How John Tory unmade his promise to “start digging” the Scarborough subway next year
On May 27, the John Tory campaign summoned the media to the Metro Toronto Convention Centre. After weeks of promising to build a “Yonge Street relief line,” Tory was set to announce his SmartTrack transit plan, a proposal to retrofit existing GO lines into subway-like commuter corridors. It’s since become the centrepiece of his campaign.
Tory’s address to reporters was preceded by a technical briefing, in which campaign officials laid out the logistics of the proposal. Before delving into specifics, though, the campaign official leading the briefing made an uncharacteristically frank—even embarrassing—admission about Tory’s commitment to another transit project: the controversial Scarborough subway, which Tory had promised, if elected, to “start digging” in 2015. This is what the official said: “We are, of course, duly chastened in regard to when that [project] can begin. It cannot have the shovels in the ground tomorrow morning, as we had previously advertised. And we’re very sorry; and we won’t make that mistake again.”
The 2015 prediction had always seemed far-fetched, but now this person was saying, definitively, that it was wrong. It was a newsworthy quote, but it wouldn’t make news. The reason the official was free to phrase the admission in such unflattering terms is that he expected that his words would never be printed, because he was speaking on background.
“On background” is a journalism term for information given to a reporter on the record, but with the expectation that the source won’t be identified or quoted directly. It’s usually a way for sources to give journalists information while avoiding personal repercussions when that information is published. Tory’s team, though, uses the tactic to let officials who aren’t polished spokespeople explain his policies. In this case, it was being used to admit a mistake without actually seeming to concede the point.
Quotations given on background are normally considered sacrosanct (although there are exceptions to every journalistic rule). And yet, on June 1, a crucial chunk of the campaign’s apology appeared verbatim in an Olivia Chow press release attacking Tory. The release—titled “Reality Check: Another calculated misrepresentation by John Tory?”—read, “The Tory campaign said it was ‘duly chastened’ by the error [on the Scarborough subway].” The quotation and other pieces of the apology appeared in a subsequent release on June 20. Assuming Tory’s campaign hadn’t leaked the quote to Chow itself, one or more reporters had done her campaign a favour.
Jamey Heath, Chow’s communications director, said he spoke to a journalist on May 30. During the conversation, he said, the journalist made reference to the Tory campaign’s admission. Intrigued, Heath sought a second source. The next journalist he contacted refused to help him, arguing—correctly—that it wasn’t his or her job to help Chow’s campaign. Heath tried a third journalist, who proved more helpful. “Like any good Carleton journalism school graduate, I phoned another reporter, and asked him or her to confirm this for me,” Heath said. “He or she went away, and reviewed their tape, and then called me back with the exact quote.” Chow’s campaign now had direct quotations for use in their attacks on Tory, courtesy of a member of the media. (Toronto Life is printing the quote only because parts of it have already been published elsewhere.)
“I don’t think it’s a favour,” Heath said of the reporter’s efforts. “I see it as a reporter doing his or her job.”
Andrew Mitrovica, a journalist and journalism school instructor at the University of Toronto and Sheridan College, disagrees. Mitrovica, who has criticized journalists for clamming up when challenged about their own ethics, said the reporter who supplied Heath with the quotations should explain his or her choice to run errands for Chow. “The perception is that, in effect, you’re working hand-in-glove with that campaign,” Mitrovica said. “The reporter in question might have a different perception, but I’d like to hear the defence.” Heath refused to name any of the three reporters he spoke with, whom he said work at three different media outlets.
Meanwhile, Tory’s website still says crews will begin digging the Scarborough subway next year. His One Toronto transit plan claims that he will “start construction on the Scarborough subway immediately.” At a June press conference, I asked Tory why his campaign materials continue to promise something that even his own spokesperson has said is impossible. Tory proceeded to bend himself into a rhetorical pretzel.
“I think ‘shovels in the ground’ is an expression that we all use to say you’re getting on with the project,” Tory said. “I realize it may be a couple of years after all the different things are done that need to be done—but the bottom line: no delays.”
![](http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https://torontolife.com/city/john-tory-admits-mistake-scarborough-subway/&title=How John Tory unmade his promise to “start digging” the Scarborough subway next year&picture=https://torontolife.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/john-tory-subway-promise-624x3951.jpg&description=[caption id="attachment_283621" align="alignnone" width="624"] (Image: Danielle Scott/Flickr)[/caption]
On May 27, the John Tory campaign summoned the media to the Metro Toronto Convention Centre. After weeks of promising to build a "Yonge Street relief line," Tory was set to announce his SmartTrack transit plan, a proposal to retrofit existing GO lines into subway-like commuter corridors. It's since become the centrepiece of his campaign.
