks on the other, and don’t worry: You don’t have to pay a single penny, and somehow it will magically appear.” And, you know, the voters four years ago made a mistake, and that is why we are such a mess.

JT: But Olivia, how can you have it both ways? On the one hand, five minutes ago, you were intensely critical of the funding tool that I have set out to pay for the transit, and you said it will not work, and it has not work here and there and so on.

OC: That is right. It is the same tool as Mr. Ford.

JT: Now, you are saying that I have said subways are free or transit.

OC: No, no, it is the same; it is the same.

JT: I have spelled out how I would pay for it. You do not like it.

OC: Because it has not worked anywhere else.

JT: You are pessimistic about that and a lot of other things.

OC: It has not worked in New York. It has not worked in California.

JT: It worked a million other places, and it will work here because we will make it work. The city is going to grow, and you know it.

OC: Eighty-nine percent failure rate in California.

JT: I do not know where you get those numbers. I think you make them up.

OC: And it is the same idea, same policy that Mr. Ford used four years ago.

RD: That it is time.

OC: It did not work for him. It will not work for you.

RD: That is time on that segment. Olivia, this question is for you: A report this week suggests that Toronto has bucked the national policing trend over the last few years. Other cities have hired more officers. Toronto has seen their police rates decline while, surprisingly, crime in the city has dropped by 41%. Given that fact, do you believe more police officers are the answer to keeping our city safe?

OC: No, not more officers. We do need officers, and I thank the men and women that keep our communities safe. They service us and protect us, but I do not think we need to increase the number. What we do need is to make sure that there is really community- based policing by bringing the community and the police together.

Secondly, we need to have a police that reflects the people they serve. That, too, is very important. And, thirdly, we have to say to the police that their budget is too large. We have to find a way to contain it, especially, the overtime budget. I believe that there should be less paid duty officers and that if we move and change the shiftwork that we would be able to lower the number of officers that need to do overtime and that when we need the officers the most, which is around the time when schools get out, from about 3:30 p.m. to about 5:00 p.m., that is the time a lot of crime happens. So we need to make sure that there are officers that are around at that time. We do not necessarily need to say to them that they should be doing it overtime.

So there are different ways in working with the police. I have done this before. I have been able to contain the police budget so that we have other funds to invest in children and young people and public transit, for example. I have the experience to deal with the police budget, and I also have the courage to say no when the request is not reasonable but also say yes when it is a smart investment. I pledge to you that is what I would do with the police and also on the policing relationship with the communities.

RD: Mr. Tory, same question.

JT: First of all, I would like to make it very clear, and I have stated it many times before: I would not reduce the size of the police complement, the number of police officers. I think it is one of the reasons why the crime rate is down: Because we have been able to deploy police officers in the community and have police officers on the spot. I think criminals naturally stay away from places where the police are, and police have been able to forge a better relationship, and I think Chief Bill Blair has done a good job. It is progress but not enough as yet but a good job at making progress, on making the police service more representative of the community that we live in.

But I think we do have to look for better policing, and I would point out to you when people will declare to you they are going to change the shifts and they are going to change this or they are going to change that, those things are part of a collective agreement that is reached between the Police Association and the Police Services Board, and so those things are not going to be mandated by the mayor or any member of the Police Services Board. They are going to be negotiated, and I think you are going to have to ask yourself who you want to send in to do that job because those things do have to be done. We do have to change some of those working conditions to make more effective use of the police officers we have. Less time standing beside construction sites—people tell me about seeing this every day of the week—and more time able to actually do real police work that they are trained to do. Less time in court. We need some cooperation from the province on this. There are immense numbers of police officers spending immense hours in court. It is not good, productive time. A lot of the time they are just sitting, waiting. Those in the room who use the courts for one reason or another know that. So these are the kinds of things we have to do, and I think that it is something where we are going to have to have the determination to do it and the relationships to do it because it is going to be—a lot of it is going to be a matter of, yes, being firm but also having the trust of the different parties involved to make sure it happens because we do have to constrain the growth in the size of our emergency service budgets because they are much like healthcare in the provincial scene, taking up an increasing share of limited resources.

