The weekend of June 26 will see Toronto host another one of these economic summit circuses.
Well in advance, the battle lines have been drawn.
Lined up on one side are the security agencies from every level of government, on the other a collection of professional protesters (who seem to travel the world for these events) local "activist" groups and an assortment of social misfits, seizing an opportunity for more violence.
Recently some of Toronto's major labor unions have decided to march in protest.
What exactly they are against is less than clear.
A news conference was held by those planning to make their presence felt at the festivities to explain their position.
Some spoke only in four letter words, making it difficult to know what they thought.
The more articulate seemed to be implying that, as they would be doing it for the poor, any acts would be justified.
They didn't elaborate on how bringing the city to a standstill helps the poor.
Current estimates place the bill for security at more than one billion dollars.
The true cost will undoubtedly be higher.
If this money could be redirected to something more useful, such as helping the disadvantaged, might not society benefit more? What is it about these events that acts as a lightning rod for such violent protests? Little enough seems to get accomplished at these high level meetings, yet to some they are like a red cape waving in the bull's face.
World leaders getting together for formal talks and photo-ops appears harmless enough.
Real decisions and policies don't normally result from these summits.
These get hammered out behind closed doors by people who actually know what they are doing.
Rumor has it that the final press release has already been prepared.
Returns compared to losses just don't justify hosting something so explosive and disruptive.
Traffic will be a nightmare, with many major freeways getting closed down to accommodate dignitaries' motorcades.
Road conditions will change moment to moment with no advance warning.
The security network will involve fencing off a large portion of Toronto's core, including all of the financial district.
A vast network of security cameras has been installed.
Trash cans, bus shelters and even trees will be removed within the security zone.
Stock exchange activity is to be moved to secret locations in outer areas of the city.
Trains can only operate beyond the city center.
Street vendors have to move and restaurants will be hard hit.
Schools and universities in the area will be shut down.
Many businesses have plans to allow employees to work from home or simply take a holiday.
This is only a partial list of headaches Torontonians will be forced to endure and as a further blow to this beleaguered city, the United States has now advised American citizens to stay away from Toronto during the summit.
We live in an age when conferences can be held without the participants having to leave their own offices.
What rationale is there for exposing the citizens of a city to the misery and expense of a function that will result in little more than injury, property destruction and potentially serious damage to the local economy? Dealing with world affairs is fine but let's not forget local concerns.
Perhaps if the worst does materialize, our elected officials won't be tempted to repeat this folly.
Well in advance, the battle lines have been drawn.
Lined up on one side are the security agencies from every level of government, on the other a collection of professional protesters (who seem to travel the world for these events) local "activist" groups and an assortment of social misfits, seizing an opportunity for more violence.
Recently some of Toronto's major labor unions have decided to march in protest.
What exactly they are against is less than clear.
A news conference was held by those planning to make their presence felt at the festivities to explain their position.
Some spoke only in four letter words, making it difficult to know what they thought.
The more articulate seemed to be implying that, as they would be doing it for the poor, any acts would be justified.
They didn't elaborate on how bringing the city to a standstill helps the poor.
Current estimates place the bill for security at more than one billion dollars.
The true cost will undoubtedly be higher.
If this money could be redirected to something more useful, such as helping the disadvantaged, might not society benefit more? What is it about these events that acts as a lightning rod for such violent protests? Little enough seems to get accomplished at these high level meetings, yet to some they are like a red cape waving in the bull's face.
World leaders getting together for formal talks and photo-ops appears harmless enough.
Real decisions and policies don't normally result from these summits.
These get hammered out behind closed doors by people who actually know what they are doing.
Rumor has it that the final press release has already been prepared.
Returns compared to losses just don't justify hosting something so explosive and disruptive.
Traffic will be a nightmare, with many major freeways getting closed down to accommodate dignitaries' motorcades.
Road conditions will change moment to moment with no advance warning.
The security network will involve fencing off a large portion of Toronto's core, including all of the financial district.
A vast network of security cameras has been installed.
Trash cans, bus shelters and even trees will be removed within the security zone.
Stock exchange activity is to be moved to secret locations in outer areas of the city.
Trains can only operate beyond the city center.
Street vendors have to move and restaurants will be hard hit.
Schools and universities in the area will be shut down.
Many businesses have plans to allow employees to work from home or simply take a holiday.
This is only a partial list of headaches Torontonians will be forced to endure and as a further blow to this beleaguered city, the United States has now advised American citizens to stay away from Toronto during the summit.
We live in an age when conferences can be held without the participants having to leave their own offices.
What rationale is there for exposing the citizens of a city to the misery and expense of a function that will result in little more than injury, property destruction and potentially serious damage to the local economy? Dealing with world affairs is fine but let's not forget local concerns.
Perhaps if the worst does materialize, our elected officials won't be tempted to repeat this folly.
Source...