Tory's address to reporters was preceded by a technical briefing, in which campaign officials laid out the logistics of the proposal. Before delving into specifics, though, the campaign official leading the briefing made an uncharacteristically frank—even embarrassing—admission about Tory’s commitment to another transit project: the controversial Scarborough subway, which Tory had promised, if elected, to "start digging" in 2015. This is what the official said: "We are, of course, duly chastened in regard to when that [project] can begin. It cannot have the shovels in the ground tomorrow morning, as we had previously advertised. And we're very sorry; and we won't make that mistake again."
The 2015 prediction had always seemed far-fetched, but now this person was saying, definitively, that it was wrong. It was a newsworthy quote, but it wouldn't make news. The reason the official was free to phrase the admission in such unflattering terms is that he expected that his words would never be printed, because he was speaking on background.
“On background” is a journalism term for information given to a reporter on the record, but with the expectation that the source won't be identified or quoted directly. It’s usually a way for sources to give journalists information while avoiding personal repercussions when that information is published. Tory’s team, though, uses the tactic to let officials who aren’t polished spokespeople explain his policies. In this case, it was being used to admit a mistake without actually seeming to concede the point.
Quotations given on background are normally considered sacrosanct (although there are exceptions to every journalistic rule). And yet, on June 1, a crucial chunk of the campaign's apology appeared verbatim in an Olivia Chow press release attacking Tory. The release—titled "Reality Check: Another calculated misrepresentation by John Tory?”—read, "The Tory campaign said it was 'duly chastened' by the error [on the Scarborough subway]." The quotation and other pieces of the apology appeared in a subsequent release on June 20. Assuming Tory’s campaign hadn’t leaked the quote to Chow itself, one or more reporters had done her campaign a favour.
Jamey Heath, Chow's communications director, said he spoke to a journalist on May 30. During the conversation, he said, the journalist made reference to the Tory campaign's admission. Intrigued, Heath sought a second source. The next journalist he contacted refused to help him, arguing—correctly—that it wasn't his or her job to help Chow's campaign. Heath tried a third journalist, who proved more helpful. "Like any good Carleton journalism school graduate, I phoned another reporter, and asked him or her to confirm this for me," Heath said. "He or she went away, and reviewed their tape, and then called me back with the exact quote." Chow's campaign now had direct quotations for use in their attacks on Tory, courtesy of a member of the media. (Toronto Life is printing the quote only because parts of it have already been published elsewhere.)
"I don't think it's a favour," Heath said of the reporter's efforts. "I see it as a reporter doing his or her job."
Andrew Mitrovica, a journalist and journalism school instructor at the University of Toronto and Sheridan College, disagrees. Mitrovica, who has criticized journalists for clamming up when challenged about their own ethics, said the reporter who supplied Heath with the quotations should explain his or her choice to run errands for Chow. "The perception is that, in effect, you're working hand-in-glove with that campaign," Mitrovica said. "The reporter in question might have a different perception, but I'd like to hear the defence." Heath refused to name any of the three reporters he spoke with, whom he said work at three different media outlets.
Meanwhile, Tory's website still says crews will begin digging the Scarborough subway next year. His One Toronto transit plan claims that he will "start construction on the Scarborough subway immediately." At a June press conference, I asked Tory why his campaign materials continue to promise something that even his own spokesperson has said is impossible. Tory proceeded to bend himself into a rhetorical pretzel.
"I think 'shovels in the ground' is an expression that we all use to say you're getting on with the project," Tory said. "I realize it may be a couple of years after all the different things are done that need to be done—but the bottom line: no delays."){kind=link}
“I think ‘shovels in the ground’ is an expression that we all use to say you’re getting on with the project,”
Except that if you say “shovels in the ground in 2015”, people expect construction to start in 2015. It’s misleading and Tory knows it. It’s quite likely that shovels won’t even be brought out until after the next Mayor’s term(please, don’t let it be Ford!). Heck, it’ll take a few years to do an Environmental Assesment, assuming that council doesn’t revisit the whole LRT vs. Subway debate again.
Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the>>CLICK NEXT TAB FOR MORE INFO AND HELP
If Tory would just reverse course on the promise to keep Ford’s boondoggle of a Scarborough subway project, he would get my vote. I like the retrofitting GO train lines plan. But the Scarborough subway is a deal breaker.