RD: That is time on that segment. It is now time for debate on policing.

OC: Well, I have said very clearly that when elected as mayor, I will sit on the Police Services Board. I will work together with other city councillors that are on the board and the appointees from the province and work together to make sure that the policing that we have are community-based.

Would you, Mr. Tory, sit on the Police Services Board, and do you think the budget is too large? And, if so— yes, of course, we need to negotiate with the unions— would you actually be involved and give direction to say that the union contract at this point needs to be changed, and what area would you like to change?

RD: Let him answer the questions you have asked.

OC: The compressed work week is too much, and that is an area that we need to change.

JT: To answer your two questions, first of all, I am not sure whether I would put myself on the Police Services Board or not, and I am not making a lot of those kinds of decisions before I get elected. I think that may be a bit presumptuous, but having said that, I will make that decision. I would hope that when I get there I would have a better sojourn in there than you had that last time you were there when you had to resign.

But, having said that, I would like to then get on to the second part of the question which is with respect to the budget. The mayor, of course, does not instruct the police chief or the Police Services Board. I would certainly set out the expectations together with the members of city council and the budget committee as to what we have to do to, I would say, constrain the growth in the Police Services budget, and I would leave it to them in their negotiating process to achieve what we need set out, and I have suggested ways in which I think that can be done. They are really not much different than what you have said. It is just that I have acknowledged the fact that that is going to have to happen as a matter of negotiation.

OC: Let me address that question. I had the guts to stand up to the police and say that it is important to de-escalate a situation.

JT: You tried to tell the police what to do at a riot going on a Queen’s Park!

OC: I had the guts to speak against the police.

JT: You know those are the facts. They are on the record.

It was a disgrace. You had to resign.

JT: They were throwing bottles at Queen’s Park and throwing sticks and stones at people.

OC: I had the courage to do so, and I am not sure you do. JT: That is why you had to resign.

OC: I am not sure you have the courage.

JT: It was wholly inappropriate, and that is why you resigned.

RD: Our time is up in that segment. OC: Not true.

JT: It is part of the history.

RD: The second section of today’s debate is actually questions from the audience this afternoon that is gathered here, both from Twitter and from e-mail, and we are going to start with the first question out. John, this question will be to you. How do you plan to work with the federal and provincial governments to actually get your platform implemented, especially, on transit where those commitments are necessary?

JT: Well, I think this is a vitally important question because I think one of the things that people are going to be judging when they make their choice on the 27th of October is who do they think between and among Mr. Ford, Ms. Chow and myself, is most likely to be able to get the support and the results we need. And I go back to sort of first principles on this. What we have allowed to happen—and I say we have allowed it to happen as a city, and, to some extent, the province has allowed it to happen within the country—is the other governments to back away from or just stay out of areas that are vital areas of public investment in the country’s biggest city, the economic engine of the country, the country that is bound to have the most complex problems because of its size and diversity and so on. And I think there are things like—not limited to—transit, affordable housing, and infrastructure, and what I think is going to be vital in the four years ahead is who is going to be best able to go and convince them to do what I think they should do.

The way I articulate it is that we should have in those areas a ten-year contract with them ideally involving all three levels of government where instead of this kind of ad hocery that goes on where you never know. And I do not know how if you do not know whether you have got the money you can ever plan anything. You do not know whether they are going to fund this transit project or that one or this affordable housing development or that one, or whether they are going to be in on Monday and out on Wednesday. And I think if we have—if they have the confidence in us that we have the kind of government administration where we have got our act together and we are acting in a sensible, competent, accountable way that we have a plan to take forward with respect to transportation and housing and so on, then I think we can convince them to do that.

