Note to Rob Ford: either deal with Occupy Toronto, or shutup

For a week or so I have been reading articles like this one where Rob Ford says that the Occupation at St. James Park is illegal and at some point the law will be enforced. When asked at what point the law will be enforced he says that it will be soon. Then he claims that they will likely go away by themselves anyway.

I understand Mr. Ford’s dilemma. It is the same problem facing every municipal leader that is unfortunate enough to have to deal with one of these Occupation protests. They are clearly committing a crime by squatting on public land, but if police are sent in to enforce the law the situation will be uncontrollable by the elected officials. Regardless of how much blame the mayor actually deserves, it is guaranteed that if violence ensues the mayor will be blamed.

The problem is that by saying the police will eventually be sent in but not saying when, Rob Ford is likely breathing life into the protesters.

Many of the protesters already despise Rob Ford (if their signs are any indication), so by being critical of the protest Rob Ford is setting him up to be the perfect vocal point of the Occupiers. Rob Ford is providing an enemy that is not abstract. He could become the embodiment of the great evil power that must be defied.

At the same time by not actually doing anything about it, Rob Ford is making it appear that defiance is not just possible, it is easy.

“I can have all the fun of standing up to the man (i.e. Rob Ford),” thinks one inclined to join the protest, “but without actually having to risk a baton to the head or a night in jail.”

Rob Ford needs to stop pussyfooting around and either be the man of action we all thought he was, or stop saying anything on the issue at all.

Rob Ford's move not to bid for Olympic Games was right

The best concrete thing that Rob Ford has done so far is to nix Toronto's bid for the Olympics. In most cases hosting the Olympics is ran on a huge lost and even the more successful model of private funding may be impossible with modern security concerns.

Steve Lafleur explains in this Huffington Post article:

To determine the conditions under which a city can run a successful Olympics, Torontonians should look to the two large North American cities that have recently run Olympic Games and did not lose money: Los Angeles and Atlanta. Vancouver can hardly be considered a success. The Olympics cost the province $925 million, and the city is on the hook for $700 million from the Olympic Village debacle. This does not include roughly $3.5 billion in infrastructure spending, and $1 billion dollars in security costs. Hopefully repaying those debts will take less than the 30 years it took Montreal to retire its Olympic debt.

Los Angeles succeeded because the games were privately funded (including venue construction), and the city shielded itself from financial liability. Atlanta followed a similar model, but was later criticized for over-commercializing the games. Given post-9/11 security concerns, it is questionable whether that model would even be viable. After all, $1 billion is a lot of advertising.

The Margaret Atwood Community Library

Or how about *The Warren Kinsella Library* ? Now, there's an idea . . . the buildings are built already, the computers in place, they're fully staffed . . . our existing libraries simply need concerned citizens of considerable means to stump up and help with the operating costs.Warren's latest column in the SUN about populism got me thinking. He's quick to point out how many concerned community