A campaign doesn’t get to deliberately misrepresent fact by calling something “background.” Tory’s technical briefing is analogous to a budget lock-up: where officials brief journalists before the budget is announced. And if, in a budget lock-up, a ministry of finance official admitted the deficit targets couldn’t happen “as previously advertised,” it would rightly be news–and silencing it would be wrong. The issue here is Mr. Tory’s transit plan and economic plan (his jobs plan in Scarborough is based on shovels starting to dig in 2015) is 100% wrong, by his campaign’s own admission.
Why are journalists agreeing to go off-record with campaigns? This nonsense is odious enough with the US media doing it to supposedly hear classified info that can’t be quoted openly. Tory’s not even in office.
Particularly with a candidate still on the board of directors of one of the largest media owning companies in Canada.
Every article should include a disclaimer “John Tory can break my puny little career if he chooses so take my coverage with that in mind.”
“The perception is that, in effect, you’re working hand-in-glove with that campaign,” Mitrovica said. “The reporter in question might have a different perception, but I’d like to hear the defence.”
It would appear that two of the three journalists in question may have been happy to relate the comments provided on background to Heath because they were frustrated that the admitted whoppers told to them by the Tory campaign were still being perpetuated by that campaign publicly, despite the campaign’s claim to have been “duly chastened”.
The idea being, I supposed, to *actually* chasten them.
If journalists allow “on background” to operate as a means to manipulate them into printing false or misleading claims without attribution, the public interest is harmed and our ability to trust what we read (to whatever extent we currently do) is undermined.
Would it have helped to read an editorial directly addressing this issue (precipitated by a newspaper frustrated by continued falsehoods issued from a campaign – because, you know, gosh, that never happens?), rather than an inside-baseball piece obliquely dealing with it from a journalistic-ethics perspective (precipitated by press releases from Chow’s campaign, forcing the issue)? Who knows. But if it leads to more names attached to statements appearing in print — you know, some basic accountability — that would be great.
I find this article fascinating on many levels. First the problem with our current political model is that candidates put out platforms and end up defending them to the death for fear of being attacked as a flip flopper. Typical example is Ford’s subways subways subways. Boy it would so refreshing to hear a candidate switch their stance mid stream and admit they are willing to listen to reasonable arguments, or that things have changed. Or that things cost money and here guys …here is the reason for my choice or change of choice, let me explain it to you.
Second I find it refreshing (Andrew Miltovica) that jounalists are being called out for not expressing their views. Hell that is what I thought they were supposed to do. I can tolerate “reporters” just reporting or filming an event and shoving a mike in the face of the politcian, but journalists….hell I epect more of them. I expect them to unearth the underlying story. I expect an op-ed piece of work.
It is too bad that sometimes their future employment may be on the line…..so they try to bend over backwards to claim they are unbiased. Or when biased reporting like the Sun often does, it becomes clear that they are on someone’s payroll and is taken with a grain of salt.. But just like any whistleblower one sometimes has to stand on principals.
Where are the strong journalists to call out The Ford Family for what they are? A crime family and all that entails. People tend to get fired, assaulted and even murdered around the Fords. City Hall is a toxic place.
I have met voters who have no idea about Crazy Town, or the Globe and Mail expose. they only get their news from TV. HELP
John Tory’s support for the Scarborough subway extension demonstrates that he is after votes rather than managing transit funding efficiently.
I am in agreement that retrofitting the GO train lines and offering all-day service is good. However, the proposed Scarborough subway extension will become a white elephant as those going downtown will take an electrified GO train. Also, I expect the TTC to short-turn every second train at Kennedy station in order to save money. People living north-east of Kennedy station will get less frequent service with the Scarborough subway extension.
If John Tory becomes the next mayor, I do expect that he will back-track on his Scarborough subway extension promise. Perhaps he may support a downtown relief subway line between St. Andrew’s and Pape stations as a top priority.
He’s got my votes. I don’t want to wait for over a decade for the DRL. Metrolinx and Mayor Tory can work out the details for SmartTrack and where that fits in to the GO Electrification plan.
SmartTrack is the only plan that I’ve seen so far that actually offers to substantially cut commute times to the core for outer 416 residents. All those LRTs knock off 10-20 mins at best. And that’s according to the TTC’s own presentation boards at the public consultations I’ve attended. Let them build smart regional rail first. And worry about LRT and local transit later.