And I think one of the things people are going to be asking is given we are dealing here with both the Harper majority Conservative government in Ottawa and the Wynne majority Liberal government at Queen’s Park and the city council, which person from among those on offer is most likely to be able to get all of those people to work together to enter into those agreements to provide that funding to actually get results for the people on transit, on housing, on infrastructure because that is what people want? It is back to the beginning. They want results.

RD: Ms. Chow, same question to you.

OC: Experience matters. When I was a Member of Parliament, I worked closely with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Big City Mayors’ Caucus to push for the gas tax from the transfer from the federal government to the city. We now have five cents on the permanent transfer of this gas tax. We need more, absolutely. We also said that we need to make sure that it rises with inflation, and that was a year-and-a-half’s, two-years’ campaign, and we were able to have the gas tax rise with inflation so that we get a bit more predictable, long-term funding. We need a lot more. It is never just being ourselves alone pushing. We need to work with other city mayors, and I have the experience to do so, and I have a record of delivery.

One other area in the federal government is that I have worked across the aisle with the minister of immigration at the time to crack down on crooked immigration consultants, and we were able to have the bill passed through, and, again, you know, the minister at the time in his introduction of the bill thanked me for the work.

In the provincial government, I have also done it. I started a children’s nutrition program when I was school trustee, expanded it across the city when I became the city councillor. Now, it is a provincial program. It is across the province, and the city has now has partnership with the province where the provincial government provides funding support on this very excellent program. I gave done it before. I know I can do it again, and, absolutely, experience matters.

Now, Mr. Tory said that it is about relationships. It is not just about relationships. If you look at the track record, when he was in Queen’s Park, I have not seen anything that was beneficial to the City of Toronto being delivered, and that is not good enough. Track records matter. Results matter. I have the experience to get things done and work with the provincial and the federal government.

RD: You will now have two minutes to debate the issue of relationships with other levels.

JT: One of the elements that I think has been missing today because there is a person missing is something that I think people really should focus on in this election campaign and when it come to those kinds of relationships you talked about because I think it starts with relationships with the city council and then goes there to relationships—not only with the other governments but also with the business community, with unions, with non-profit groups and so on.

We have in Doug Ford a person who referred not long ago to the city councillors as “monkeys.” He indicated his desire was so strong to have the mayor’s job which he was not seeking at the time that he said, “The sooner he could get out of town and go to Chicago, the better.” Now, he is a candidate for mayor. He told the premier of this province to “grow up.” I do not really think that kind of approach is going to work very well when it comes to dealing with what you talked about, and I think people have a clear choice in this election because they know in their heart of hearts, I think, that we have got to get those governments and the city council working together, bringing them together. We have got to get those other governments on side and all the other players. And that the kind of approach that calls people “monkeys” and tells premiers to “grow up” is just not going to work.

OC: Mr. Tory, may I come in?

RD: You can step in here. You can have the other minute, Olivia.

OC: Right. The other minute. Mr. Tory, when you had your best chance, when you were the leader of the Conservative Party at Queen’s Park, you said that the provincial Liberal budget was too “Toronto-centred” when in fact Toronto was receiving too much money. With friends like this, who needs our enemies, right? And also when you have a chance, you said that in your election platform that you want to ship 5,000 jobs, 10% of the jobs, to outside Toronto. That is 5,000 jobs you want to ship out there because you think that other small municipalities should benefit. You know, what you have shown in the past is that when you had the position of power, when you were able to be at Queen’s Park, over and over again you did not deliver any results for Toronto. You did not stand up for Toronto, and that is your track record. I consistently stand up for this city. That is what we need as a mayor.

RD: That is time, Ms. Chow. Our second question from the audience this afternoon is directed to Olivia Chow: What will you do as mayor to promote the financially strapped arts in this city? And they give some examples here: Visual art, dance, music, Canadian books and films.

