Article content continued

Gurney: It’s a good time to ask the question. In Saturday’s Post, Peter Kuitenbrower put together a story (with accompanying graphic) that listed six TTC “dream projects.” And I’m for dreaming impossible dreams. But what struck me as most fanciful of all was the fact that even if every last one of these six dream projects were hand-waved into existence tomorrow, Toronto’s would still have a completely inadequate transit system. So Chris is right. With service cuts ahead, not dreams coming true, people are going to be steamed.

I think it’s important to channel the protests in two different ways. For customer service issues directly relating to TTC staff — rude or illegal behaviour, sleeping on the job — I’m all for the shame-by-camera approach. It’s controversial, I know, but I have no objection to it. But for the grander, more top-level problems – the ones that are the fault of the politicians, not TTC front-line staff — I admit I’m at a bit of a loss. I’m not sure how you can protest and agitate your way into more money, and that’s the TTC’s problem. It needs more of everything and can’t even afford what it has.

Goldsbie: On Friday night, Post Books Editor Mark Medley tipsily tweeted, “So the TTC is cutting service AND raising fares? Can’t believe I’m saying this but maybe it’s time to privatize. Couldn’t be worse than now.” To me, that’s an expression of unjustifiable acquiescence, a suggestion that we give up on public transit simply because our current municipal leadership neither values nor encourages it. Medley’s sentiment isn’t an especially widespread one, but it does raise the question of what is the appropriate response — emotionally, intellectually, and tactically — to political powers that insist the 23¢/day personal vehicle tax was an unmanageable burden on citizens, whereas a 20¢/day transit fare hike coupled with a thoroughly less pleasant travel experience is not. So what would I do to protest? I’d share the video of TTC Chair Karen Stintz explaining, at July’s Council meeting, that it was imperative for the City to spend money removing the Jarvis Street bike lanes because her North Toronto constituents found the handful of minutes added to their afternoon commute to be simply intolerable. Passionately quoting a resident she met on the campaign trail, Stintz declared, “It is not a four-minute delay. It is not a five-minute delay. It’s the difference of me being home at 6:00 to have dinner with my kids.” The lives of non-motorists apparently do not merit the same consideration.