Preville on Politics
Make mine 75 litres
Posted on June 21, 2007 by Philip Preville
I’ve had to go AWOL this week. Alas for me, I missed out as council adopted the trash-charge trial balloon they’ve been floating for what feels like years now. I’ve never blogged about it, so just for the record: it’s a fine idea. Pay-for-use in garbage makes sense on many levels—far more than I’m willing to delve into during a week off. Away I go now. Back with regular posts next week.
Philip Preville
Veteran freelance writer Philip Preville lived much of his life in Montreal and Edmonton before he was lured, like so many Torontonians before him, by the promise of more work and a better living. A National Magazine Award winner and former Canadian Journalism Fellow at the University of Toronto’s Massey College, Preville writes Toronto Life’s politics column. He lives with his wife and one-year-old son in Riverdale, just close enough to the Don Valley Parkway that he can hear it when he steps outside his house—but just far enough away that it doesn’t keep him awake at night. On his office wall hangs a 1938–39 press pass belonging to his grandfather, Elias Gannon, who wrote for the Montreal Star.
Latest blog entries:
- I have a new home
- Montreal to adopt vacuum waste collection
- Why U.S.-based magazines hit newsstands so late
- I salivate at the prospect of a Miller-Smitherman-Ford cage match
Topics:
Postings by date:
- May, 2008
- April, 2008
- March, 2008
- February, 2008
- January, 2008
- December, 2007
- November, 2007
- October, 2007
- September, 2007
- August, 2007
- July, 2007
- June, 2007
- May, 2007
- April, 2007
- March, 2007
Comments
Neither the author nor Toronto Life necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Editors will not correct spelling or grammar. Toronto Life reserves the right to edit or delete comments entirely. Read our full policy
James Kane June 23, 2007 at 10:55 a.m.
This garbage plan is not "pay per use". If it were I would be inclined to agree, however, we will all pay the same or more for less service. So this pig with lipstick is really a tax increase which you socialists are always so fond of. If you're such a "pay per use" advocate, why not apply the same principals to health care and education?
Philip Preville June 26, 2007 at 9:32 a.m.
I don't advocate pay per use for health care or education, and if that means I'm inconsistent, I'm okay with that. Education is a public good, so we pay for that with taxes. Health care is partly a public good, and partly a government-mandated group insurance program, or at least it's supposed to be, and I support that basic insurance principle as well. I could even see myself supporting a system of separate premium payments dedicated to health care services. (The McGuinty government's health premium is its own separate and convoluted story. The fact that the money goes into general revenues means we don't really know if it's actually being used for health care. For all we know, it pays for roads and agricultural subsidies. If it's a premium, it should have separate accounting and be earmarked only for hospitals and the like.)
As for the new garbage scheme being a tax increase: in the sense that homeowners will be paying separately for trash collection on top of their property taxes, then I suppose that's what it is. But it's also a pricing scheme that serves as a disincentive to trash generation, and that makes sense to me.
Mark Dowling June 27, 2007 at 2:38 p.m.
Philip
One thing I haven't seen anyone notice yet. When property tax is transferred to the water bill, seniors and the disabled can't defer/cancel it and other low income Torontonians won't qualify for a tax credit on the amount.
What the City should have done is retain an amount on the property tax as a standing charge to cover no-fee programmes like green/blue bin and then an extra charge on the water bill covering garbage only and charged by weight rather than volume.
Philip Preville July 4, 2007 at 11:44 a.m.
Mark, I realize this is belated, but if you're still checking in: you are correct that they should charge by weight rather than volume. My impression is that the city knows this and is trying to figure out if it can be done cost-effectively. The short-term answer is that it can't, because you'd need to add all sorts of technology to the garbage fleet and make sure that every container on the curb is standardized. But it may well turn out to be the long-term strategy for waste management in the city. Wait and see.