Councillor controversy

Re: Ford’s use of notwithstanding clause is what Canada needs, Conrad Black, Sept. 15

Conrad Black rightly points out that compared to the use of the notwithstanding clause the number of councillors on Toronto’s city council is simply a technical issue. Nevertheless, it is of interest to note that C. Northcote Parkinson pointed out many years ago that if there are too many councillors sitting around the table nothing gets decided. He judged that if the number of councillors exceeds approximately 21 a council becomes inefficient and he termed this number to be the “Coefficient of inefficiency”.

Why perpetuate inefficiency in a council? With a reduced number of councillors in Toronto the sizes of the remaining councillors’ staffs could be increased to deal with increased work loads.

Alan Goodacre, Ottawa

You are drunk on Ford KoolAid. Every columnist, editorial writer and every letter writer — even Conrad Black — “think” alike. No opposing opinions, no questions, no worries. It’s just perfectly fine, admirable even, that Ford is using the notwithstanding atom bomb to disrupt a free and fair democratic election.

The constitutional right to a free and fair democratic election (Charter, S.3) cannot be “nonethelessed”. If the Court of Appeal, or any later Toronto citizen goes to court to void the election, turns the issue into “right to vote”, there will be utter, total chaos. But I guess that’s also OK by you.

Anyhow, change the name to the Ford Post, so no one gets confused.

Robert Burton, Toronto

CHRIS YOUNG / THE CANADIAN PRESS Protesters continue their presence outside Queen’s Park as the Ontario Legislature holds a midnight session to debate a bill that would cut the size of Toronto city council from 47 representatives to 25, in Toronto on Monday.