OC: That is an excellent question. As a visual artist, I have always thought that the arts give us a sense of identity, bring us together and lift us up, and it allows us to see the world and our city in a different place. We are from many different parts of the world, but the arts allow us all to live together in harmony. It allows us to bring all our cultures and heritages together and connect with each other and create something beautiful and new. That is what the arts can do, and I have always supported the arts.

In this election, I pledge that we would increase the Toronto Arts funding to $25 per capita. We are way behind Montréal. Montréal is $55 per capita, and the money that we can have is through the funds from people that put up the billboards; if the billboard funds can just rise with inflation, that would produce the funds for increasing the grants in the Toronto Arts Council.

I would also start a commission, a mayor’s commission for public art. There are a lot of very, very generous donors that want to purchase art, and this art can then be put into public spaces, like parks. We can then take that beautiful sculpture. We can put it in this park, and we would be able to also provide some enjoyment for the people. It is good for the donor. It is also good for the city.

Lastly, I believe we need to make sure that all neighbourhoods can participate. There are a lot of artists that cannot afford to live in this city or in an area that they want, so we need to spread the art outside to as many areas as possible to all across the city and make sure that artists have enough funds themselves and a place affordable to live.

RD: That is time. Mr. Tory: Same question to you.

JT: Well, I am very committed to this sector both because I think it is an important sector for us to be able to express ourselves, and I think it brings us together in many respects and, also, it is a huge industry. It is a huge industry if you add up all of the different jobs that exist in all the different aspects of the arts and cultural industries across the city. So I think there are a number of reasons to be very supportive of it.

And, by the way, I think the $25 target is getting close to being achieved. It is helped along by the existence now of the billboard tax that was put in place, and I think it will get us there. But I have said in my own arts and culture platform that I am willing to look at other ways to move us there and then to move beyond that because, in fact, while we have been waiting, I think, the $25 target was set when I was running for mayor 11 years ago. Only just now are we getting close and, in the meantime, as Olivia said, some of the other cities have moved to much higher targets, including Montréal and others. I think part of what we are going to have to do in order to both find the source of funding and also to sort of take full advantage of this in every respect is to connect the creative economy to the creative sector, and I think that is going to be an effort we are going to make because the two are very much interlinked in terms of the economy of the city. I have said I would establish a music office. Music—as film did 25 years ago—represents a huge opportunity for us to grow. We have a huge embedded music production and performance music talent base here, but what we now have to do is turn ourselves into music city because Calgary is out there saying they are going to do it.

The last thing we want to do—because there is a lot that goes with that in terms of, again, both cultural activity but also economic activity—is to look at spaces for arts. I mean there are just not the spaces now where a lot of artists can do their work. We have all kinds of vacant storefronts. We have seen them in different places now with the ebb and flow of the economy. We now give a rebate to people to take account of the fact that those stores are vacant. We should be looking at better, more creative ways, including with arts, to deploy that.

And last but not least, I am a big supporter of the Block by Block local arts initiative undertaken by the Toronto Arts Council which tries to help take art to be more local. In other words, encourage grassroots art.

RD: That is time on that issue. You will now have two minutes to debate the issue of this culture funding.

OC: I talked about finding space for artists, whether through Artscape, which is a very successful organization, and we can provide some support for art spaces such that if there are spaces that the City of Toronto has, we can use some of those empty places so Artscape can establish—and I worked very closely with them right at the beginning when they were looking for a space. At the time, I was a city councillor. I said to Artscape that with one dollar a year, they would be able to use the Gibraltar Point which is the old island school. And, from there, they were able to establish one of the first artists places where they could practice. We need to do a lot more of that, and we also need to create some affordable housing because artists, by and large, are not—their income level is quite low, so I would pledge to create some affordable housing.

RD: Mr. Tory, I will give you the next 60 seconds.

JT: Sure. I do not think you are going to find that there is a huge debate. I think we are both people who have a track record, and I certainly have had a keen personal interest in this as a volunteer, whether it is with a whole bunch of different organizations—the film festival itself, the Canadian Art Foundation. Barb, my wife—I am proud to say—has been the vice chair of the Canadian Stage. I think we have been people who have been not only involved in this—because I think involvement as a private citizen tells you a lot about somebody’s interest in this—but also, you know, I have been an advocate for it.

