Talk:Hazel McCallion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Contents

[edit] Neutrality and sufficient content

This is quite a glowing article for a fairly divisive figure. The section I marked makes assertations that are not backed up with evidence. In fact, this article reads like even more of a mash note than her official biography. The description of Mississauga as a shining suburban (sorry, "urban") paradise is questionable.

This article needs expansion. McCallion is a colorful, popular, and notorious figure. To claim she is without "ideological pretensions" (with no evidence, of course) is misleading at best. Cleduc 19:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

And it turns out: this suspect content was removed once before, and then added back by User:Mikerussell. The same POV issues remain however. I'm deleting the POV parts now. Cleduc 19:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Campaigning

I've heard that Hurricane Hazel hasn't had to campaign for the past little while... that could easily be wrong, but it would be nice if it were true, eh? Kareeser|Talk! 17:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

It very much is true. During the last municipal campaign she took a vacation to China, and asked all her supporters offering donations to give the money to charity instead. I added a small note about that in the article. Snickerdo 21:40, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hazel McCallion's "ideological pretensions"

I suppose this is rather belated, by six months or so, but it is the first time I read your comments and they sparked my curiousity. To say that Mayor McCallion has no ideological pretension means she does not closely or recurrently align herself with a clearly defined political party or right or left wing policy framework. You're definition must be different, at least I am assuming, so before I make a revision to the article in the future, I thought I would ask for an explanation to your problem with such an accurate assememnt. In the new edit I will add info on how she has worked with both provincial and federal parties and her own lack of a university education which may be a contributing factor in the absence of an ideological orientation. Also, the fact she is a municipal politician adds much, if not all-to-obvious, weight to her absence of defining herself as a party affliated politician. Quiet frankly, I think you are biasing the article out of your ignorance. --Mikerussell 07:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

To write that she has no ideological pretensions or orientations is meaningless opinion and cannot be proven. If it is meant to mean something else, then it should be written another way. As it was written, I could read it to mean that McCallion holds no ideology above any other -- that, for example, she'd be equally comfortable with Trotskyite Communism and Mussolini Fascism. If you wish to state "she does not closely or recurrently align herself with a clearly defined political party or right or left wing policy framework" then that's what you should write, and provide sources to prove. I myself have some doubts on the latter part, and would watch for neutral, reliable sources to back it up (as opposed to original research). Also, I respectfully request that you refrain from making assumptions about my ignorance on the subject. Cleduc 19:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
It strikes me as biased or POV to interpret the word ‘ideological’ in this article- a civic leader in Mississauga- in the fashion you have in your response. Do you seriously think the average reader would assume she is a Trotskyite? Get a grip on the language used, and not a strict, exaggerated interpretation of the word. We cannot assume every wikipedia reader is a moron; the context under which one writes cannot be debased by some irrational standard applied by a single opinionated contributor. Apart from taking a rather straightforward and frank assessment of your qualification on the topic, namely Mayor McCallion and Mississauga’s governance, too personally, you have failed to offer much in response to counter my original astonishment at the surprise I have at your edit of the article. I will try to add more and replace a picture that as taken down, but overall, unless you really think that it is prudent, logical, or good prose to make certain ‘ideology’ a word coined by Karl Marx and tied to his view of History, a word almost totally divorced from its original meaning, which currently covers a wide spectrum of political opinion, is used in some strict academic fashion, then I suspect we will meet again on the Hazel McCallion page. Thanks for the response. --Mikerussell 00:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
I look forward to reading your changes on Hazel McCallion, and encourage you to look for sources which document her freedom from ideology. Words are what we have to work with, and they matter. Cleduc 00:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't want to pick a fight, but in re-reading this whole exchange I thought I might clarify a point. The reason why I said "Quiet frankly, I think you are biasing the article out of your ignorance" is not anyway intended as an assessment of you or your background- that is why I said you misconstrued it too personally, but perhaps I was not clear. The statement was/is based on my reading of the article and your contributions to it (as seen in history listing) which do not provide any information on what ideological position she does have. My actual comment way back when (6 months ago) was she has 'no set ideological pretensions'- italics now added, which you saw as POV, but you have not ascribed her any ideology either, thus you must be 'ignorant' of what ideology she has, yet certain she has one. Well, what it is it then? You add info about ring tones, but nothing about her ideological views, why not? That is why I claimed you were 'ignorant', it was a 'descriptive' evaluation in my mind of what the article currently states. At any rate, just thought I would make that comment clear because it may be days before I get around to getting a usable picture and updating the article. When I do, I am sure you may have comments. However, you must also be prepared with, in your words, to have "neutral, reliable sources to back it up (as opposed to original research)" to support your own opinions. Thanks for debating. --Mikerussell 05:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

The new article Mikerussell wrote looks really good. There are a couple of points I'd like to establish some references for:

