Flip-flop on Greenbelt is Ford in a nutshell
Trial balloon on housing leaves Tories deflated
Thus far, for want of many specific Progressive Conservative policy proposals, the Liberal line on Doug Ford has essentially been to brace for catastrophe: trust that no matter what he says, he will fire everyone and cut everything and destroy all that you hold dear, because he’s Doug Ford and that’s what Doug Ford does. Oh, also he’s Donald Trump. The Liberals know no other way of campaigning. They were comparing Patrick Brown to Trump way back in October.
On Monday, though, Ford unveiled a specific, bold, novel and controversial policy approach on the major issue of affordable housing in the Greater Toronto Area — something wonks and pundits and opposition politicians could really sink their teeth into. Sadly it was a tremendously dumb policy: to develop “a big chunk” of the Greenbelt, while somehow tacking other compensatory bits of land onto it to ensure it didn’t shrink in overall size.
It was the worst of all things Ford: uninformed (there is no need for this); confusing (where exactly are they going to find all this replacement land?); a bit sketchy (the Liberals released a video of Ford saying the idea came from big developers); and ultimately not worth the napkin it was drawn on the back of. On Tuesday, citing public feedback, Ford abandoned the plan and promised to be the Greenbelt’s fiercest protector.
“I govern through the people, not through government,” he explained in a statement. (He is running to lead Canada’s second-largest government.) Campaign spokesperson Melissa Lantsman was reduced to characterizing it as a great leadership moment.
It was anything but. And you hardly need to go beyond the premise to see why.
“Everyone knows housing costs (are) through the roof and there’s no more property available to build housing in Toronto or the GTA,” Ford told reporters in Whitby on Monday. That’s just a silly thing to say, not least in Whitby. In a 2016 report, the Neptis Foundation pegged the amount of land set aside for development in Whitby at 2,740 hectares. That’s the equivalent of a 5.2-km square. It’s one-and-a-half Pearson airports. Brampton, Vaughan, Hamilton and Milton all have far more land available, and if GO service keeps improving as promised it’s all going to look ever more compelling as a place to call home.
“Neptis researchers have estimated that only about 10,800 of the 56,200 hectares (in the GTHA) was developed between 2006 and 2016; less than 20% of the total supply,” the report reads. “That leaves 80% of the designated land supply to accommodate another 15 years’ worth of growth to 2031 and possibly beyond.”
Even in Toronto proper, the idea that there’s no more room to build is laughable. There are huge neighbourhoods of single-family homes in this city that are served by two- or three-storey retail on major roads, in some cases with subways running underneath them. (Hello, Danforth!) Everyone knows the city has to get denser, everyone knows where that density ought to go, and developers are lined up around the block to make it happen — to buy up low-rise retail and single family homes and replace them with something bigger. They don’t have to be behemoths, and density doesn’t have to mean Hong Kong or Tokyo: cities like Vancouver, Boston and San Francisco are considerably more densely populated than Toronto, and no one thinks of them as remotely unlivable.
The problem, vastly oversimplified, is that planning and zoning regulations, governance structures and righteous militant NIMBYism make it very, very difficult to put the density that everyone realizes we need in the places where everyone realizes it should go. If Ford wanted to launch a specific, bold, novel and controversial policy approach on affordable housing in the GTA, he could propose the province cut through all that and — for example — assume the authority to overrule local planning authorities along major transit lines.
It’s not something I support in principle; the move in recent years, which I support in principle, is to give municipalities more control rather than less. But Toronto is doing such a terrible job I’m certainly open to alternatives. It would at least suggest the premier-in-waiting had given this important issue a moment’s thought.
When it comes to the Fords, I learned years ago not to hope for the best or to try to look on the bright side. Down that path lies only disappointment. Tories who spent a solid day trying to rationalize this turkey of an idea only to see it decapitated should probably get used to that slightly nauseous feeling they’re experiencing.
EVENIN TORONTO PROPER, THE IDEA THAT THERE’S NO MORE ROOM TO BUILD IS LAUGHABLE.