Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ratio'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Real estate projects
    • Proposals
    • Going up
    • Completed
    • Mass Transit
    • Infrastructures
    • Cultural, entertainment and sport projects
    • Cancelled projects
  • General topics
    • City planning and architecture
    • Economy discussions
    • Technology, video games and gadgets
    • Urban tech
    • General discussions
    • Entertainment, food and culture
    • Current events
    • Off Topic
  • MTLYUL Aviation
    • General discussion
    • Spotting at YUL
  • Here and abroad
    • City of Québec
    • Around the province of Québec.
    • Toronto and the rest of Canada
    • USA
    • Europe
    • Projects elsewhere in the world
  • Photography and videos
    • Urban photography
    • Other pictures
    • Old pictures

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Biography


Location


Interests


Occupation


Type of dwelling

Found 9 results

  1. 1:40 Campaign – What happens now? AIR CANADA COMPONENT A MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT Dear members, Last Thursday, on May 22nd, we met with officials with Transport Canada to present our objections and arguments against their proposed regulatory change (NPA – to consult it click HERE http://gallery.mailchimp.com/f6750312d5/files/5a08042b-48e8-48a2-88e3-4536caa1f04a.pdf), which will allow airlines in Canada to flip-flop between the 1:40 ratio and the 1:50 ratio at will, per aircraft type. It is fair to say that we took Transport Canada by surprise last Thursday – a sizable crowd participated in this meeting from across Canada, including over 125 CUPE flight attendants, members of the news media, members of Parliament, and allies representing different groups. We expressed our views forcefully and eloquently, and clearly demonstrated that passenger safety would be compromised if this regulation were approved. During our presentation, we had hoped to screen our newly recorded video testimonial of a survivor of the Air France 358 accident, which supports our position, but Transport Canada prevented us from doing so. If you would like to see this video, please click HERE Furthermore, if you would like to see a recently rediscovered short documentary produced by CUPE in the 1980's that presents a clear case for maintaining the 1:40 ratio, click HERE You will be amazed at the timeliness of the content, and at the undeniable truths that come from the mouths of Canadian flight attendants who survived airplane accidents. Another video is currently circulating which features a photomontage of graphic visual examples of why the 1:40 ratio should be maintained. You can see this video HERE We would encourage you to share the above videos using your own personal networks and social media. The May 22nd session was a learning experience for all of us. It was evident that Transport Canada is determined to give our airlines an unprecedented luxury, which no other country on the planet has. With the flip flop regulation, airlines will be allowed to pick whichever FA ratio leads to the fewest FAs per aircraft type, and then change the ratio whenever it suits the airline’s configuration or financial priorities, with only 60 days notice. TC was also extremely disrespectful to the two NDP MPs who took the time to attend ("the Minister will answer your question") and was unresponsive to many of us who highlighted the negative impact of the proposal on our work and safety ("noted" or some other equally evasive response like "trust us"). We were very successful in obtaining wide news coverage, and had the opportunity to engage the media in print, radio and live television. The quote from TC Cabin Safety inspector Christopher Dann was priceless, and found its way in the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star, amongst others: The safety level afforded by 1 in 50 "can't be equivalent" to the 1 in 40. With this quote, we have put TC on the defensive. Here are a few great examples of some of the media we received: TELEVISION - RADIO Globe and Mail video report CTV National News TVA nouvelles en direct CBC Radio WRITTEN PRESS CTV News Vancouver Sun Globe and Mail Toronto Star CBC News Here is our plan going forward, and this is where we need your continued help: We will be submitting a comprehensive dissent to the NPA, emphasizing that it is less than what we have today, is unprecedented in the world and has not be proven to be workable or enforceable by Transport Canada, among other such general arguments. Where there are good "mitigating factors", we will endorse them and urge them to be put in place regardless of the FA ratio. Where the "mitigating factors" are ineffective, we will say so and describe the changes that are needed. In addition, we will be re-working our PowerPoint presentation as a separate written submission on what the NPA does not address in the real world of flight attendant work, emergencies and evacuations. Transport Canada will be receiving comments regarding the