From the comments: Ford’s move to cut Toronto councilors has readers debating merits of government reduction

Open this photo in gallery:

From, Ford to slash Toronto council by almost half, Tory calls for referendum, by Adam Radwanski and Jeff Gray

An interesting move by the government which will reduce an expensive level of bureaucracy known as regional governance. It makes sense that municipal boundaries would have the same alignment as, provincial, and federal. Ford cannot be accused of partisanship as it cut a swathe through all political Party holdings. - moon howler

In response to moon howler

This does not make sense. Means many many more constituents. Regional governments run policing for example. Now what arrangements need to be made in three months for the municipalities within? Need to better understand before applauding. - Mr. Yellin

My city councillor works like a dog and is very accessible. $25 million is nothing and when all is said and done, i bet there isn’t even a savings. Why is this one of his first priorities? This isn’t about money; this is about doug taking control of the city. - Leese1

New York - 8 million people - 51 councilors

Toronto - 3 million people - 25 councilors

Sounds about right. – Sue Howard

If this was a move to more democracy Ford should propose a plebiscite on how the Cities are best managed. His top down approach is not the right way at all. – TerryQ

I did not vote for Mr. Ford but I applaud his effort to reduce our political bureaucracy. We do not need 47 city councilors. – StephenHarperIdiot

From, Toronto has lots of room to grow. It’s time to let that happen, by Alex Bozikovic

Open this photo in gallery:

The author advocates for increasing population density in a city that is already (over) crowded.

Why live in Toronto? Because of job opportunities?

Why not decentralize some of the businesses (that provide jobs and require workers to live in TO) to other cities.

I am not an urban planning expert, but intuitively I think there is a tipping point of city size and density, after which a city’s problems cause it to decay as opposed to grow. I think Toronto may have reached that point. I see escalating gun violence, TTC problems and have and have not neighbourhoods as a sign that things are going downhill.

Furthermore, the incredibly high cost of living is an inflationary pressure on labour market wages. To have any professional work in Toronto you have to pay them 1.5 to 1.7 times the salary of, lets say, Montreal - just so that they can pay outlandish mortgage or rent.

If there are any urban planning specialists out there, please tell me if there is any theory to back up my intuitive judgement.

I am will to admit I am wrong, but something tells me that Toronto has reached its limit. – Intheflow

In response to Intheflow

at 3m people? There are cities that have much higher populations, on smaller areas, and are much more livable. Take a walk around Toronto and you’ll see how much wasted opportunity there is. People are sitting on rundown houses on 45 foot wide lots. It makes complete logical sense to turn that into two semis, or two stacked semis for 4 units. People are ready and willing to pay to do it. What’s the obstacle? It’s the city and their antiquated rules, you’re not allowed to split a 45 wide lot! - HuHu1

This article is very logical, if there is such a term. The downtown core of Toronto was thinning out in the 70’s and over the past 40 years there has been a concerted effort to bring people to live, work and recreate there. Projects like the Skydome, the ACC arena, concert halls and theatres have all helped invigorate the downtown core.

I still think Toronto should continue to think forward by allowing more condos in the actual city to plan for the vacating of baby boomers who will leave or die.

If you want a city to thrive , you need critical mass. There’s still plenty of room to grow in the city of Toronto. As the author stated, it’s the nimby “ neighbourhood “ who prevent growth. Millenials cannot afford single family dwellings in these areas but, condos offer a better alternative.

Sometimes Toronto is it’s own worst enemy. Young families need help to afford a decent home. – Golf Guy 3

This week’s notable discussion, featured in Tuesday’s From the comments:

From, Laureen Harper, Rona Ambrose throw support behind SheLeads Foundation, by Kelly Cryderman

Open this photo in gallery:

Great to see strong women who will inspire and guide other women who aspire to careers in politics. - Layla4

In response to Layla4′s comment

Agreed! The Liberals and now with Ashton’s group the NDP have had such mentoring initiatives for years and it is past time for Conservative women considering running for office to have a similar support system.

The fact that it is being organized by two respected, accomplished and modern, moderate conservative women is important for credibility and effectiveness.

It was legendary Ottawa mayor in the 1950s and 60s Charlotte Whitton who first said “Whatever women do they must do twice as well as men to be thought half as good. Luckily, this is not difficult.”

This was the reality in those times and fortunately it is changing fairly quickly today.

This new initiative will be helpful in that regard.

Politically capable women don't need the reverse discrimination of arbitrary and condescending quotas to compete in elections but they do need mentoring and support and this will give it to them.

And it is interesting to note that almost all of the most prominent women world statemen (statespeople?) from Ghandi to Thatcher to Merkel have been conservative by the standards of their countries in their times.

Great good luck to the SheLeads Foundation. - Teddy Ballgame 9

From the Comments is a new feature designed to highlight interesting and thoughtful contributions from our readers. Some comments have been edited for clarity. Everyone can read the comments but only subscribers will be able to contribute. Thank you to everyone furthering debate across our site.