A NEW WAY OF THINKING? TOWARDS A VISION OF SOCIAL INCLUSION

Speaking Notes

by David Miller

• One of Toronto’s key competitive advantages is our quality of life.
• Particularly in the North American context, relative to city-regions of similar size and with similar overall business costs, Toronto is perceived to have a very good quality of life.
• We are civil to one another. We are tolerant and proud, of our diversity. We are relatively non-violent. We are the city that works.
• That is our reputation. And, to the extent that we are able to live up to that reputation, our city and our region will continue to prosper – in relative terms.
• In turn, I believe that the extent to which our city prospers economically and the extent to which that prosperity is spread among the residents, has an impact on our level of social harmony. That is, on the state of our civility. Which is, as I mentioned, one of our competitive advantages.
• In the age of the internet, virtual workplaces and highly mobile capital and labour, we cannot afford to ignore quality of life as a locational advantage.
• Furthermore, as their elected representative, I have a responsibility to my constituents to advocate their need and right to live in a secure, safe, healthy, nurturing and viable community.
• So quality of life tops my list of priority items on the municipal agenda.

IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC POLICY

• All of what I’ve described as contributing to Toronto’s livability and competitiveness are the focus of and are influenced by public policy decisions.
• Public policy decisions determine the priority given to infrastructure investment.
• Public policy decisions and regulations affect the environment for private sector investment.
• Public policy decisions in the form of direct investment or plans and regulations influence the variety and affordability of housing in a city.
• Public policies impact how easy or difficult it is for people and goods to move in to, out of and within our cities.
• Public policies can mitigate or exacerbate outcomes of the marketplace.
• Speaking at the 1996 "Cities of Tomorrow" forum, Professor Marvyn Novick of Ryerson University suggested that the relative success and high quality of life of Canada's large city regions, particularly Toronto, were attributable to deliberate public policies.
• Professor Novick agreed that the "social equality" of urban life in Canada has been one of its greatest economic assets.
• He argued that the Canadian difference was not based in wealth but rather in how Canada's cities managed growth and what they did with their wealth.
• In Professor Novick's opinion, strong public frameworks at all three levels of government have been essential to the post-war success of Canadian cities like Toronto.
• These public frameworks have included:
  • National equalization programs such as Medicare, Unemployment Insurance and the former Canada Assistance Plan which provided a basic safety net throughout the country.
  • High quality public services in cities which prevented a flight of the advantaged and articulate from the cities.
  • And the introduction of successful governance structures, such as Metro Toronto in the 1950s, which was able to ensure that essential services were accessible throughout the metropolitan area.
• I don't want to get into a debate about the relative merits of the Canada Assistance Plan versus the CHST, or UI versus El, or the amalgamated City of Toronto versus Metro Toronto.
• For me the most important aspect of Professor Novick's observations is that the policies and actions of all levels of government impacted the state of the city.
• And they still do.
• In combination they formed the public frameworks which created the capacity for Toronto's urban vitality, earning it the accolade of "the city that works".

CHANGING ROLE OF THE CITY

• So, from the perspective of a participant in Toronto's city government, what is the state of these public frameworks today?
• I think that the short answer is that they are still there but they are seriously out of synch with the reality of the new world order and city-regions’ role in it.
• Let me expand on that claim.
• Our observation in Toronto is that, for the past few decades, the federal and provincial governments have steadily been withdrawing from or reducing their commitment to a number of policy fields that have a profound impact on Toronto.
• The combination of lack of investment in social housing by the other orders of government and cuts in welfare rates correlate statistically with observable increases in homelessness. There’s a direct impact on the demand for municipal services from hostels to policing.
• Restrictions on eligibility for and reductions in levels of unemployment insurance - or employment insurance - have an impact on applications for welfare, which of course the city cost shares with the municipal government. So a cutback to a federal program can increase the cost to the municipality.
• The withdrawal of the federal and provincial governments from the provision of social housing has shifted responsibility to the municipal level.
• The complete withdrawal of the Ontario government from transit and urban transportation shifted responsibility to the municipal level. A few weeks ago, the provincial government admitted that it had made a gross error and announced that it will once again fund transit (but at a significantly lower level than it used to). AD LIB TRANSIT
• Even where there has not been a formal transfer of responsibility to the municipal level, cities like Toronto are being drawn into responsibilities vacated by the federal and provincial governments.
• Toronto’s Task Force on Homelessness and the subsequent actions of city council, including a "Housing First" policy, are examples of this.
• You will recall my comment that "things happen in cities". The government of a City cannot afford to ignore what goes on in that city.
• Whether as a result of a deliberate transfer of responsibilities as with Ontario's downloading, or as a result of more ad hoc processes, a shift of responsibilities to the city level of government is taking place.
• That makes the city’s role as a focus for social inclusion critical.
• Our policies – our openness, policies, programmes – impact in a real way.
• Civic participation builds social capital to the extent that people become actively involved in political decision-making. Political representatives have to demonstrate how the ideas and viewpoints they have heard during a consultation process have actually influenced the final decision on a given issue. Civic participation holds political representatives accountable and makes decision-making more transparent.

David Miller is the City Councillor for High Park-Parkdale (Ward 13) in the City of Toronto. He was first elected in 1994 to the then Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and was re-elected in the 1997 and 2000 municipal elections. Councillor Miller has undertaken a variety of roles during his tenure as a Councillor. Recently, he has been the Chair of the Special Council Committee to oversee amalgamation, the City’s Civic Participation Initiative, the Oak Ridges Moraine Committee, the Immigration and Refugee Committee and the Personnel Sub-Committee. He is particularly active on Public Transit issues, being a T.T.C. Commissioner, GO Transit board member, member of the Greater Toronto Services Board, Co-Chair of the Transportation Management Association and Chair of Metro’s Pro-Transit Sub-Committee.

Professionally, Councillor Miller is a lawyer. Prior to his election he was a partner in the prominent Toronto law firm Aird & Berlis, specializing in employment, immigration and shareholder rights litigation.

He is married with two young children and resides in the High Park area.

[ Conference Page ][ CCSD Home Page ] [ The Laidlaw Foundation ]