I think what we need to do is, yes, find the tools that are going to help the arts community through the grants program and otherwise to be stronger and to make more of an investment and to link together the creative economy with the creative sector. We also need to have the government not be an obstacle. The film industry has been helped immensely by the fact there is somebody whose responsibility it is to get the government out of the way wherever it can and allow people to get on with the business of making films which employs all kinds of creative people. We have not been so good in a lot of the other areas where there are obstacles put in peoples’ way, and I think that that is part of the music office mandate, and I think we have got to have the whole government understand that this is an important industry and that it is an important part of who we are, and we need to get the government out of the way.

RD: That is time. This will be our final question before closing statements and, again, this comes from the audience this afternoon. A lot has been made about the divide between Toronto’s downtown core and bordering regions, like Etobicoke and Scarborough, with some feeling that this city has been fractured. Are these parts of the city really that different, and how would you bridge the perceived divide? And John, you start this question.

JT: Well, I think one of the great—it is actually a privilege to run for public office. People write these articles about the two of us often out debating more often than others, but, having said all that, we are out doing this, but it is actually a joy, and part of the joy is not that you meet thousands of people but that you also get to see every nook and cranny of the city. And, yes, areas of the city within the City of Toronto, within Scarborough, within Etobicoke and so on are very different, but, at the same time, I think people are getting more cognizant of the fact that we are one city. The amalgamation debate was a long time ago, and people sort of remember it, and they have some certain resentments about the outcome. But in the end, I think they know we are one city now. But I think that we have to work at that, and I think it starts with leadership. Again, I draw the contrast to you of the style that has been deliberately employed by Doug and Rob Ford where they deliberately, as recently as yesterday, you know, kind of encouraged dissent and resentment between downtown and some other part of the city. That has got to stop. That has got to stop. I have said, you know—I mean even look at his answer with respect to the Pride Parade. It is the same thing. You know, what possible reason could he have as a person who is being asked in his capacity as the leader of the city as to why he would not march in the Pride Parade? And he gave one of those answers that was kind of some-of-my-best-friends-are-gay answers where he sort of said, “Well, you know, I write them a cheque, and I go down there and kind of hang around on the sidewalk and watch it.” No, no, you are the leader of the city. You are the leader for everybody, so I think it starts with that.

I had one other idea that I will mention in the time left to me. I would actually take the city council over the course of a year out to each of the old constituent municipalities once a year and have an informal meeting. I think there are impediments that stand in the way of a formal meeting, including technology, where they would actually listen to people from that part of town and then go out in the afternoon and see things in that part of town, see the Scarborough General Hospital where they have 1967 operating rooms. It is not a civic responsibility, but people from Etobicoke should know about that because we do not accept that kind of thing. So those are some of the kinds of thoughts I have on that.

RD: That is time. Ms. Chow, same question to you.

OC: Well, Mr. Tory has said that he really disagreed with Mr. Ford, both Fords. He donated to Mr. Doug Ford’s election campaign and then Mr. Rob Ford’s campaign, so I do not know, but your policy, both Mr. Ford’s and Mr. Tory’s policy, leave entire neighbourhoods behind. If you think about what is happening in our city, one out of three kids live in poverty. That is 29%, and it has grown in the last four years. And, by and large, a lot of them live in the suburbs. These are the neighbourhoods that need and that are crying out for assistance, and they need help right now. That is why I said that every person counts. We need to start investing in what matters most to them—buses; light rapid transit within four, five years; food for the kids when the kids go to school; after-school programs for their children; good jobs for their young people, so they have a sense of hope and do not feel that they are trapped in a cycle of poverty because many of them do feel that way.

