The real Scarborough subway vs. LRT debate lost in politics

Last week, as city council debated subways-versus-LRTs for what felt like the 1,000th time, I heard a lot of theories about why this council decision was so important.

What was weird, though, was that many of these theories had absolutely nothing to do with what makes for efficient and effective transit.

Sure, on a fundamental level, councillors were debating whether it made sense to scrap an approved LRT plan and spend an extra billion dollars extending the Bloor-Danforth subway into Scarborough, but this wasn’t really an issue of planning or principles.

Instead, I heard a lot about politics. A high-level staffer working for a pro-subway councillor told me flatly that it was critical that council endorse subways because endorsing a plan for light rail might help Tim Hudak become premier of Ontario.

Another popular theory tossed around left-leaning councillors’ offices was that support for the subway was important because it would somehow help the NDP build political popularity in Scarborough at both the provincial and federal level.

Then there were various theories relating to the 2014 municipal election. I think I heard every variation. Support for subways will hand Mayor Rob Ford his reelection, they said, so we have to vote for LRT.

But, for some, the reverse was true: voting for LRT will only strengthen Ford’s subways-only platform, so we have to vote for subways now.

The political calculus and complicated theories spanned all three levels of government and sometimes time and space.

By the time council finally got around to endorsing the subway plan — with a ton of conditions that make things far from a done deal — I wouldn’t have been surprised if councillors had told me that it was important council endorse this subway because otherwise Skynet could become self-aware and send a Terminator back in time to kill John Connor.

It was all very tiring, and served as proof that politicians in this town haven’t learned much since Ford cleaned their collective clock in the 2010 mayoral race.

Because here’s the thing about Ford. For all his faults — and he’s got a lot of them — he’s not one to play these kinds of games. The mayor’s opinions aren’t generally derived from complicated political strategy and vote projections. He’s not seen as a flip-flopper.

Ford was a refreshing change for voters because he generally just says what he thinks.

And in this transit debate, we could have used a whole lot more of that.

We could have used more councillors that actually bothered to look at and consider the evidence. We could have used more clarity, more facts and more honesty. We could have used more bravery.

But instead we got the same old political games.