Article content continued

GURNEY:

Ford can kill two birds with one stone, since making government smaller makes his supporters happy. Nothing paradoxical about that. Further, I dispute that the “stature” of a government must be directly linked to the size of its workforce and budgets, rather than its accomplishments (or that a constantly “built upon” government will translate into improving lives for us all). The problem in Toronto has been the perception —whether accurate or not is open to debate — that despite the fact that the government and its costs to the taxpayer kept going up and up, the quality of life you speak of was not increasing accordingly, but was in fact declining. That’s where the anti-government anger comes from. People are, I think, fundamentally reconciled to paying for services or for government institutions, whether we’re talking libraries in a specific city or the nation’s armed forces. But they need to be convinced that their dollars are providing something, and it’s hard to do that while constantly asking for more without offering more in return. But I do generally agree with you that Ford, having promised both a smaller government and no reduction in services, is going to have to go with one or the other (and I suspect I know which option we’d both choose). As we’ve discussed earlier, I think you and I are in broad agreement that due to his personality, he’ll probably find that damned hard to do. Those around him in the circle of power? Less so.

GOLDSBIE:

Asking for more without offering more in return? Like increasing user fees while cutting bus routes and closing a library?

GURNEY:

I can only imagine the horror Ford feels at the prospect of having to make up the few dozen votes that might cost him … but probably won’t.