Update: Was The G20 In Toronto Worth The Cost?
The short answer is no.
The absurd amount of money spent on police forces to protect delegates for the G20 would have been completely unnecessary had it been held in a low key setting, aka not Toronto.
Prime Minister Harper has been touting the reason for the G20 to be held in Toronto as a marketing ploy for international investment in Canada. Press packages contained a number of items advertising Muskoka and Toronto, and were contained in a Canadian flag shoulder bag which almost no one used or carried anywhere. The free TTC passes were a nice touch though, and if you add that to 3 free meals a day, no one was spending much time or money around Toronto. I had never seen the highways surrounding Toronto so light on traffic and the streets downtown so empty, but it was obvious that most people just wanted to stay away. Frankly, the only businesses that made money were hotels filled with delegates and reporters from all over the world.
Let's get one thing straight about international interest in Canada. It's about our natural resources. Yes, we get a lot of praise over the excellent state of our banking sector, but I have yet to read anything indicating anyone even being interested in copying it.
That brings up loss of revenue to those businesses which were forced to close. What is the calculation on that, plus the costs of damages? Toronto Mayor David Miller said yesterday morning that he would be passing on the bill to the Federal government, but it's clear that the real costs for the summits will be even higher than what was originally stated.
Had the G8 and G20 been held in a small place, or perhaps a plan enacted to build a complex specifically for these international hosting events, there would have been no need for 5000 police being paid double and triple time. It only makes sense if Canada is going to be required to host such events on a regular rotating basis to invest in something more permanent, away from giant cities. Now, I'm no security expert, but it seems reasonable to me that any violent protesters would be incredibly easy to spot and detain without having to deal with accidentally arresting either legitimate protesters, or fans of the world cup.
This morning, Toronto Chief of Police William Blair held a news conference to defend police tactics over the weekend. From the beginning he appeared uncomfortable and somewhat agitated for having to defend his officers, pointing out the dangerous items confiscated by police from those violent protesters associated with the "Black Block" crowd. Unfortunately his credibility was damaged when a sharp eyed reporter pointed out that a crossbow and chainsaw prominently displayed on the table were actually taken from a schizophrenic man living in his car with no connection to protesters or the G20. Whoever decided to display those items succeeded in undermining the message the police department was trying to convey. The chief actually had to ask the press to please ignore the crossbow and chainsaw, saying that he could guarantee that the rest of the items on display were definitely from violent protesters.
He then attempted to explain that the police tried to tell people about the secret law passed by Queen's Park allowing police to arrest anyone not identifying themselves within 5 metres of the barrier fence. What he didn't understand however, was that people are upset that there was no public debate on the measure, and as such may not even be legal. I actually felt a little bad for him as he tried several times to get back on message with the BB crowd, and to be honest, he's right about the people who were violent and caused damage. The problem I have with his position is that I actually spoke to an intelligence officer and he told me that they (the police) had messed up despite knowing who they were and where they came from. They lost their chance to grab BB when they were all together which led to police chasing lots of small groups all over the city all while they smashed things in their way.
On top of that, at some point after a couple of police cars started burning, according to author Naomi Klein, her and several other media began to receive emails on their blackberries from police where to go to get video and photos of the burning vehicles. That means that someone, somewhere within the police, made a decision to try and make it political. Add that to arresting people who had nothing to do with violence or even protesting and you've got yourself a bit of a problem.
Lots of bad decisions by lots of people.
UPDATE: I almost forgot. Canada signed a non binding deal to reduce deficits by 2013 along with the other members of the G20. A non binding agreement. I'll leave it to you to decide what you think of the cost/benefit ratio on that.
The absurd amount of money spent on police forces to protect delegates for the G20 would have been completely unnecessary had it been held in a low key setting, aka not Toronto.
Prime Minister Harper has been touting the reason for the G20 to be held in Toronto as a marketing ploy for international investment in Canada. Press packages contained a number of items advertising Muskoka and Toronto, and were contained in a Canadian flag shoulder bag which almost no one used or carried anywhere. The free TTC passes were a nice touch though, and if you add that to 3 free meals a day, no one was spending much time or money around Toronto. I had never seen the highways surrounding Toronto so light on traffic and the streets downtown so empty, but it was obvious that most people just wanted to stay away. Frankly, the only businesses that made money were hotels filled with delegates and reporters from all over the world.
Let's get one thing straight about international interest in Canada. It's about our natural resources. Yes, we get a lot of praise over the excellent state of our banking sector, but I have yet to read anything indicating anyone even being interested in copying it.
That brings up loss of revenue to those businesses which were forced to close. What is the calculation on that, plus the costs of damages? Toronto Mayor David Miller said yesterday morning that he would be passing on the bill to the Federal government, but it's clear that the real costs for the summits will be even higher than what was originally stated.
Had the G8 and G20 been held in a small place, or perhaps a plan enacted to build a complex specifically for these international hosting events, there would have been no need for 5000 police being paid double and triple time. It only makes sense if Canada is going to be required to host such events on a regular rotating basis to invest in something more permanent, away from giant cities. Now, I'm no security expert, but it seems reasonable to me that any violent protesters would be incredibly easy to spot and detain without having to deal with accidentally arresting either legitimate protesters, or fans of the world cup.
This morning, Toronto Chief of Police William Blair held a news conference to defend police tactics over the weekend. From the beginning he appeared uncomfortable and somewhat agitated for having to defend his officers, pointing out the dangerous items confiscated by police from those violent protesters associated with the "Black Block" crowd. Unfortunately his credibility was damaged when a sharp eyed reporter pointed out that a crossbow and chainsaw prominently displayed on the table were actually taken from a schizophrenic man living in his car with no connection to protesters or the G20. Whoever decided to display those items succeeded in undermining the message the police department was trying to convey. The chief actually had to ask the press to please ignore the crossbow and chainsaw, saying that he could guarantee that the rest of the items on display were definitely from violent protesters.
He then attempted to explain that the police tried to tell people about the secret law passed by Queen's Park allowing police to arrest anyone not identifying themselves within 5 metres of the barrier fence. What he didn't understand however, was that people are upset that there was no public debate on the measure, and as such may not even be legal. I actually felt a little bad for him as he tried several times to get back on message with the BB crowd, and to be honest, he's right about the people who were violent and caused damage. The problem I have with his position is that I actually spoke to an intelligence officer and he told me that they (the police) had messed up despite knowing who they were and where they came from. They lost their chance to grab BB when they were all together which led to police chasing lots of small groups all over the city all while they smashed things in their way.
On top of that, at some point after a couple of police cars started burning, according to author Naomi Klein, her and several other media began to receive emails on their blackberries from police where to go to get video and photos of the burning vehicles. That means that someone, somewhere within the police, made a decision to try and make it political. Add that to arresting people who had nothing to do with violence or even protesting and you've got yourself a bit of a problem.
Lots of bad decisions by lots of people.
UPDATE: I almost forgot. Canada signed a non binding deal to reduce deficits by 2013 along with the other members of the G20. A non binding agreement. I'll leave it to you to decide what you think of the cost/benefit ratio on that.
Leave a comment