toronto100On May 11, Habitat for Humanity hosted a mayoral debate among the 6 frontrunners in Toronto mayoral race on affordable housing.

The debate gave the candidates an opportunity to elaborate on their platforms. But generally speaking, they stayed to their rehearsed talking points, while taking the occasional potshot at each other’s campaigns.

To bring you up to speed on their individual positions, here’s our cheat sheet on their positions:

Rob Ford

According to the Gospel of Ford, the system is broken and no more social housing should be built in Toronto. Instead, the city should take advantage of the current vacancy rates in private buildings and provide rent subsidies to low-income individuals. Ford peppered his speech with comments on the remarkable cleanliness of social housing in Toronto (he’s visited people in social housing) and how the Rob Ford Football Foundation was a good place for youth in social housing to become healthy and productive citizens.

Giorgio Mammoliti

Mammoliti, chair of the city’s Affordable Housing Committee, repeatedly flourished a copy of the Housing Opportunities Toronto: An Affordable Housing Action Plan 2010-2020 (HOT) as if it were his campaign document. He identified himself as a champion for further social housing development and reinvestment in existing stock. And yet his position on inclusionary zoning was surprisingly evasive, suggesting that he would defer to local communities (read: local NIMBYism). Mammoliti’s primary target for barbs was his council-mate Ford, who he repeatedly charged with a lack of experience on the issue.

Joe Pantalone

As Deputy Mayor and the sole lefty on the panel, Pantalone defended Mayor Miller’s record on the file (and got booed for that). He also emphasized the need for a national housing strategy, citing Bill C-304 which recently passed second reading. Pantalone also made a suggestive pitch for Transit City, noting the correlation between accessible housing and transit – that real estate near good public transit is unaffordable and that low to moderate income earners are denied opportunities as a result of that. Pantalone took issue with Smitherman on provincial funding for housing and Transit City and with Ford and Rossi on relying on private interests and to support social housing. But overall, Pantalone’s delivery was garbled and he got clobbered when he attacked Smitherman on how scandals like eHealth diverted money from the city – with ‘Furious George’ parrying back with a laundry list of poorly run, over budget city-run projects.

Rocco Rossi

For a Liberal, Rossi sounded like a dyed in the wool blue conservative. His message was simple and unequivocal: the invisible hand of the market is the solution to social housing. The public sector, with its “culture of waste” and lack of fiscal accountability needs to focus on regulation and hand the management of social housing over to the efficient, effective private sector developers and landlords. His solution for waiting lists is a more robust and dynamic city economy that will create higher paying jobs. When Rossi cited Pathways to Education as an effective, innovative private sector solution, however, he was challenged by Smitherman on the reality of this claim.

George Smitherman

Just as Mammoliti trotted out his HOT report, Smitherman repeatedly cited Habitat for Humanity, Streets to Homes, Options for Homes, Artscape and Toronto Community Housing initiatives in Regent Park and Lawrence Heights as models for the future of affordable housing. He also pointed to his work as Minister of Health in creating 6,000 units of housing for the mentally ill. Smitherman suggested that solutions for social housing should come from across the political spectrum. On the right side of the plank, he agreed that private housing stock could be used to create affordable housing and cited his track record of fiscal discipline. On the left side of the plank: reinvesting in the existing social housing stock, leveraging city land resources and the necessity of government’s central role in building affordable housing. The left side took centre stage when he challenged Rossi on the notion that you can run a city like a business — because when it comes to cities, there is no single bottom line.

Sarah Thomson

Strains of Kumbaya could almost be heard every time Thomson spoke. Weighing into the debate based on her credentials as a (briefly) homeless teen and a business leader committed to working across boundaries, Thomson was light on details but big on the warm fuzzies of cooperation and collaboration. She advocated partnerships between private, public and non-profit organizations and offering the poor a “hand up, not a handout.” She was also the only candidate prepared with a prop, sporting a pink hardhat to complement the Habitat volunteers’ white ones.

Looking for more commentary? Visit: