Toronto has developed a unique civic strength: it excels at conducting repeated consultations on strategies and visions. This process has delivered tangible results in areas such as the Eglinton Crosstown and improved snow removal.
However, Toronto’s track record on long-term social strategies and structural reform remains uncertain. We provide six examples below where processes replaced outcomes.
But before we enumerate them, it is important to acknowledge the accomplishments and milestones that the City has achieved.
Toronto’s accomplishments
This year’s Toronto City Budget makes targeted investments in the services that matter most to communities across our city. It includes over $30 million in new and enhanced funding for key programs.
There are also important increases to the Rent Bank to help prevent evictions and strengthened support for RentSafeTO to improve housing conditions. Student nutrition and camp nutrition programs are expanding, reaching more children and youth. TTC fares are frozen again and fare capping is moving forward, making transit more affordable for low income riders. Library hours are expanding, and there are added supports for seniors, tenants, community health initiatives, and local climate action.
These outcomes are the result of sound management, sustained advocacy, strong research, and coordinated community pressure.
Consultations, but where are the decisions?
But across major initiatives such as the Neighbourhood Improvement Areas (NIAs), Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS), the Seniors Strategy, COVID recovery engagement, disability planning, and violence-against-women consultations, a consistent pattern emerges. Residents note that timelines are unclear, replacement frameworks are lacking, and action plans often devolve into ongoing activity without accomplishment. As a result, consultations become routine while city hall decisions remain temporary.
This issue is not primarily about staff capacity; it reflects a lack of political leadership.
Council and the Mayor set timelines. Council approves strategies and Council decides whether action plans are mandatory. Council determines whether consultations culminate in votes.
When consultation becomes the endpoint rather than a step toward decision-making, it is a political choice. This approach is eroding clarity, accountability, and public trust in city institutions.
Six examples of consultation as endpoint
Example 1: TSNS 2020 (when “2020” becomes a museum label)
The Toronto Strong Neighbourhoods Strategy 2020 (TSNS 2020) designated 31 Neighbourhood Improvement Areas beginning in 2014.
The branding was explicit: “2020” implied a horizon. It suggested that by that date, Council would evaluate progress and adopt a successor framework.
The TSNS 2020 formally ended in 2020, but the designation system did not.
After the City reconfigured neighbourhood boundaries in 2022, the official language states that affected NIAs “inherit their designation until such a time as a new neighbourhood place-based strategy is released.”
There is no end date, binding milestone, or public deadline.
This language is intentional and reflects a political decision not to commit Council to a successor timeline.
If a strategy branded as ‘2020’ continues into 2026 without a replacement framework, the delay is not technical nor can it be blamed on the pandemic. It is a governance decision not to prioritize closure. Council could set a clear date, but has chosen not to.
This political drift has created open-endedness in a strategy that could have transformed the lives of many underprivileged groups and neighbourhoods across the city. Did Council take on more than it could manage?
Example 2: Poverty reduction (a 20-year plan without results)
Toronto’s Poverty Reduction Strategy was built as a 20-year framework with term-based action plans. The First Term Action Plan (2016–2018) and the Second Term Action Plan (2019–2022) provided clear deliverable structures.
The Third Term (2023–2026) silently abandoned the action-plan format following extensive stakeholder consultations.
This change did not occur due to staff oversight, but because Council quietly discontinued the action-plan approach.
Long-term strategies require short-term political action. Four-year action plans turn aspirations into commitments that Councillors can defend or revise.
Without an action plan, Council cannot be held accountable for its commitments.
What remains is a list of ongoing actions, cross-references to other strategies, and narrative reporting that creates confusion rather than results.
An effective government strategy sets deadlines and outlines clear actions for Council. Additionally, staff may provide activity updates on actions that may or may not be completed for various reasons.
The first approach holds elected officials accountable, while the second insulates them from responsibility.
Without term-based action plans mandated by Council, the Poverty Reduction Strategy becomes a living framework without political accountability.
This political comfort continues to cause public confusion, erode trust, and reinforce the trend of open-ended strategies.
Example 3: The Seniors’ Strategy (consultation without ranking)
The City has been transparent about the Seniors’ Strategy process. Consultations have begun, “What we heard” reports are promised, and the strategy is scheduled for Council consideration in 2026. This work is important and consultation across broad fronts is needed.
The primary risk is not delay, but rather expanding the process without establishing political priorities.
A seniors’ strategy affects many areas, including housing, transit, health, income, isolation, and ageism. Comprehensive consultation ensured all legitimate concerns were acknowledged.
Only the Council can set these priorities. Staff cannot determine which issues to exclude, as sequencing trade-offs is a political responsibility reserved for elected officials.
If the final strategy becomes a list of aspirations instead of a focused, costed, and sequenced plan, it risks failure. This is not due to excessive consultation, but rather the Council’s reluctance to narrow the agenda.
When every issue is a priority, none are. This creates unrealistic expectations and increases the risk of unmet goals. Priority inflation reflects a political failure to make choices.