  • Biographical notes. Is there a comprehensive source for this, like a printed biography?
I will try to get a citable reference.
  • CP rail spill & subsequent evacuation. good source?
Need to find one.
  • Conflict of interest. Source? All I can find is this person and I'm thinking I don't want to hang an argument on that.
I really don't have any knowledge of this issue but from this article, I assumed it was true, or at least possible, but maybe it is one of the things that someone planted and nobody ever did the research to confirm its validy.
  • Anglophone exodus linked to Mississauga's growth. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is fairly silent on this... the Montreal article deafeningly so. Is there a source which can document this, and more specifically the link to the growth of Mississauga? It makes sense, but I don't want to draw this conclusion without a source for cover.
This, I must confess on reflection is partially based on my personal, ancedotal experience as a child in Mississauga and having so many new classmates from Baconsfield and other Montreal anglophone, upper-middle class neighbourhoods enroll in school. Howvever, there must be clear, objective sources which document the flight of corporate head offices and jobs from Montreal to Toronto. Families left as jobs left, but also many left because of Bill 101, the law which mandated French language schooling for all children unless each parent had been taught in English in Quebec. In fact, if I had more time now I would try to do a better job of researching this myself, but it is a fact that many anglophones left in the late 70s because they feared a further erosion of their 'rights'- and the Quebec government and population did not much object to the migration. This might be why the migration is not mentioned often, there is a tincture of racism to the whole thing perhaps. Although whether it was racism correcting racism is another issue; after all, the history of the Province was one in which the minority group (the English-speakers) were disproportionatly found in high-paying, commercial or adminstrative positions, partially because English was the language of business and commerce, if not law and government, and French was the language of the 'masses'. For a francophone to rise to a position of power they had to learn English, if not work and live in English. The article of Bill 101 gives some insight into this- in that the change under the PQ was a clear and decisive policy to end the dominence of English in the 'upper classes' or 'business world', and thus diminish the disadvantage Francophones had in employment and government. I think even to be a Montreal Police officer before the PQ you had to speak English, not French, whereas a French Cop would have to know both languages. So maybe this is way too much to incorporate in the Hazel McCallion article, but some objective statistics should be found that testify to the population and business shift to Toronto. Right now I don't have time to do the research, but somebody might, or I might try later. --Mikerussell 03:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Pearson Airport Terminal 3. I also recall her extracting a pound of flesh from the Feds... the "world's largest septic pool" quote comes to mind. Is there an easy source for this, or do we have to hit the newspaper archives (groan)?
again, good question, there should be a usable source, but i will need more time to get it. --Mikerussell 04:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Gridlock and failure to achieve transportation goals. I can dig out the original EIS for the Transitway, but I don't have a good source for her own role in its (non-)development and whether it was her initiative (I know, I know, who else's could it have been?). Is there someplace that talks about what her vision for Mississauga's transportation infrastructure was and how she didn't accomplish it, or did she actually achieve her vision (and it's what we have today)? Cleduc 04:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Publications

Here are some sources I found at the Toronto Public Library and the Mississauga Library System. Are there any other published sources recommended?

  • Madam mayor the life and times of Hurricane Hazel. Rogers Video, 2001. (available for loan at TPL, MLS)
  • Urbaniak, Tom. Farewell, town of Streetsville : the year before amalgamation. Epic Press, 2002. (Reference stacks only at TPL; MLS has 16 copies)
  • An Interview with Mayor Hazel McCallion about her career in politics, Mississauga Heritage Foundation, 2001. (MLS Call #: CAN R 971. 3535 INT)
  • Mayor Hazel McCallion. Newspaper clippings. Mississauga Library System. 1980- (MLS, Ref stacks)
  • Moving forward together : a discussion paper. Hazel McCallion, Mel Lastman, Nancy L. Diamond, Barbara Hall, 1996. (MLS Call #: R/352./07135/MOV)
  • Shape the future [2003] : Central Ontario Smart Growth Panel : final report (MLS: Call #: CAN R 338. 9713 ONT)

[edit] Noting references

Perhaps we should use the <ref> system to footnote these points. Cleduc 04:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] oldest

Is she the oldest mayor in the world? Or of Ontario? or something?--Sonjaaa 18:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but she certainly is the sexiest. --72.57.241.84 22:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hazel McCallion's Maiden Name?

