THE BATTLE OF THE BRIDGE

In the political wars of Toronto the battle of the bridge across the Western Gap to the island airport was one of the crucial struggles in recent years.

By 2002 the Toronto Port Authority was trying to achieve two things: gain payment for the land conveyed to the City of Toronto, and expand the island airport. Key to expansion of the airport was permission to build a bridge across the Western Gap.

The land issue was controversial with the city politicians because it threatened to cost the city $1 billion, but it was difficult for the public to understand. Island airport expansion, on the other hand, was simple. Waterfront renewal had been in process for more than a decade, and to many, particularly those who lived downtown, an expanded airport would threaten the city’s quality of life and kill the dreams of a clean, green waterfront. Those two issues came together in the fall of 2002.

Mel Lastman, then the mayor, was a Toronto booster who came from North York, far from Toronto’s waterfront. He championed the business elite of the city and was always available to help to make developments happen. An expanded airport on Toronto’s waterfront: absolutely, he was in favour.

Alan Sparrow addressing the Economic Development Committee on behalf of Community Air in 2002.

Lastman, his supporters and the TPA held discussions and a resolution emerged. In November 2002 Toronto City Council met in a closed-door session to discuss the proposed settlement. Later it was revealed that the city had agreed to pay the Toronto Port Authority $48 million over ten years to resolve the dispute. As well, there was a tacit understanding that Lastman and his followers would support the building of the bridge, and, therefore, the expansion of the airport.

In the highly polarized atmosphere of Toronto City Council, this was like setting fire to gasoline. The councillors could not reveal the terms of the settlement, but the rhetoric in the meeting where it was discussed was inflammatory. The mayor tried his best to defend the deal, but it was pro-business, suburban councillors, such as Denzil Minnan-Wong, who led acceptance of the agreement. On the other side were most of the councillors from the old City of Toronto, such as David Miller and Olivia Chow.

Jack Layton made an impassioned speech against the approval, putting forward a motion to dissolve the Toronto Port Authority. It passed with a large majority but was only symbolic because the TPA is a creation of the federal government. This was one of Layton’s last political acts as a municipal councillor before he resigned to become the leader of the national New Democratic Party.

Community Air member, Bill Freeman, shown here being interviewed on CAIR's opinion on the bridge.

The second issue to be dealt with was building the bridge. In order to build the bridge the Tripartite Agreement had to be amended and that needed the approval of city council. The issue was referred to the Economic Development Committee, chaired by Denzil Minnan-Wong, as the first step toward the approval.

The battle lines were drawn. The Toronto Port Authority, led by its president and CEO Lisa Raitt, and the chair of the board, Henry Pankratz, presented a glowing report to the committee outlining the benefits of the expanded airport. They asserted that virtually all of the passengers would be arriving at the airport by public transit. Finally, they discounted the pollution argument by saying that the aircraft would contribute little to Toronto’s air pollution problems.

At the same time it emerged that the TPA had found a major partner to establish commercial air service to cities within a 500-kilometre radius of the island airport. That partner was Robert Deluce and his company Regional Airlines Holdings, Inc. (REGCO). In a deputation Deluce said that he would be establishing an airline at the island airport using the Bombardier Q400 turboprop, if the bridge were built.

The citizen deputations to the Economic Development Committee were overwhelmingly opposed to the building of the bridge and the expansion of the island airport. Those deputations were presented by community groups and individuals. Objections covered a range of issues, from pollution to destruction of the quality of life for people in the city. One particular concern was that the bridge would be a hazard to navigation, making the Western Gap treacherous for all boats, but particularly sailboats. Another issue repeated in the hearings was that an expanded airport would threaten the natural environment and particularly the colonies of water fowl living on the islands and along the shoreline.

Despite the clear community opposition, the Economic Development Committee, loaded with Lastman supporters, gave approval to the bridge. People went home, licking their wounds from the bitter struggle, but the battle of the bridge was far from over.

