Thursday, August 4, 2005

Bummer to Bummer

The London Free Press is devoting a lot of space of late to the parking problem in downtown London and the consultant who is to receive $30,000 to tell council what to do about it. As usual, these articles feature people who don't really get it.

From today's edition of 'if it wasn't available online for free, I wouldn't pay for such trash' press:

Their parking spots might not be where they want them, but London drivers have some of Canada's cheapest downtown parking, figures suggest.

"I've been saying that all along," said Janette MacDonald, manager of Main Street London. "I think Londoners just need an attitude change. To some, there's lot of parking and it's cheap, but to others, there is none because there's nothing free. We can't expect to get things free. We're not a burg or a hamlet. We're a major city and we have to pay."
I don't know about being a 'major city' but the Mayor and her minions are a major pain; citizens here pay financially, physically and psychologically for living in this town that masquerades as an important city. Until the barb wire boundaries effectively prevent us from leaving, I suppose we ought to blame ourselves for staying, which forces us to contribute to the sacrificial plate if we want to avoid jail.

The issue is not about having to pay for parking - the cost of any good or service must be borne by someone - the question is, who pays for it? In this case it is the taxpayer who is not necessarily the user who is paying and getting ripped off. The real problem is London city council and their dithering over an issue they shouldn't be discussing in the first place, because it is none of their business - rather than butt out and let downtown developers, guided by a market unhampered by overfed fools, to determine the viability and advantage of providing parking spaces, council spends $30,000 so some guy can drive around all day and then talk parking over a plate of 'free' food at the city cafeteria, thus allowing more time for individual council members to lobby support for their developer of choice, also over free food and behind closed doors.

Perhaps Ms. MacDonald did not read a previous article which quotes prominent downtown developer, Shmuel Farhi:
"I don't want the spaces for free and I'm all for giving spaces to other people," Farhi said. "I'll pay full market value so I can bring more people to the downtown."
I also note that London was not considered significant enough to be included in the official study. Of course, this doesn't prevent the bleating and blathering about how 'good' and 'fair' London is. Thanks to the London Free Press for yet another plug for central planning. I wonder which councillor's business interests will win out this time around. The one who eats the most free food wins.

1 Comment:

gardner said...

well lets be honest, city council needs consultants...if they didnt have them, they would have to think on their own and actually do their jobs and save tax payers money...which we all know is just wrong, we wouldnt want that... how ever will they have time to eat their free food and golf? really isnt it about time we think about the city councilors and how tough their lives are?