Does anybody have her maiden name? It would be less awkward to write "Hazel McCallion (born Hazel xxxxxx)" in the first section... 64.228.130.138 04:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hazel was accused of racist remarks

Hazel was accused of racist remarks a few years ago, 2001 or 2002 I believe. The nature of the comments were basically an implication that people of ethnic heritage (particularly South Asian) were draining the health care system. She also mocked their "native costumes." I haven't had much luck finding the articles, maybe someone else has seen them recently. This, and Hazel's recent car accident, would give her article a greater sense of balance. 72.137.224.24 01:20 17 October 2006

Somebody should remind you what the word "accused" means.--Mikerussell 04:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Shanel's valueless deletions on Political Ideology

As a general rule an editor that deletes a whole section of a long standing article should make a claim in the discussion page to the value the deletion adds to the article. I can see none whatsoever, as some info is better than none and reinserted the paragraphs and sections. I found no evidence of any incorporation in the other parts of the article. --Mikerussell 01:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I removed the entire section because it was unreferenced and reads like an election advertisement. It is also POV, in my opinion. In incorporated the paragraph "McCallion is the founder of Hazel's Hope, a campaign to fund health care for children afflicted with AIDS and HIV in southern Africa. Accordingly, she has been lauded as "an international ambassador for the city and a world citizen" by World Mayor, a non-partisan, not-for-profit organization advancing the concerns of cities internationally." into the "Personal" section. I have put the {{advertisement}} template on the section for now.--§hanel 07:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
There are 2 references cited in the paragraph, each with outside links. The first paragraphs about her working with other governemnt is just common sense, and it is included because it shows no clear political party preference. Is she a Liberal, Conservative, or NDPer? That's what can be reasonably infered by a reader with that sentence so it is useful- she is pragmatic more than politically attached to an ideology. She worked with the Harris governemnt and the Perterson government and the Bob Rae government etc., so unless you can source something to suggest she worked better with any one of the three major parties then I hardly think it is outlandish to remain in the article. Her policy of running the city like a business might need to be sourced but all that is requirred is a {{Fact}} tag; otherwise, the article is fairly straight foward.
As far as advertisement tag- what is this article selling? I don't get it. This is not a consumer good, you are suggesting wikipedia has such power as to effect the voters of Missisauga in 2010, or in the latest election? If you are saying it interferes with others opposing her in the City of Missisauga city counsel, or other municipalities in Ontario, then you might be accused of being POV yourself. This advertisement tag simply does not apply, the notion that this is propaganda is just your own POV opinion, she has won all the awards mentioned, are we suppose to hide that fact? She is suppose to apologize for winning the award or starting a charity or getting the Order of Canada? I think you should try to expand the article if you feel it doesn't mention important facts about her, but you need to better articulate the standard by which you feel this article is propoganda. --Mikerussell 06:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality question (July 31, 2007) By: The Mississauga Muse

I agree with the statements above. McCallion is on record as insisting that Council must look at issues and in reaching decisions from "a corporate point of view". She is on record as saying "We don't operate like the Federal and Provincial government. Thank God. Thank God I say again."

The Federal government (Canada) and the Provincial (Ontario) have opposition parties. The other thing is all debate at both levels are in the Hansard records. The public can read every word uttered at both levels of government.

Mississauga isn't like that at all. It's, shall we say, "efficient".

One of the more revealing insights into Hazel McCallion's ideology can be found in this 16 minute video on Google Video when she took on Councillor Carolyn Parrish.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5486668015046113293

Perhaps that might be of help in defining McCallion's Mississauga. You know, her own words and actions? Hope this helps.

This is for Mike Russell. I've been reading this debate here with great interest. I also read your bio. It reads, "I was born, raised and educated in Toronto; I have no real expertise or insight on any matters pertaining to my contributions and I don't take wikipedia too seriously."

And we are now supposed to take your contributions on Hazel McCallion seriously? Do you attend Council meetings or General Committee meetings or standing committee meetings? Do you read the agendas and the minutes of each one? At attend Peel meetings too? Do any Freedom of Information research on Mississauga municipal governance to verify statements posted at mississauga.ca? User:The Mississauga Muse July 31, 2007

You have failed to contribute much but your own opinion, so it is not helpful. You are attributing quotes to McCallion without references, meaning from legitimate sources where others can read beyond this website, and without context. Moreover, you are unclear about what exactly point you are trying to contest or reply to. You want readers to spend 16 minutes listening to a video or read a Hansard in vain since Mayor McCallion would never be found in any record of the House of Commons or Queens Park- she is a municipal politician. Do you mean Mississauga City Council minutes? Why don't you try explaining what is at issue, before misleading readers and contradicting yourself.--Mikerussell 04:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Mikerussell wrote:

"You want readers to spend 16 minutes listening to a video or read a Hansard in vain since Mayor McCallion would never be found in any record of the House of Commons or Queens Park- she is a municipal politician."

For someone writin' about McCallion, you should know that her primary mantra is "Do your homework". You haven't. McCallion HAS appeared on record of the House of Commons (Queen's Park)

Quick easy example:

"Consideration of Bill 130, An Act to amend various Acts in relation to municipalities / Projet de loi 130, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne les municipalités."

http://www.ontla.on.ca/committee-proceedings/transcripts/files_html/2006-11-22_G038.htm#P80_3057

Usually though her name appears in Hansard as it's tossed around by others. Example:

Hansard). Tuesday 26 April 2005. Mardi 26 avril 2005. Speaker.

