Ford must put $1B offer to council in writing
Coun. Ferguson and councillor-elect Clark want guarantee on using LRT funds elsewhere
Put it in writing.
That’s Coun. Lloyd Ferguson’s and Councillor-elect Brad Clark’s take on Premier Doug Ford’s commitment to let Hamilton use the $1 billion earmarked for LRT for other projects.
Ferguson, who labels himself a “conditional” LRT supporter, says verbal assurances and government responses to media questions aren’t enough for the newly elected city council to make a decision on.
“All that is, is chatter. We’ve got no document on this.”
Clark, who campaigned against LRT during the election, agrees.
“It would be very helpful if we had something in writing as to what the commitment is, how the money will flow, if there are restrictions, what’s the approval process.”
Clark says he appreciates and respects the public commitment Ford made during the spring provincial election to allow the new council to decide if it wants to stay the course on LRT or spend the money on other infrastructure or transit-related projects.
“But before council makes any determinations on where they want to go, I would assume … that we would like to have very clear indications from the government in writing in terms of what the options and alternatives are.”
That’s fine, says Conservative MPP Donna Skelly, who repeatedly has said Ford’s promise hasn’t changed.
“If council requests confirmation in writing … I would certainly follow through on it, but I haven’t heard anything. I haven’t had anyone asking anything.”
“The direction has to come from council,” Skelly says.
To be fair, the new council hasn’t taken office yet. That happens Dec. 3. And then a request for written confirmation would likely require a motion to be voted on and approved.
Clark says he’d consider putting forward such a motion. But he’d also like to hear the promise openly affirmed by a senior government official.
“I would love to hear directly from the minister of transportation and the deputy minister themselves, have them come and speak directly to council.”
According to Ferguson, a number of councillors view Mayor Fred Eisenberger’s election victory as a de facto referendum on LRT, even though Eisenberger downplayed the issue during the campaign.
But despite Eisenberger’s convincing win over his anti-LRT rival Vito Sgro (74,093 votes to 52,190), Ferguson notes it’s still not clear exactly what the province intends to do.
“Are they really going to offer us the $1 billion? Are they going to offer us something else? Are they going to take all the funding away?”
Those questions and rumours have been ricocheting around local political circles since Eisenberger’s win.
There’s talk the province is considering holding its own LRT plebiscite. There’s talk the PCs may kill the project altogether as part of their deficit-busting crusade.
There’s talk they might drastically reduce provincial funding, leaving the city to pick up the balance.
The latest scuttlebutt even has Ford coming to town to say the cost of the project is higher than expected and so the city needs to pitch in with a capital contribution of its own.
None of the rumours have been substantiated. The only substantive word from the province is the $1 billion is there for either the 14-kilometre light rail route between McMaster University and Eastgate Square or other infrastructure and transit projects.
To which Ferguson asks: Would the city really get $1 billion to spend on other projects or would the province deduct the $105 million already spent on LRT?
The Ancaster councillor readily admits he could drop his support for light rail depending on the Ford governments answer to that and other questions.
“Clearly if I can get a chunk of that money for Ancaster I’m going to give it some serious consideration.”
But right now the spending alternative is just too tentative and vague for his comfort.
“What are the rules around it?” Ferguson says. “There’s tons of questions on this. So that’s why my support (for LRT) is conditional. What’s the real deal from the province?”
It’s a good question, one that conspicuously requires a written detailed response.
Andrew Dreschel’s commentary appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. adreschel@thespec.com @AndrewDreschel 905-526-3495