What makes the Spec an authority?

I found the statement “The Spectator is a better authority than most on the proposed Hamilton LRT …” both encouraging and alarming. Encouraging because, here at last, we have an entity that can tell us what the truth and facts are (the theme of your editorial) related to the LRT. At the same time I was alarmed that a media outlet would be so presumptuous as to think it has the best command of the facts.

So here is my request — no, my challenge: Please tell us, the “unauthoritative” ones, on what facts and truths you base your support for the LRT. Please cover all the relevant issues: What problem needs to be solved, now and in the future, what city-wide transit options have been considered, what evaluation criteria (cost, disruption to the existing infrastructure, compatibility with 21st century technology like autonomous vehicles, etc.) were used and why LRT?

Please don’t bother to repeat the oft-used non-reason for the LRT: “We can’t forgo the $1 billion gift.” That is not a sufficient reason to tear the city in half. At the risk of digressing, we must remember that Trojans also thought they could not forgo accepting a gift (from the Greeks). There are times when, “looking a gift horse in the mouth” is warranted and not in bad taste. Milan Gacesa, Dundas