For example, there is growing alarm concerning the increasing numbers of single senior women who have been private market renters but who are now showing up in shelters and encampments. A critical issue like this should top the list of any seniors’ strategy but it appears to have only been ‘added to the list’. This should not be acceptable.
Example 4: COVID/Pandemic recovery (engagement without change)
The City’s COVID recovery engagement included roundtables, surveys, equity-focused language, and narratives supporting inclusive rebuilding. It remains unclear what structural reforms, if any, that Council will adopt.
The formal Council decision document outlined what was heard, what was adopted, and what was rejected. While there was engagement with residents affected by the pandemic, Council-level changes were limited. If consultation does not result in a visible change to a bylaw, responsibility remains with Councillors and the Mayor.
The Council controls the floor agenda, and the Mayor drives political momentum. Without their support, consultation becomes archival, and residents may lose trust in public institutions.
Example 5: Disability strategy (still at risk unless the council sets hard timelines)
The disability strategy currently mirrors the PRS approach, featuring broad engagement, intersectional framing, and strong values-based language.
However, whether it becomes another open-ended framework depends on Council action.
Only time will tell if Council will include clear implementation schedules, ranked priorities, term-based commitments, and public scorecards.
Alternatively, Council may adopt another values-driven strategy without enforceable sequencing.
A well-designed engagement process can support findings when a strategy includes measurable outcomes and accountability features. Only Council can ensure discipline.
Example 6: Violence against women strategy (consultation without a vote)
A clear example of political responsibility is the consultation on violence against women, which did not meaningfully reach the Council floor.
Many survivors participated, numerous advocates engaged, and city staff prepared findings. However, without a formal Council debate and vote, the consultation remains incomplete.
When engagement does not result in legislative closure, it reflects political avoidance rather than administrative drift.
An underlying pattern: Elected officials can favour consultation over accomplishment
A clear and consistent pattern emerges across these files:
- TSNS 2020 persists without a replacement deadline.
- PRS loses its action plan framework.
- The Seniors Strategy expands without clear prioritization.
- COVID recovery engagement did not result in a visible shift .
- Disability planning becomes unfocused.
- Violence-against-women consultations stalled before reaching Council resolution.
These examples reflect a broader political culture that views consultation as safer than making definitive choices.
Consultation distributes responsibility, but decisions concentrate it.
Consultation signals empathy, and decisions create wins and losses.
Consultation extends timelines, and decisions force trade-offs.
In a council chamber where coalition-building is fragile and political risk is high, consultation is appealing. It allows elected officials to demonstrate they are listening without committing to narrowing options or setting priorities, even though effective leadership requires these actions.
Systemic consequences of Toronto’s current consultation culture
When consultation becomes the dominant political approach, three consequences follow.
1. Endless ‘Provisionality’
Frameworks remain in place indefinitely when no elected body sets a clear deadline. Provisional status becomes permanent because Councillors are reluctant to call for a vote.
2. Diffused accountability
Without action plans aligned to Council terms, it is difficult to attribute achievements. Strategies often outlast electoral cycles which blurs accountability.
3. Priority inflation
Each consultation introduces valid concerns. Without clear prioritization, strategies expand beyond the city’s capacity to implement them effectively.
At that point, engagement is measurable, but outcomes are not.
Expectations for strong political leadership
The solution is not less consultation, but greater political discipline and commitment. This includes Council-imposed deadlines, replacement plans as needed, and clear action plans.
This should also include term-based commitments adopted by vote and a publicly voted priority cap. Council should publicly rank top priorities, accept the political consequences, and formally adopt or reject proposals after consultation. All engagements should culminate in a vote, even if it is uncomfortable. Strategies should include sunset clauses and expire unless Council explicitly renews them.
These are not technical reforms, but political actions expected from a strong and committed Council.
Intentional listening
If the Council does not deliver results, Torontonians will continue to feel ignored. Without intentional listening, the Council and the Mayor risk substituting consultation for real decisions, leaving those most affected without meaningful outcomes.
When ‘2020’ extends into 2026, a neighbourhood priority strategy drifts without an action plan, a poverty reduction strategy meanders, a seniors strategy expands without prioritization, pandemic consultations leave little lasting impact, a disability strategy drifts and consultations on violence against women stall before a vote, the public then begins to suspect that the process is being mistaken for progress.
Toronto is effective at listening but should focus on intentional listening. Elected leaders must improve at completing initiatives, as strategies are measured by Council decisions and the deadlines they commit to. Toronto does not have a consultation problem; it has a political completion problem.
Until the Council acknowledges this distinction, the next ‘2020’ will quietly arrive and pass without accountability. Council owes it to residents who feel disrespected and unheard.
A glimmer of hope
In recent years, the City budget committee has asked Torontonians to identify three important services for investment. This decisive action set achievable goals and led to strong budget investments, with residents accepting decisions that followed a clear process from beginning to end. This approach can be adopted in other city strategies.
Council owes it to residents like Siva, Abdul, Sufia, and Nima who participate in strategy consultations to see results that improve their lives and neighborhoods. Council owes results to these hopeful residents.