The Election of 2003
By late 2002 the opposition to the bridge and island airport expansion was led by CommunityAIR (CAIR). The leader of CAIR at that time was Allan Sparrow, a former Toronto city councillor and community activist. CAIR established a membership of some 2000 people and gained broad support across the waterfront and among community groups in the city. The strength of CommunityAIR was in the quality of its research, provided primarily by Marc Brien, and the respect that Allan and his wife Sue Sparrow brought to the group. Members of CommunityAIR met regularly, strategizing, building alliances, and meeting politicians and the press to put forward their arguments as to why the bridge and airport expansion would be a disaster for the city.

In the summer of 2003 final approval of the bridge was given by Toronto City Council. It appeared that nothing could stop it now. But, as it happened, a Toronto municipal election was looming in the November of that year, and that election would prove decisive on the issue of the bridge.

Mel Lastman was retiring, and the vacancy prompted five major candidates to run for mayor. Among them was Barbara Hall, a former mayor of Toronto, who was viewed as a progressive downtown politician, and David Miller, a lawyer and councillor who had been on council for three terms. Hall started the campaign with over 70% of the vote, according to early polling, while David Miller’s support was barely in the double digits. Of the five major candidates, Miller was the only one who opposed island airport expansion. Barbara Hall, on the other hand, was one of the project’s chief supporters.

As the election heated up in the fall of 2003, the bridge and airport expansion became the central issue of the campaign. On other issues such as policing and traffic there were few differences among the candidates, but on the issue of the island airport only David Miller was strongly and clearly opposed to building the bridge and airport expansion. In the meantime, the Toronto Port Authority went blithely ahead as if there was no political opposition. On October 1, 2003, little over a month before the date of the election, the TPA announced that it would proceed with its plan to construct the bridge.

The election campaign increased awareness of the issue. On October 12 The Toronto Star published the results of a poll showing that 53% of Toronto residents opposed construction of the bridge, while only 35% supported it. On October 29th, a Toronto Sun poll found 55% of Toronto residents opposed the expansion of the island airport, while only 25% were in favour.

As opposition to the bridge and island airport expansion solidified, support for David Miller grew. In the last days of the election, it was clear that Barbara Hall had lost support, and the contest was between John Tory and David Miller. In the final tally, Miller received 43% of the vote; Tory, 38%; and Hall had faded to 9%. The people of Toronto had spoken clearly. They wanted no bridge and no island airport expansion.

December 2003, when council voted to cancel the bridge.

Council Cancels the Bridge
As it happened, between the municipal election and the swearing in of David Miller as mayor on December 1st, the federal Liberal Party held a leadership convention in Toronto. Paul Martin looked like a shoo-in to be the next leader and the next prime minister. When Martin arrived, reporters cornered him. “What are you going to do about airport expansion?” asked Adam Vaughan, then a reporter at City Television. “We will take our cue from city council,” was the reply.

Mayor-elect Miller announced that at the first meeting of the new council on December 2, Toronto City Council would deal with the issue of the bridge. The politics were intense. Robert Deluce notified the city that it could face a $500-million lawsuit, if it stopped the bridge. He wanted to start his airline, “but only on the condition that the bridge is built.” (The Globe and Mail Nov. 29, 2003) Miller was not troubled by the lawsuit threats. “I don’t think they have much merit. Sure looks as if they were designed to influence the political process.”

The issue raged in the press. David Crombie, the former mayor, federal cabinet minister and chair of the Waterfront Regeneration Trust, along with Jane Jacobs, the best known urban policy guru in North America, wrote an op-ed piece for The Globe and Mail in which they said, “Make no mistake about it: if the expansion (of the airport) is allowed to proceed, it will be a blunder of historic proportions and a giant step backward for Toronto.” (The Globe and Mail, Dec. 2, 2003)

The Toronto City Council December 2nd meeting voted to cancel the bridge. Later the federal government passed a regulation disallowing any fixed link to the island airport. The victory appeared to have been won. Robert Deluce had said that he could not go forward with his plans to expand the airport without the bridge. There were calls from the mayor and all of the major news outlets in the city to disband the Toronto Port Authority.

It seemed the struggle was finally put to rest, but as it turned out cancelling the bridge has been only one moment in the efforts of the people of Toronto to take back their waterfront and keep it clean and green.