Politics | Sarah Millar

Tag Archive for Politics

Hope is better than fear

By: Sarah Millar | August 22, 2012 Politics 3 comments

My contribution to last year’s Jack Layton Memorial was a can of orange Crush. I’m thinking about returning to city hall to pay my respects again this year.

Dear Jack,

A lot of what you wrote in your last letter resonated with me. But in these past 365 days since you left us, there is one bit that I have taken to heart and worked very hard to make those words ring true in my own life, no matter how hard — or how hopeless — things may seem.

This is for you, Jack:

I believe in you.

Before Jack Layton died, I didn’t believe in myself or my convictions — especially when it came to politics. I didn’t vote with my heart, I voted with my head. I often marked my ballot strategically, in order to help keep the party I didn’t want to win out, instead of trying to elect the party I actually supported.

I always wanted to vote for Jack Layton’s NDP, but because I voted strategically, I never did. And now, I never will be able to cast that ballot.

The provincial election in Ontario last fall was the first opportunity for me to vote for the candidate — and party — I wanted. I didn’t vote strategically or for the candidate in my riding I “knew” was going to win. I voted with my heart. I think that last vote of mine is the most meaningful one I have ever cast.

My friends, love is better than anger.

This is a message I have always tried, not just to believe in, but to practice. There have been people who have hurt me deeply in my life, and I have worked very hard at not being angry with them, and instead forgiving them to the best of my ability.

I can only hope that those who I have hurt in my lifetime are able to do the same thing toward me. Being angry takes too much energy, it’s much easier to love than to hate.

Hope is better than fear.

Ask anyone who knows me (especially my boyfriend), I’m a big giant ‘fraidy cat. I’m scared of our stove, I’m scared of weird noises in the house, I’m scared of lots of things. The biggest thing I’m afraid of though is the unknown. But lately, I’ve been trying to let go of my fears, especially that last one.

So much so that recently I decided to veer career paths. I’m not a journalist anymore, which is something I’ve wanted to be all of my life. It’s scary, but it’s also a new journey that I’m very excited about (and liking very much). I’m hopeful about what’s ahead.

Optimism is better than despair.

Optimism is harder than despair, there’s no doubt about that. But life isn’t always easy. Looking at a glass half full can sometimes put things in a different perspective. You’ll never know what’s about to come around the corner if you give up halfway through.

It is at these times we need to take a page from Jack’s book and smile as big as we can.

So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.

I already think we are.

Thank you, Jack. For everything.

Please leave your memories of Jack Layton in the comments.

Toronto mayoral race loses its only woman

By: Sarah Millar | September 28, 2010 News commentary, Politics 3 comments

Sarah Thomson dropped out of the Toronto mayoral race on Tuesday, throwing her support behind George Smitherman in an attempt to stop current front-runner Rob Ford.

Thomson held an early morning news conference at her campaign headquarters where she made the announcement, saying:

(Ford is) going to basically destroy transit, he doesn’t care about the social issues that George Smitherman cares about, there’s so many reasons … these reasons are very important to the long-term future of Toronto.

Some will applaud Thomson’s move, considering she was trailing in the polls and was not likely to win.

Sarah answers the question, Smitherman draws a blank

Sarah Thomson dropped out of the Toronto mayoral race to endorse George Smitherman.

However, there’s no doubt that others will see this as another blow to women in politics — losing the only woman who was considered one of the five front-runners will no doubt cause some people concern.

As a woman, I never really got behind Thomson because she was a woman — it’s not how I vote. This being Thomson’s first attempt at politics, it’s also hard for me to get behind her as a genuine candidate (who can forget the kerfuffle when she used her magazine, the Women’s Post, to announce her candidacy?)

The question really boils down to this: Can a woman really run Canada’s biggest city?

Well, they did before amalgamation, but since 1998, both of Toronto’s mayors have been men (Mel Lastman and David Miller). Has the city grown and changed enough that a woman would be unable to handle the portfolio?

Not necessarily.

Was Thomson that woman?

I don’t think so.

Sarah Thomson is a successful business woman, much like Belinda Stronach and others who have entered politics before. But I think she failed to really get the public’s trust before throwing her hat into a big, political job (much like Stronach when she ran for the leadership of the Conservative party).

In order to get a woman elected as mayor in Toronto, I think that woman has to be a councillor and prove herself to the electorate before trying to become mayor of Toronto.

