Toronto politics: An endless loop of the same issues, over and over again

Here’s a theory: politics in Toronto works on a big loop, with the people of this city doomed to debate the same issues again and again and again.

I’m not sure how else to explain the reemergence last week of the debate over the expansion of Billy Bishop Airport on Toronto Island, following a surprise announcement from Porter Airlines that they’ll be seeking permission to fly jets out of the downtown location.

It’s basically the same issue that defined Toronto’s 2003 mayoral campaign. Add it to ongoing arguments over what to do with the Gardiner and the same old transit expansion fights city hall has been having for years, and it all feels a lot like too much déjà vu.

It’s got me wondering if it’s too much to ask for this city to just accept past decisions and move on.

With the airport, the debate really shouldn’t be about the specifics of Porter’s proposal, but rather whether it’s worth monkeying with a status quo that has — maybe surprisingly — worked OK for Toronto’s waterfront since Porter first took flight.

I’ll admit that I like flying out of the island airport.

The Toronto I know has always included an island airport. And the door-to-door experience of flying Porter versus Pearson is night and day. Plus — hey! — free snacks and in-flight beverages.

Part of me is drawn to the idea of being able to take convenient island flights to more far-flung (and warmer) destinations.

But I get nervous about the trade-offs. Porter isn’t just asking for the rights to use new jets that they say are just as quiet as their current planes. If that were the extent of their request, I’d find it hard to care. Instead, they’re also asking to expand the length of their runway. That means literally filling in a part of Lake Ontario.

That’s not a precedent I much like the sound of. Nor do I like the idea that, inevitably, other operators will come calling, asking for the right to fly their own jets off the island.

Offering direct flights to Florida and the Caribbean will change the business model, with kids wearing mouse ears joining the suits and briefcases in the airport lounge. That means more traffic clogging waterfront streets in the short term and likely more requests to expand airport capacity in the long term.

It just doesn’t seem worth it. In just two years, a rail connection from downtown to Pearson will open. Assuming it’s priced reasonably, that needed rail link should help eliminate a major complaint about the Pearson experience.

With that coming, and with the inherent risk that comes with letting Porter spread their wings, I’m asking: is this really a debate we need to have again?