Today Thu Fri
It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 10:00 PM EST on February 22, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
6°/0°		 It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 10:00 PM EST on February 23, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
6°/1°		 It is forcast to be Chance of Rain at 10:00 PM EST on February 24, 2012
Chance of Rain
4°/-1°

12 Comments

news

Newsstand: July 29, 2011

By Brendan Ross

kyranewsstandtrain.jpg
Illustration by Kyra Kendall/Torontoist.


It’s just another Friday morning in what feels more and more like Wonderland. In the news: Public deputations are done in the longest meeting in city council history, cyclists get one less friend in the city, and Maple Leaf Gardens’ owners are told not to use the name “Maple Leaf Gardens.”

If you’re reading this right now, it’s probably because you got a good night’s sleep in a nice, comfortable bed. Not so for the throngs of people that waited through the night at City Hall to give the executive committee their two cents, not to mention politicians and journalists (including Torontoist‘s Hamutal Dotan, who is live-blogging the chaos). Yep, through the night. And they’ve got photos to prove it. On the eve of a long weekend, to boot. And after countless deputations, a whopping two people spoke supporting service cuts efficiencies. So what’s the deal? Is Ford Nation a PR invention, as some have speculated? Or just a bunch of cowards?
In case you haven’t been following what is now the longest meeting in council history, between zingers by deputants, a speech from a sock puppet, death threats against the mayor, Margaret Atwood merch and masks, and the now-legendary #yellygranny “modest proposals”, our municipal government has been by far the craziest party in town so far. And have any of the people’s opinions mattered to the mayor and right-wing councillors? Not a chance.
Bike-riding pinkos in the city have one less ally thanks to reckless behaviour, as a woman who was severely injured after being hit by a cyclist running a red light is now calling for licensing and insurance for all cyclists. Seriously, we know this post has been widely circulated by now, but it’s still worth reading. So here it is again, in case you just missed it.
With season after season of embarrassing losses, you might think nothing could get under the skin of Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, owner of Toronto’s loveable hockey losers and former owner of Maple Leaf Gardens. But as Ryerson University and Loblaw are discovering, there is something: money, and the threat of not making as much of it. The former Gardens owner, which sold the building to Loblaw in 2004 (which in turn partnered with Ryerson in 2009), is seeking an injunction to prevent Ryerson from using the name “Maple Leaf Gardens” and from holding concerts in the arena, which could cut into the pocket-lining smaller concert business at the Air Canada Centre. Considering concerts are about the only time Torontonians leave the Air Canada Centre feeling good about life, the injunction is probably a good idea.

Filed under: ,

Report error Send a tip

Comments

  • http://blog.yasmary.com yaz

    I'm not necessarily opposed to the insurance & licensing of cyclists… but it feels like a reactive solution to a problem. How about the city become more proactive, and educate people on the roads better? It also wouldn't help if they started fining people who don't stop at red lights.

  • http://profiles.google.com/artscanner Bruce MacLean

    How about insurance and licensing for pedestrians? And definitely licensing for parents. And lets go back to licensing to buy liquor, beer and wine.

  • http://twitter.com/natekelly Nathan Kelly

    Licensing will do nothing. Human stupidity always finds a way, and a small minority of cyclists will continue to ignore the rules. Just like a small minority of motorists and pedestrians will continue to ignore the rules. Sad, but that's life.

  • torontothegreat

    easy on the hyperbole there :P

  • torontothegreat

    Licensing would at the very least be a way to identify cyclists who commit stupid acts.

  • Joel Phillips

    I just don't see why people get so fundamentalist about the red-light thing.  Traffic lights were designed to regulate motorised vehicles.  Jumping a red light in a car is pretty much always dangerous or inconsiderate.  Motorised vehicles are fast, unmanouverable, heavy, afford their drivers crappy sight-lines and can't easily be picked up and walked off the street if their drivers accidentally find themselves inconveniencing someone with the right of way.  None of these things apply to someone cautiously riding her bike through a red light when there's no traffic crossing the other way.  

    To criticise the cyclist for doing that on the basis that other cyclists jump red lights less cautiously and idiotically cause danger or inconvenience to others misses the point.  What we should care about is the dangerous or inconsiderate driving and riding.  We take a relative approach to traffic laws all the time.  If I go 20 kph over the speed limit in my car on a highway on a clear day in a well-maintained car in light traffic, I don't think anyone's going to get that upset.  If I do it at 4pm along a snow-covered street that passes a school, I ought to be jailed.

  • istoronto

    This licensing scheme hasn't  been thought out very well. At what age do we license a cyclist? 19? 16? 4? In my neighbourhood, most school aged children bike to school. Do we charge them or their parents, for biking without a license? Will children be exempt or will they be band from cycling until they become of age?

    Providing  separate, safe and connected bike lanes seems to be a much better solution than, taxing and ticketing people for choosing a mode of transportation that is good for the environment, road congestion and health of the rider.

  • http://blog.yasmary.com yaz

    Agree with you on this. The logistics of licensing are huge.

    That said, the outlook on bike lanes is not really great right now, so licensing seems like an approach this current political climate might accept. And it might have mostly positive results. (I could be very wrong though.)

  • http://blog.yasmary.com yaz

    I feel that the fundamentalism is a result of a bigger problem: bad drivers/riders.

    The solution is more complicated, doesn't have quick results and is too long term: educating our population.

  • http://twitter.com/MarkJull Mark Jull

    People might be interested in the city's own history with licensing cyclists: http://www.toronto.ca/cycling/…

  • torontothegreat

    What if you required a license to professionally ride a bike (re: couriers) or to ride on major arteries? This wouldn't affect kids.

  • John Duncan

    I don't really think it's a small minority, whether we're talking about cyclists, motorists or pedestrians. I'd say the vast majority of motorists speed, turn right on reds without first stopping, do rolling stops at stop signs, and cross the line into the crosswalk.

    I'm not sure its so much human stupidity, as human impatience and risk compensation. People will do what they feel is safe (which on a bike apparently includes not stopping at various signals) and convenient (which as a pedestrian includes not walking a km out of your way just to get to a signal).

    Like you say, the answer isn't licencing. It's building places that do a better job signalling risk to people and providing them with infrastructure that actually meets their needs and habits. Pretending otherwise, as our current political leaders do, is dishonest and disgraceful.