And while even that does not guarantee anything (just look at former mayor Barbara Hall’s failed bid against David Miller in 2003 and former councillor Jane Pitfield’s failed bid in 2007), I think it’s something that will come with time.

It just wasn’t the right time and Sarah Thomson was not the right woman.

(Photo courtesy of Sarah Thomson’s flickr account. See more of her photos here.)

A step in the right direction

By: Sarah Millar | July 26, 2010 News commentary 4 comments

On Monday, the Ontario government made a fantastic step at trying to break the habit of drinking and driving.

Basically, no matter what your license status (whether it be G1, G2 or a full G), if you are under the age of 21, you are not allowed to have any alcohol in your system at all or you could face a license suspension. Previously, it was just the G license holders who could have the legal amount of alcohol in their system.

From the Toronto Star:

Under Ontario’s graduated licensing system, all drivers are currently allowed to have small amounts of alcohol in their blood once they have earned a full “G” license.

But starting Sunday, drivers aged 21 and under who have been drinking will automatically lose their licenses for 24 hours and could face a fine up to $500 and have their license suspended for 30 days.

Anyone caught breaking the rule three times will have their license cancelled.

I applaud these rules. And think with this legislation, the government could even push forward even more and attempt to increase the amount of people who cannot drive with alcohol in their system.

Considering kids could not drink and drive with the way the Ontario licensing system was, this should not hamper them at all. If anything, being unable to drive with alcohol in my system for the four years I had my G1 and G2 got me into the habit of not getting behind the wheel after I had a drink.

Even today, I will have just one drink if I know I have to drive. My life is more important than a glass of booze.

Some kids that just turned 19 and hold their full G license will no doubt the angry about this move, but to the kids just getting their licenses today or currently holding a G1 or G2, the new law makes no difference. And that’s where the strength in this law is: Introduce it to the young drivers who don’t know any better, and haven’t formed bad habits. Bad habits are what kill people on the road.

If the government continues their crackdown on drinking and driving, Monday’s ban could be the start of a further ban. Whether an outright ban of drinking and driving for all drivers will come to fruition or even be possible remains to be seen.

But at least for today, the Ontario government has done something right.

Photo courtesy of jburns00 on Flickr. You can see more of his photos here.

Why Jarvis St. losing a lane is a good thing

By: Sarah Millar | July 19, 2010 News commentary, Politics 19 comments

Drivers will never see an X or a green arrow on Jarvis' centre lane again.

Big news out of Toronto.

OK, not really big news per say, but because it affects drivers, it’s become big news.

Jarvis St., which once had five lanes (the middle lane flipped back and forth to a north or south lane depending on the time of day), is now down to four. The middle lane has been closed and by the end of the month, bike lanes will be painted on each side of the road.

You’d think the city decided to remove the street with the reaction the missing lane got on Monday (the first workday without those precious arrows giving traffic a bit of relief). From the Toronto Star:

“Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb,” said a woman in a champagne-coloured Maxima.

“Give us back our middle lane!” called out a man with a moustache in a silver VW as he zoomed south.

Really people, what is the big deal?

Toronto drivers seem to have such a sense of entitlement to them, don’t they? (Full disclosure, I own a car and do drive — to get out of the city to work. I tend to take transit to get around the city).

Take away a roadway of theirs to those dreaded bicyclists and you never hear the end of it, do you?

Yes, driving in Toronto is a pain. Driving in any city with a population of over 2 million people is bound to be one. And yes, Jarvis serves (served?) a great purpose. I used it all the time when I lived at Mt. Pleasant and Eglinton and my boyfriend at Jarvis and Queen.

During the day, Yonge St., Avenue Rd. and other north-south arteries can be clogged with cars, pedestrians and bikes. If you hit Jarvis at the right time, you could get from midtown to downtown in no time.

And that’s what Toronto drivers are angry about.

They’re missing a few key points here though.

The first is that bikes have a right to be on the road. And in Toronto, they often are forgotten about — or ignored all together. Bike riders deserve better than they’ve been getting in this city.

Before the Jarvis St. change, riders there would often be squeezing between parked cars and traffic. I can only imagine how scared bike riders were — as I driver, I was terrified driving alongside a bicyclist on Jarvis.

Bikes have a right to be on the road. And if they want — they can take up a whole lane of traffic. So drivers, it could be a lot worse for you.

By putting in bike lanes, the city is actually doing you a favour. At least this way, everyone gets room.

It's no longer all white lines across Jarvis St. — the centre lane now has two solid yellow lines painted across it to remind drivers they can't use it anymore.