I am the only candidate in this election talking about those neighbourhoods that have been left behind. I have concrete proposals, specific ideas, and yet we have not heard anything, any investment, any ideas, specific targets on how to deal with those areas that are being left behind. And that is not fair. That is not the kind of city we have. It should not be. They have been left behind for four years already. It is enough. It is time we invest in them. It is time that we create a much fairer, more caring city, a better city for everyone, no matter which neighbourhood they live in.

RD: Now time for two minutes to debate this issue.

JT: I referred today while we have been standing here to investing in programs for kids and families, and we have talked a lot today about transit. You and I have some different ideas on that, and I think that there are some big holes in what we have talked about in terms of what you say about bringing transit right now. I even have and I can pull it out, but I will not waste the time. I could pull it out and read it to you. You have said over and over again about how you are going to deliver things right now, and yet in an interview with Matt Galloway—he, by the way, Matt Galloway, CBC, is not involved in this election campaign, is non-partisan—described what you were talking about in terms of how you would finance your transit as he said, “Isn’t this some kind of a shell game?” That is what he said to you.

OC: Mr. Tory, he actually said your plan had failed everywhere else in terms of transit plans, transit funding. He actually said that very clearly, and he asked you several questions which you would not answer. I recall that interview very clearly. It was a good four minutes of interchange about your transit plan, your transit funding plan, which is identical to Mr. Ford’s. What you are saying is “Let’s borrow billions of dollars for the downtown subway relief line. Let’s borrow billions of dollars for this track, and, somehow, somewhere, sometime later that money will materialize.” You and I know it does not work.

JT: Well, just to address that, in the end, the tax increment financing, which has worked in many places around North America and has been successful, is founded on the notion that the city is going to grow. In the last 13 years, this city attracted—thank goodness—$32 billion in development, $25 billion residential, $7 billion commercial. That included three or four years that were in the deepest recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s. So, if you ask me whether I have the confidence that we are going to get the investment and that I am going to, as mayor, lead a government with the other governments to go and get it and make sure it comes here so that a small portion of the revenue coming from that development to build SmartTrack is going to come, yes, I do.

OC: Do you have a plan B if it does not work? What is plan B?

JT: I can tell you SmartTrack will be built.

OC: If it does not work, what are you going to do? How are you going to manage it?

RD: That is time on that segment. It is time for closing statements. Olivia Chow, you have two minutes to present yours.

OC: Thank you. Thank you for being here today. Our city is at a crossroads, and you will have a major decision to make on how to improve public transit and cut gridlock. I have the plans and the know-how to get people moving faster and sooner. Not in ten years from now, but right now. We have a clear choice. The other two candidates want to continue the policies that have left huge numbers of people and neighbourhoods behind. With me as your mayor, everyone counts. You will see investment in people right now, especially, those that need it the most.

The problem with elections is often the truth gets hidden. You need to know the complete truth, but there are too many questions that Mr. Tory would not answer: How many homes will have to be torn down to build Mr. Tory’s transit scheme? What would residents do when Mr. Tory bulldozes over their neighbourhood because it will happen under his plan? And how many kilometres of tunneling are we talking about? Will there be 12 kilometers of heavy rail that has to go underground? Is that what a plan is? That is $300 million per kilometre, and how much more money would we have to pay in? There is no plan B. If it failed, what are we going to do? So I think it is important that Mr. Tory start being honest about how his financial scheme would work. Our city needs a mayor whose plan is real, who knows the specifics and has a track record to deliver the results. I am that mayor, and I am looking for your vote so we can start building a better city, a more caring city right now. Join with me. Elect me as your new mayor. Thank you so much.

RD: Mr. Tory, two minutes for your closing remarks as well.

JT: Like most of you—and I do want to thank you for your attention today—I love this city. It is a remarkable place if you think about it. All of the objective rankings consistently take this city that is not the oldest and is not the biggest high everywhere else on the list of those cities that are livable and that are great places to do business.

