Maple Leafs Inc. sticks it to Toronto again

Now you can’t exactly blame Maple Leafs Sports & Entertainment Inc. for mounting a sweet ride when it’s spread-eagled in front of them, but the more properties Leafs Inc. acquires at the expense of the taxpayer is disconcerting.

I don’t know about you, but watching Leafs Inc. grow even more prosperous and stinking rich off the backs of the bruised certainly isn’t “the passion that unites us all” in ol’ Sammy’s eyes.

That the average Toronto taxpayer will pay not once, not twice, but thrice to help fund the new soccer stadium to be built on the CNE fairgrounds and will ne’er see that money come back is irksome enough. That Leafs Inc. will assume far less financial risk than you and I and reap a huge chunk of the rewards long-term really boils my stew.

Toronto City Hall unwisely voted recently to commit $10 million towards the 20,000-seat stadium. I don’t suppose that cash might have benefited the TTC or Toronto’s non-existent affordable housing initiative. Hmm, let’s see . . . pick a public service that needs propping up in this city. For my money, soccer just doesn’t spring to the forefront.

That Toronto doesn’t actually have the funds and will have to borrow it makes this decision by the likes of Mayor David Miller and the majority of city councillors about as bone-headed as former Mayor Mel Lastman’s decision to build a subway line to nowhere in North York. So in fact, the $10 million throwaway by Miller’s government will actually cost us $16 million after interest is calculated over 20 years, according to the Toronto Star.

J’ai digress.

Not to be outdone on ventures that offer zero return for the investment, the federal government has committed to $27 million and the provincial government $8 million.

Meanwhile, Leafs Inc. will dole out $18 million towards the stadium’s construction and is said to be working on bringing a Major League Soccer franchise to the city to play there while sharing the facility with the Canadian Soccer Association.

I got nuthin’ against soccer. I don’t mind the game. I dig the World Cup and such. But if building a soccer stadium in Toronto is such a worthwhile venture to Leafs Inc., couldn’t they, along with other private investors, have paid for the whole she-bang on their own? Of course they could of.

But why when three levels of government are more than willing to bow down before “God’s Team”? It makes ya wonder.

Illustration by Trevor Turner

I have a feeling the people in Toronto will get a kick out of this: For those of you who don't know who André Boisclair is, he is in the running for the Parti Quebecois leadership.

Why is he important? Considering the Parti Quebecois hasn't had a leadership race in close to 20 years (recent past leaders such as Lucien Bouchard, Jacques Parizeau and Bernard Landry were nominated by the PQ) and that the Quebec Liberals would probably lose the next provincial election to a dead squirrel, it is more than likely we will end up with yet another Pequiste government.

Since the beginning of the PQ campaign, the 39-year-old Boisclair (described as being darkly handsome and openly gay) has benefited from a considerable lead in the public opinion polls. Here's the problem: The man has admitted to taking cocaine while a member of the Bouchard Cabinet!

Boisclair dismisses it as a youthful mistake, but are we all to accept that when the going got tough, he obviously couldn't perform up to snuff on his own and needed a little "pick-me-up”?

As if this wasn't enough, now the questions are pouring in. Some people have asked "where did he get the drugs?" or "where did he get high? At parties or on the job?" He refuses to answer, questioning the pertinence of these inquiries.

I for one would like to know if our potential future Premier has ties with organized crime. While I do not condone being a public servant and snorting coke, I sure as hell believe there is a difference between socially getting your nose dirty and opening up your desk drawer to get a jolt before an important meeting.

Some journalists from the English press have also asked these questions, but Boisclair dismisses them by pretending his hold on the English language isn't strong enough to nuance the situation. This is tough to swallow coming from a man who made a point of stating publicly that he studied at Harvard University in the U.S.

Well, there it is: Quebec is heading for the ultimate lesser of two evils. In one hand, a Liberal government led by man who has corporate ties and the deciding capabilities of a Post-It note in a hurricane (Jean Charest), and on the other, a bitter rogue gallery composed of union lapdogs led by a lying junkie (Boisclair). Oh, I gotta wear shades; the future’s too bright!

It’s understandable that the Toronto Police Service wants more officers. Toronto (and the GTA) have become rife with shootings, gangs have taken over parts of this once fair city, and beat cops are feeling the pressures. But to hold the city hostage by not doing their jobs correctly – ie: stepped up job action – is absolutely ridiculous.

If we didn’t need them, I would fire the lot of them then rehire only those who look ready to move forward in a constructive not abrasive manner.

The Police Services Board now has a new head honcho in Alok Mukherjee, who is a lot more conciliatory than good old chairwoman/Councillor Pam McConnell. The PSB issued a release on Oct. 19 saying the Toronto Police Association acted “unlawfully and crossed the line” by encouraging officers not to conduct routine patrols between calls.

How can the cops say they’re here to serve and protect when they’ve opted to park their cars between calls? How about an emergency situation? Why isn’t the Provincial Government mandating them back to work… better yet, slapping them back to work?

But it won’t be the safety of Toronto citizens that get cops back on the streets (with more of them to boot) it will be the fact it costs the city hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost revenue due to cops not ticketing as much – it’s costing the city about $500,000 a week in lost revenue. The cops write about 80,000 tickets a week.

