George Smitherman's non-contradiction

By ROBERT SILVER

The Toronto Star takes a swing at George Smitherman in an editorial today for what they allege is contradictory policy pronouncements:

"In two different newspaper interviews this week, Smitherman - the former provincial cabinet minister and acknowledged frontrunner in the mayoral race - adopted contradictory positions. In one, he expressed an openness to the idea of imposing road tolls ("I'm not one of those that would ever short-circuit the discussion, which I think is one of the two or three essential discussions for this election campaign"). In the other, he called for reduction or elimination of Toronto's $60 motor vehicle registration fee ("I think it is one of those things that is a little bit like the straw that broke the camel's back").

Both are user fees that serve the dual purpose of raising revenues and encouraging motorists to consider alternatives (transit). It makes little sense to consider one while promising to get rid of the other."

First off, calling the motor vehicle registration a "user fee" is a bit of a stretch. It's an ownership fee - you pay it whether you drive downtown daily or your car never leaves the driveway. It is therefore not a particularly well designed tax if the purpose, as the Star states, is to encourage motorists to use transit instead of driving. I haven't seen any data to suggest that car ownership has dropped in Toronto because of this $60 fee and once you own the car, there is nothing about the fee that would impact how often you drive it.

But let's be honest, that wasn't the real incentive for the vehicle registration tax. It was a cash grab by David Miller to plug a budget hole, plain and simple. The word cash grab is obviously a pejorative, a defender of Miller could rightly call it a necessary new tax given our fiscal situation. That's fine - part of governing is making tough decisions. Just don't pretend it has had or will ever have any meaningful impact on congestion, car ownership levels or transit usage.

So call the vehicle registration fee apples, let's move on to talk about oranges, namely road tolls.

Road tolls, if properly designed, can push drivers to leave their cars at home. Are they controversial? Sure they are. Ask David Miller circa 2003 about his experience with even raising them.

That having been said, I'm not sure how Metrolinx/the city is going to pay for MoveOntario (the transit plan for the GTA that has supplanted Transit City no matter how many municipal politicians still cling to what is now little more than a slogan) without resorting to some form of road-toll.

As such, Smitherman deserves immense credit for keeping the option on the table. The fact that he has done so despite his frontrunner status is a tribute to him and his candidacy. If Adam Giambrone and Rocco Rossi haven't started thinking about the issue yet, I would get on it because, as Smitherman says, this is one of the two or three issues on which every candidate will need to take a clear position before election day.

Now putting apples and oranges together: if Smitherman wants to cancel the vehicle registration tax then yes, he has an obligation to explain how he proposes for the city to make up the lost revenue. That could come in part from new road tolls, it could come from spending cuts, lots of different options.

If by the time election day rolls around, in nine months or so, he still has the commitment to kill the fee without having answered the question of how he will pay for it (as well as fill the city's current operating deficit) then yes, he will deserve to be criticized and will probably lose the election.

But we do have nine months to go in the campaign so I think a tiny bit of slack is in order.