MPP John Baird:

"Baird: The member opposite has my private line at his desk, I guess, and still gets calls. I got this call from this hysterical woman saying to me, “Mr. Minister, I’ve got a double-barrelled shotgun, it’s blazing and it’s got your name on it.” I said, “Who the heck is this?” Then I looked at the call display, and it said, “City of Mississauga, Mayor’s office,” and I believe it was Her Worship offering her suggestions as to my energy policy. I know she can exert considerable influ-ence, but it’s important that reason prevail, that it’s not just that the person who demands".

The issue is that Hazel McCallion's Mississauga is based on stupifying hypocrisy. While she lauds openness, accountability and importance of public input, Mississauga has NO PUBLIC COMPLAINTS system.

None.

Mississauga Parks and Recreation keep no records of public complaints. Neither does Mississauga Corporate Security. Imagine --security guards who can arrest, handcuff you and there is no complaints procedure.

Freedom of Information confirms that there is not a single record of a complaint made against Mississauga Parks and Recreation or Mississauga Corporate Security?

Hazel McCallion boasts about openness and the important of providing citizens with information. Yet McCallion's Mississauga has but one person in the entire Freedom of Information department.

Just one. And that person isn't doing Freedom of Information full time.

To return to what you wrote:

""You want readers to spend 16 minutes listening to a video"...

No, not people. But certainly the dude writin' up about some person here in Wikipedia. Good grief. Yeah. Listen to some of the Pure Duplicity she routinely spouts.

McCallion can get away with the bull she does because there's no opposition parties at the municipal level. There's no watchdog media with anything resembling guts and a memory. And a joke of a local television "news" show.

Mississauga is a Company Town.

Next you wrote:

"You are attributing quotes to McCallion without references, meaning from legitimate sources where others can read beyond this website, and without context."

What is better than a person's own words?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPztx3Y5Cig

See you at the November 25th Audit Committee, dude?

Signed, The Mississauga Muse

OOOPS... FOUND SOMETHIN' ELSE:

Regarding the entry:

"Her principles are grounded in the belief that a city should be run like a business; thus, she encourages the business model of governance."

During the October 24, 2007 Audit Committee, it became apparent that while McCallion "encourages the business model of governance", she is unable to get staff (also senior staff) to comply to the standards that a reasonable person (as in "reasonable person test") would come to expect.

Staff switch contracts without consulting with Council and even small switches are done without proper documentation. Records in some departments vary from "adequate" to "non-existent" (Happy to provide you with the visuals to support this. And even audiotapes)

And of course then there's ENERSOURCE. 90% owned by the City of Mississauga (that is Mississauga residents are owners of Enersource). Yet the 10% shareholders OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System) can veta anything that the other 90% on anything.

Seems Hazel McCallion's "I run Mississauga like a business" Mississauga signed an agreement on behalf of Mississauga citizens that contained no dispute resolution clause! City of Mississauga was to lower the salaries of the Enersource Board of Directors?

10% OMERS says no?

No it is.

Oh, that's how I'd run a business all right. Municipal employees call the entire shots at Mississauga Hydro and 90% City of Mississauga can't do a freaking thing about it.

"no dispute resolution clause in the agreement"

Here --nothing lengthy. Just a bit over two minutes long.

Hazel McCallion's "I run Mississauga like a business" Mississauga in action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guxFljvTmto


Signed: The Mississauga Muse

I am still a little mystified at why you have such a misplaced sense of indignation at me, at wikipedia, and MCallion. First and foremost anybody can edit any article on wikipedia. My contributions are no more important than any other's editors. Nor do I believe I have added much info that relates to the daily politics of the city. If you have info that relates to this add it here and elsewhere and the weight of other editors will shape it over time. You really do exhibit a kind of "wacko" unbalanced tone here against the Mayor in my opinion, who is not a totalitarian despot, nor does she run the government alone. If you have reason to cite all this video junk- and it is junk in my opinion because they are out of context and people just have no idea what the point is with them, please explain the issue. Lets be honest- anybody familiar with municipal government will tell you that a few citizens can get very angry with the city. There is a reason why they install plexiglass at a lot of city's bylaw depts and tax depts, if you know what I mean. You seem to have some uindisclosed personal axe to grind, and if you can offer the readers of wikipedia evidence that McCallion is oppressing the civil rights of people who compalin about Parks & rec or whatever- just add it and let the other readers of wikipedia judge. otherwise, you are just wasting your time and making yourself look foolish too.--Mikerussell 02:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)