Shaun Cleaver, TTCrider member and University of Toronto graduate student sent the following email to Murtaza Haider of Ryerson University on July 10, 2013 in response to a disappointing commentary published in the Globe & Mail.
Professor Haider,
I was recently pointed to your commentary in the Globe & Mail. As a Toronto-based graduate student I was extremely disappointed to see an assistant dean of graduate programs advance an opinion that is contrary to the interests of graduate students, let alone one sustantiated according to rather bizarre and short-sighted reasoning.
A recent UofT survey estimated that 52% of the graduate students at our downtown campus commute to school using public transit. With us being just down the road from you, I suspect that the decisions made by Ryerson graduate students are similar. Moreover, many of us reside in what are commonly referred to as the “suburbs”: the segments of the GTA constructed according to the dominant post-WWII building form, which privileged the automobile as the sole viable mode of regular transportation. There are multiple reasons for graduate students to live in suburban areas and commute to our campuses downtown by transit (instead of automobile) including, among others, costs, social or environmental principles, and the inability to drive a car. As such, the opinion that “Investments in extending transit coverage to suburbs, where commuters enjoy significantly shorter commutes by car, will be wasting taxpayers’ money” is highly problematic, especially during a period where we are finally approaching a critical mass of public support for reasonable public transit funding in Ontario. With such investment there will be a major change in the way that we are able to get around our region; and for many students this will mean a faster and more convenient trip to and from campus, let alone a system that allows us to actually get from most points A to various points B.
I could extend this message by adequately discussing the flawed logic of concluding that the automobile is a more convenient travel option for citizens of the “suburbs” based on reduced travel times, when that conclusion is made according to our current situation where the built environment is designed to privilege automobile use and public transit coverage is shoddy. I will opt not to, however, because even if your logic was reasonable, the conclusion that you have publicly advanced is a tremendous disservice to your student body.
I happen to agree completely with the advantages of public transit that you mention and also have major problems with the current obsession with commute time as THE rationale to support adequate investment in public transit. Unfortunately, those minor (positive) points are heavily outweighed by a commentary that is highly problematic. I would be extremely surprised if you were oblivious to how the messaging in this commentary is problematic to graduate students at Toronto universities (to name but one constituency detrimentally affected by the position you advance). Through a Google search I was unable to locate subsequent communications where you account and atone for the damage inflicted by this piece; please advise me as to where you have communicated this.
Regards, Shaun Cleaver, PT, MSc, PhD student Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science University of Toronto Member UofT GSU Civics, Environmental Justice and Sustainability Committee Member TTCriders
Ben Spurr and Ben Cohen of the Toronto Star report on the 2025 City Budget. TTC riders are considered winners due to the investments being made in transit!
Read analysis from TTCriders about what's being proposed in the TTC budget in 2025 and how to get involved! Members of the public can speak directly to City Councillors during budget hearings on January 21 and 22 at locations across Toronto.
TTCriders reaction to the release of the 2025 TTC budget.