Toronto, Tourism, Island Airport

It's dªjà vu all over again

When the calendar turns a page to a new year, you hope that it will be better than the last. I am getting tired of 2006 already, and we are only starting the second month. Its the political reruns that are depressing.

First, we have Tourism Toronto and the Greater Toronto Hotels Association telling us that we need to spend much more money in the U.S. ($30 million) trying to convince Americans to visit Toronto. Tourism from America is off by 33%. At the same time we are told that Toronto has recovered from its image as "plague city". This statement is based on the raw numbers by which tourism is measured, i.e., tourists from all parts of the globe.

Even if visiting Europeans are boosting the numbers, the fact that the number of American visitors has declined means that we have not recovered from SARS. Our epidemic got big play in the U.S.; especially after the former mayor, Mel Lastman, said he had never heard of the World Health Organization on CNN.

The so-called tourist experts say that Canadas image is still moose, mountains and Mounties.

I thought they were concerned about tourism to a city, not a country.

Torontos image is unhealthy city (perception, not reality), as well as dirty city, homelessness and despair city, and gang war and murder city (the latter three being both reality and perception). Spend the money fixing those problems and then sell the cleaned up image.

Here is another reason why we should be careful about throwing good money after bad.

At the moment, 100% of Americans can travel to this country and re-enter the U.S. without a passport. Tourist advertising is mass based and probably cheaper because of that.

In 2008, all travelling U.S. citizens will be required to carry a passport to re-enter the U.S. Since, statistically, only 23% of Americans apply for passports, this means the American market will shrink by 77% in two years time. Tourist marketing will have to be much more target focussed and more expensive.

The second rerun is the Toronto City Centre Airport.

Porter Airlines, a new player, has announced a start-up this summer from the island. It will fly to a number of Canadian cities, as well as some American destinations. Porter is buying its Toronto- built aircraft from Bombadier. The order will secure important manufacturing employment in a province where 63,000 such jobs have disappeared in the past three years, and will contribute nearly a billion dollars of economic prosperity to the city.

Naturally, hearing all of this good news, Torontos socialist mayor, David Miller, immediately promised to put a stop to it.

He called the airport an "industrial use" that was incompatible with nearby residential uses.

Hmmm.

Since the airport has been there since 1939, and the residential uses only started in the 1970s, why did the city zone the land residential knowing that it was incompatible with the airport? Or, did city planners and politicians who approved the building plans not consider the uses incompatible?

Calling the airport an industrial use is Millers idea of humour. When he was castigated in the council chamber after the last election for distributing misleading election literature showing a squadron of big jets coming to the airport, he implied that his critics were humourless, unlike him. Jolly old David Miller--now there is a real incompatibility.

Let us hope that Councillor Jane Pitfield, who is running against Miller, embraces the airline start-up as a good thing, and proves herself smarter than the mayors last major opponent, John Tory. When it became clear that Miller was positioning the airport as the only real election issue, Tory was tepid, and backed away from the challenge.

Tory lost the election because he thought he could carry some of the downtown vote by fudging on the airport and he failed to marshal the suburban vote. The downtown socialist hordes came out in an "all court press" to kill the airport plan, and put Miller in the mayors chair. Most voters in the suburbs either had no opinion about the downtown airport or thought the plan to boost it as a regional commuter hub was sensible.

Shortly after that election, a poll indicated that no more than one percent of the Toronto electorate considered the airport an important issue.

It will be a shame if Miller can again maneuver the November election to be a plebiscite on the future of the airport. He should be held to account for his ratty record on homelessness, civic repair and lack of leadership on crime. It will be a disgrace and an insult to the 52 victims of gunshots in 2005 if the airport eclipses the most urgent social issue in the city in the coming municipal election.

Oh well, I am sure 2007 will be a better year.

Gary Reid is a freelance writer and a public affairs consultant. Gary Reid, Opinion 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002