It is with devotion to the city and to that quality of life and to our values as Torontonians and as Canadians that caused me to decide to run for mayor. Yes, I think that a competent, collaborative, accountable approach to the leadership of this city was very much needed and is very much needed after four long years of division and chaos at Toronto City Hall. I think if we do not resolve that issue and go back to something that is competent and reliable and stable and sensible that we run the risk of doing real damage to the city, with respect to its economic prospects and its reputation but also its social and political fabric. I think people are yearning for results more so than demanding them. They are yearning for them because they know in their heart of hearts that what has been going on with all the division and the chaos is stopping us from being as great as we can be. They know that it is stopping us from building that stronger, fairer Toronto that we all want. I know how to get those results on transit— yes, being bold and with a sense of urgency to do something big. But I think that is what we have to do with traffic—using common sense to move quickly to make things better—and with jobs to sell and actually know how to do it and how to attract those jobs. And I will work with the council and with those other levels of government because I know that is what you have to do to get things done.

I said I was running for this job out of devotion for the city, and, you know, I have been out there for the past eight months, as has Olivia, earning, I hope, your trust each and every day because I think people have to see a candidate earning the trust of somebody who wants to be their leader. I am 60 years old. I do not look at having this job as a stepping stone to anything else. I want to go down there and perform public service which is what it is supposed to be all about—to build a city that is going to go from good to great in the coming years. And I hope I can have your support. Thank you.

RD: That is time. I would just like to, personally, thank both Ms. Chow and Mr. Tory for taking the time to debate the issues. We appreciate it, and we appreciate you taking time out of your afternoon today.

Note of Appreciation by Ted Griffith, First Vice President and President-Elect, Empire Club of Canada¶

Thank you very much, Andrea. Thank you, Mr. Tory, Ms. Chow. This has been very incredible for us at the Empire Club. A couple people to thank in addition to our debaters, speakers. The change we went through this morning, very late, required more than just the removal of a podium and one place at the lunch table, and I want to thank our staff, Jehan and Jenna and the volunteers for the incredible job they did. I also am glad I am not the President of the Empire Club at this particular time, as my colleague, Andrea, had to do a major bit of media relations work in speaking for the Club. Thank you very much, Andrea, for doing that.

What I would like to do is thank our guests for their debate today. I think at the table I heard John saying 31 debates so far. I think we take that for granted in Toronto. I wish we had that same kind of political discourse and debate at the federal and provincial level. I think we would all do better for it. I know it is tough for the candidates, and I thank you for being here.

I have for you each a gift, and that is a copy of our Red Book, this one from 2010–2011. It is a very special Red Book, and I will tell you why in just a second. We publish the Red Book every season, and it is a record of every word spoken at the Club and is delivered to every public library in Canada, every consulate, every Canadian embassy around the world.

This is the official record of everything that is spoken at the Empire Club, and we have produced this every year since 1903. So I have a copy of this. First of all, you will get also copies next year because this debate will be in this book, so every word you said is actually written down and being handed to you. And, of course, one of you will be, one of you is highly likely to be mayor at that point, so you will be able to look back on that, and we also hope you will come back as mayor should you be elected as mayor and speak to the Club again. There is a very important speech in here, a very important speech. It is on page 24. It is where a certain candidate for mayor, Councillor Rob Ford, spoke at the Club on September 28th, 2010 in his run for mayor. It is very important that you have these words to carry you forward in the future. Thank you very much.

Concluding Remarks by Andrea Wood

Thanks, Ted. I would like to extend a few final thanks before you all head on your way. First of all, thank you to our generous sponsors. Our event sponsor today was Accenture. Thank you. Our VIP reception sponsor is Campbell Strategies.

I would also like to thank the National Post as our print media sponsor and Van Valkenberg for providing our AV. Please, follow us on Twitter at @Empire_Club, and visit us online at www.empireclub.org. Thank you all for coming. We hope to see you again soon at some of the exciting upcoming events that are advertised in the brochures that are on your tables. Thank you all, and we will see you soon.