Joshua Hind: Chow can't spend the next few years pretending Oct. 7 didn't happen
Toronto's mayor needs to stop acting like a senior bureaucrat.
By: Joshua Hind
Last Monday, the United Jewish Appeal held a vigil to mark the one-year anniversary of the October 7th attacks. Once again, Mayor Chow was notably absent.
This is a pattern. One in which she tries to placate both her most progressive supporters, and the more apathetic centrist base that she needs to hold power.
On the day Olivia Chow was sworn in as Toronto’s 66th Mayor, I wrote a piece for this publication in which I applauded her for volunteering to take on a crummy job. Even with the much-discussed “strong mayor” legislation, the position of mayor of Toronto remains a soft-power position, and soft power is of limited immediate value in a moment where every problem is a “crisis.”
Despite her careful and deliberate efforts to avoid making firm commitments during the 2023 mayoral byelection, Chow entered the mayor’s office with baggage. Though she hadn’t promised to be anything more than fiscally responsible, her most vocal supporters clearly thought they’d elected The Most Progressive Mayor Ever™. After all, they likely reasoned, Chow is left-wing royalty: a long-time progressive councillor, an NDP member of Parliament, and the widow of Canadian left-wing messiah Jack Layton. After nearly nine years of conservative leadership from John Tory and the non-stop chaos that signified Rob Ford’s term, many assumed progressivism was finally returning to city hall under Chow.
Things haven’t quite worked out that way. Chow did raise property taxes — a policy move Toronto’s left has demanded since the days of Mel Lastman — but she’s been disappointing progressives on a growing list of issues. From her flip-flop stances on Ontario Place and the Science Centre to encampments and standing up to the Toronto Police and their ballooning budget, Chow has consistently avoided the confrontations her base expected her to fight. In many such cases, her attitude can best be described as disinterested. Rather than engaging with divisive issues, Chow appears singularly focused on the city’s finances.
Toronto’s progressives were essential to Chow’s success in the 2023 race. However, that constituency alone has never been large enough to bring a candidate to power. To retain the mayor’s office, Chow must appeal to the quiet majority of voters who would have re-elected John Tory, even after he admitted to dallying with a staffer. Those casual centrist voters, who wisely preserve their sanity by following local politics at a distance, will typically support the incumbent so long as the candidate feels safe, doesn’t cost them too much, and makes them believe the city’s problems are under consideration, even if they aren’t under control.
That said, progressive votes still count, and Chow can’t afford to lose all of them. This leaves her with a difficult balancing act, trying to retain the support of the progressive base that elected her while attracting centrist voters — many of whom will demand policies that directly conflict with her base’s ideals. It’s a precarious path for Chow, who isn’t a particularly strong communicator and often seems like she’d rather be left alone to tackle the city’s larger issues. Any amount of friction and her weaknesses become glaringly obvious.
On the matter of Israel and Palestine, this friction has become unavoidable.
Amidst a busy summer of public appearances, Mayor Chow faced criticism for declining to attend the "Walk with Israel," a mass demonstration organized by the UJA Federation of Greater Toronto in solidarity with Israelis affected by the October 7th attacks, which resulted in 1,200 deaths and 240 hostages being taken back to Gaza by Hamas. This decision followed her earlier absence from an Israeli flag-raising at City Hall in May, which she had called “divisive.”
Two days later after missing the October 7th vigil, Chow held a press conference where she apologized for missing the event but initially deflected blame. She claimed that the invitation had never reached her inbox and unironically promised to raise the issue with IT. Later, she contradicted that explanation by saying she was too “stretched,” caught up in a long discussion with staff about bike lanes (I am not making that up), and simply missed the vigil.
Further pressed by reporters, Chow’s frustration became evident. “I don’t know at this point, it doesn’t matter,” she snapped. Unsurprisingly, her comments were not well received.
Last Thursday, Chow tried again, appearing on CP24 for an interview, but she only managed to make things worse. In an awkward defence, she stated that “it doesn’t matter” because she had worn black on Monday “and most of the weekend.” She then threw her staff under the bus one more time before promising to “do better,” whatever that means.
Whether you believe Chow’s varied excuses or not (I do not), at this point we have sufficient evidence to conclude that Mayor Chow sees any question of Israel, October 7th, Gaza, and Palestinians as a political third rail she wants to avoid at all costs. But these issues aren’t going away, and she can’t dodge them for the next two years. She should expect to receive more invites from the UJA and other Jewish organizations, if only to test what she’ll do with them.
Politically, the math is clear. Chow cannot become a staunch supporter of Israel without alienating her base, but she also cannot continue avoiding UJA events while presenting the image of a centrist mayor. One possible escape from this mess would be to overwhelm the controversies with a substantial vision for improving the city’s operations. Chow hasn’t been interested in visions so far, though, so I wouldn’t bet on her changing that now.
Fundamentally, Chow’s problem seems to be this: in the first 15 months of her term, she has acted more like a senior bureaucrat than a political leader. While she deserves credit for addressing the macro-level issues her predecessors avoided (or made worse), her reluctance to engage with anything else makes it difficult to see any benefits. If the city’s problems persist, and if she can’t dissuade vocal community groups from actively turning against her, Chow may find herself, once again, finishing a mayoral election in third place.
Joshua Hind is a designer, writer and content creator based in Toronto. Find Joshua on Twitter at @joshuahind and on YouTube at @nohumbleopinions.
The Line is entirely reader funded. If you value our work and worry about what will happen when the conventional media finishes collapsing, please make a donation today.
The Line is Canada’s last, best hope for irreverent commentary. We reject bullshit. We love lively writing. Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Follow us on Twitter @the_lineca. Fight with us on Facebook. Pitch us something:
Although there are many who might consider Toronto the centre of the universe and its municipal politics as critical to all Canadians it’s likely not really the case and there are many who could give a rats patoot about the twisted angst visited upon the citizens of that city.
I neither live in Toronto nor do I want to live there. Of course, in this country we must live with Toronto being the center of the universe (Canada edition) and, obviously, obviously, obviously everything TO is necessarily of interest to we the great unwashed. Even when it is not.
That is not a slam at this column but is a ham-handed way of saying that even though I don't live in TO, I am aware of the Mayor and the disgraceful way that she has conducted herself on this issue. It is clear that she is not interested in doing what is right but is only interested in doing what is politically expedient.
Why do I say that she is not doing what is right? Well, her various and sundry contradictory excuses show that she cannot figure out what she should say. If she really believes that Israel is bad actor (I don't) or that Jews deserve all that happens/happened to them (dammit, that is just going far, far too far even for a stupid leftist) or that nothing happened on October 7 (Laif Marouf et al - you know, the really deranged types) then she should say so and take the heat. If she is a supporter of Israel, etc., etc. she should say so and take the heat.
But, no, she isn't interested in doing what is right but only what is kinda, possibly maybe, perhaps expedient. No matter how disgraceful that shows her to be.