But what really seems to piss off Jarvis drivers more than the installation of the bike lanes is how heavy and congested Jarvis is going to become now that it’s only four lanes instead of five.

Talking to the Toronto Star last week, Toronto mayoral candidate Rocco Rossi said he would take bike lanes off Jarvis if he’s elected: “The math doesn’t work. There are almost 30,000 cars a day that use Jarvis, rain or shine, winter or summer,” he said.

Sure, that’s likely true (just like it’s also likely true Rossi has just lost the bike vote). And no doubt, now with the fifth lane option gone, many of those cars are going to find an alternate route because Jarvis will be too heavy.

And once that happens, we’ll be back to the flow that was Jarvis with the fifth lane.

I haven’t read it yet, but I’m willing to wager that the city will also remove parking from Jarvis during rush hour so both north- and southbound traffic get two lanes to drive in. And that’s typically what driving in the third lane was — since cars were allowed to park on the direction that had the middle lane.

And really, if you’re that peeved about losing your precious fifth lane, there’s another solution: Stop driving in the city. Take transit. Or better yet, ride your bike.

After all, I hear they’re installing a new bike lane over on Jarvis.

(All pictures courtesy of Neal Jennings, AKA Sweet Ones, on Flickr. Check out some more of his great shots on his Flickr stream here).

Some sobering thoughts after the G20

By: Sarah Millar | June 29, 2010 News commentary, Politics No comments

As per Guy’s suggestion, I have decided to revisit my thoughts about the G20 after the dust settled (and the rain cleared).

Monday may have marked the beginning of a new week, but Torontonians were not letting the events of the weekend go — another protest began at police headquarters, marched across College St. to University, down to Queen and over to city hall.

Apparently, the group was protesting the treatment of police Sunday night when a whole bunch of people (including those just in the neighbourhood and journalists) were held at Queen and Spadina Sts. and threatened with arrest. They were let go after nearly five hours of standing on the street surrounded by police.

And if Twitter is an indication, it was also a way for people to shame Toronto Mayor David Miller (who likely would totally have been at his City Hall office at 8 o’clock at night) for praising the work done by the police over the weekend and not asking questions.

Here’s what I wonder: All of these people joining groups on Facebook calling for inquiries to the way security was handled during the G20 or saying Miller should step up and all of those on Twitter making sure to use Miller’s account in their tweet in the hopes he sees the anger, how many of them actually voted in the last municipal election? The last federal election.

A giant protest outside of city hall and police headquarters in not necessarily the way to get your message across (I went to York University, where people protest about protests). Exercising your democratic right by voting is the sure way to enact change (that and there is the Toronto police services board for complaints — Miller made that abundantly clear to Torontonians in his press conference Monday morning).

In fact, if you look at all the peaceful protests on Saturday: The ones for women’s reproductive rights around the world, climate change, poverty, etc. etc., voting for someone who shares your viewpoint on all of these things is one of the easiest ways to try and get action on them.

What I fear from the vast majority of the current angry mob is that they haven’t voted, or don’t vote, for the old fear the guy they want will never get elected, anyway. I understand that adage — it’s one I subscribe to myself. But it shouldn’t be. After all, voting for who you think is going to win, or not voting because you feel your vote is worthless, is not democracy in action.

I would hedge my bets that even if Miller was running again, he would not condemn the police service. From what I’ve heard, it wasn’t Toronto Police that held all those people at Queen and Spadina. He can’t tell the cops how to do their job, that is not his job as mayor. A politician who tells the police what to do and how to act is not what we want to happen in Canada, because that could lead to a loss of democracy and freedom.

As for the cries on Sunday night demanding our dear old Mayor make an appearance, he was detained at other engagements — and then a city emergency when Union Station began to flood because of the rain. No doubt if he had ignored that to deal with Queen and Spadina, a whole different group of citizens would be yelling shame, shame at him when the station was closed Monday morning.

Should an independent inquiry be held about the police actions over the weekend? Yes. Should Miller be the one to demand it? No. This was not his meeting. It was not his decision to hold it in Toronto — or to close off downtown for days by building a fence. Miller is not the enemy in all of this (neither, really, is Stephen Harper).

Demand an inquiry by writing letters to politicians who can make that happen. File a complaint with the police services board if you were treated badly. Exercise your right this fall to vote for a city council you feel you can trust, you align with your beliefs.

If you really must blame Miller, then at least take it off social networking and into the real world by real action. A tweet can never replace action.

« Older Entries