The Police Services Act does not allow an officer to withdraw services, so it’s up to Chief Bill Blair to determine whether officers are violating the act. If you ask me, not going on patrols is pulling services. But what do I know?

Unless you’re proposing a new condo to obstruct people’s view of the lakeshore, the skyline… pretty much the entire city, Toronto City Council is always a few years behind. In this case, I write of city councillor’s proposed plan to count the homeless.

Everyone knows Toronto is its fair share of homeless – many not even from our fair city. On a recent walk downtown, I asked every person I gave change to where they were from. A guy and a girl were both from Montreal; another guy was from Rochester, NY, and a ton more from northern Ontario.

How is the City going to tackle such a mix? They will spend $90,000 to do it, and start the headcount Spring 2006. We already spend millions on the problem, what’s another $90 grand? Then findings of the report will be tabled by council’s last meeting before summer, the end of June.

The amount of time wasted doing one study after the other is one thing, but to then wait for who knows how long to get something done is the paralysis of this (and past) City Councils.

The go-ahead on the Street Needs Assessment took what seemed like forever. Assessing street needs and hopefully getting something done to help get people off the streets is a valiant mission, but the dillydally of city council keeps this positive move from ever moving forward.

We’ve ignored the situation for years because for some reason people think it violates the homeless’ rights. That’s interesting! How about my rights not to have my tax money spent on a plan that won’t get implemented?!

Wait a minute! You mean to tell me that a convicted murderer is being awarded $5,000 of what is surely Canadians’ money for being exposed to second-hand smoke while serving a life sentence for killing his wife and daughter? What the fuck is wrong with this country?!?!?!

It seems a federal court judge found that Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) failed to provide Vlado Maljkovich with a healthy environment (as mandated by law) while he was serving two life sentences (with no chance of parole for 14 years) at the Fenbrook Correctional Institution in Gravenhurst, Ontario.

CSC has 30 days to appeal the decision; and while they should, this is a perfect example of a case that should have been laughed out of court. Possibly even screamed out of court!

Last time I checked, both his wife and daughter are dead, and don’t have the luxury to complain about second-hand smoke. But the guy who killed them seems to have all the rights in the world to complain all the way to the federal court about smoke wafting into his non-smoking area thanks to a ventilation system.

In my opinion, smoke is too good for him. He should be gassed!

I don’t want to sound heartless, but that’s exactly the way this little late-day opinion is going to read. Someone I work with just lost her sister. Unexpectedly. I feel for her, I would hate to lose my brother, especially unexpectedly. But in the end we’re all going to die and must learn to live with the idea of our fragile mortality.

I remember being very young (less than ten) when my father filled me in on death. He said something along the lines of, “Son, I’m not going to be around forever. Young or old, we’re all going to die. Just like your pet rabbits, birds, fish, we all have a very limited amount of time here.”

That might sound a bit harsh, especially for a kid under ten years of age, but it’s the truth. Why sugarcoat the topic? Why dance around something that will affect someone more intensely the longer they wait before traversing such sensitive waters? I’ve never understood why parents coddle their young?

The notion of death also raises the question: Why do we feel so sad when someone dies? Are we sad for them, or are we sad for the loss we’re experiencing? We’ll never see that person again, never enjoy their company, never laugh and cry with them again. It really digs deep into our insecurities.

In the end, I gave her my condolences… She was very appreciative. I wish I could have said, “toughen up, lady!” I know this sounds cruel, but her sister (like her) was in her mid-80s so she lived a long life and her death should not have come as a surprise when considering people half her age die unexpectedly.

Before I start sounding like a Michael Coren lover, I will preface this opinion by saying I had the pleasure of working with Michael while producing the weekend shows on Newstalk 1010 CFRB where his show (weekdays 7 pm – 8 pm) continuously enlightens and enrages.

Michael, to anyone who reads his column in The Toronto Sun or listen to him on CFRB, can come across as a complete one-sided asshole. Granted, he can be one-sided but an asshole, I don’t think so. I’ve manned the phones of his show many times and spoken to him about a variety of things most people don’t have the pleasure of doing.

His views, although often contrary to mine, reflect my upbringing. My father, a devout Catholic (like Michael) brought me up Catholic. I was an Alter boy for almost a decade, and went on to study religion at the U of T. Religion fascinates me, which might explain my fascination with Michael, who many people think is as extreme as al-Qaeda.

His opinions are clear, his intellect fully intact, and his arguments, although we might find them very dated, are well thought out. His beliefs cannot be dismissed, or we might as well dismiss all other beliefs, including those of every man, woman and child in this country.

Michael is right when he brings up the Catholic-bashing that seems to permeate the media and society these days. In Canada everyone has to be secular, which is fine as long as we’re discussing the law NOT religious beliefs. Our constitution solidifies the right of religion so why is it wrong from someone like Michael to express how he feels? This country is filled with morons from sea to sea to sea.

A belief system is just that, and as long as it doesn’t counter our laws we’ll be just fine. The one thing I normally argued with Michael about were rights of people to choose an abortion, choose to get married if they were gay, etc. Let God sort it out, not us. As long as we’re good people, it’s not our place to judge. Judging Michael, included.