proposed regulatory change up until June 23, 2014. Please send them your thoughts and opinions. Comments can be sent to: [email protected] and please also send a copy to CUPE Researcher Janet Dassinger: [email protected] to allow us to keep track of them. All of your comments are valuable and should be on the record. There should be emphasis on how the NPA will negatively impact passenger and our safety, particularly on narrow body aircraft but also on wide body aircraft if the airlines are successful in blocking the minimum floor level coverage provision for 1 in 40 operations. Please also request that Transport Canada hold another meeting to allow for further discussion on this important matter. For all submitters, please conclude your submission with the following statement: "I request a written response to my questions and comments before pre-publication of any such regulation in Canada Gazette Part I by return e-mail". Encourage others you may know to make submissions as well on the problems with this NPA. Feel free to have others sign on to your comments so it is coming from more than you alone. Finally, please use your written comments to seek out a meeting with your MP if you have not already done so. State your concerns and stress that what is being proposed in the NPA is less safe than what we have today (as admitted by TC's own Christopher Dann); it is a unique rule that does not meet the international standard despite what Minister Raitt has said; there are no real "mitigating factors" that can compensate for a missing FA; and all of this Transport Canada rule-making must be subjected to a Parliamentary Inquiry. Together we will make a difference. In Solidarity, Michel Cournoyer President Air Canada Component of CUPE Forward to Friend Copyright © 2014 Air Canada Component of CUPE, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you have subscribed. Our mailing address is: Air Canada Component of CUPE 25 Belfield Rd. Etobicoke, On M9W 1E8 Canada Add us to your address book unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences
  2. Laval séduit Standard & Poor's La firme d'évaluation de crédit Standard & Poor's a revu à la hausse la cote des titres d'emprunt à long terme de la Ville de Laval. Celle-ci passe de A+, avec perspective positive, à AA-, avec perspective stable. S&P justifie sa décision par «les progrès continus dans la réduction significative de la dette, conjugués à une forte croissance économique et à une performance budgétaire améliorée». L'agence ajoute notamment que depuis 1999, l'endettement de Laval suit une courbe descendante, le ratio de la dette sur les revenus totaux, une mesure propre à Standard & Poor's, ayant décliné de plus de 30% durant cette période. «Nous prévoyons que cette tendance se poursuivra au cours des prochaines années», précise Standard & Poor's.
  3. http://www.scfp.qc.ca/nouvelles/2831/--Transports-Canada-compromet-la-securite-des-passagers-aeriens-en-permettant-que-des-sorties-de-secours-soient-laissees-sans-surveillance--?langue=fr «Transports Canada compromet la sécurité des passagers aériens en permettant que des sorties de secours soient laissées sans surveillance» «Le nouveau ratio d'un agent de bord pour 50 sièges passagers proposé par Transports Canada met la sécurité des passagers en danger. Avec la nouvelle réglementation, il y aura au moins un agent de bord de moins à bord de nombreux avions, ce qui ne permet pas d'assurer un niveau de sécurité adéquat aux passagers en cas d'évacuation d'urgence», a déclaré le président de la Division du transport aérien du SCFP, Michel Cournoyer, lors de sa participation à la réunion du Conseil consultatif sur la réglementation aérienne canadienne sur le projet de modification réglementaire. Son message a été repris par des agents de bord de partout au pays, représentés par la Division du transport aérien du SCFP. Ils ont pris part à la consultation, soit en personne à Ottawa ou par vidéoconférence dans d'autres villes canadiennes. «En réalité, le nouveau ratio ne prévoit pas suffisamment de personnel pour surveiller toutes les issues de secours, lors de situations où les passagers doivent pouvoir compter sur des agents de bord ayant reçu une formation complète pour les aider», a expliqué Michel Cournoyer. Par exemple, lorsque le ratio d'un agent de bord pour 50 sièges passagers est en vigueur sur un Airbus A320, toutes les sorties de secours ne sont pas surveillés par un agent de bord. A pleine capacité, trois agents de bord doivent couvrir les quatre sorties accessibles au niveau du plancher. «Le ratio actuel d'un agent de bord pour 40 passagers ne laissait déjà place à aucune marge d'erreur en situation d'urgence. Avec un équipage réduit, imaginez comment les choses pourraient tourner si un agent de bord était blessé en cours d'évacuation», a déclaré M. Cournoyer. «Les accidents survenus par le passé prouvent qu'un ratio d'un agent de bord supérieur au un pour 50 proposé améliore les chances de survie des passagers en situation d'urgence. En 2005, lorsque le vol 358 d'Air France s'est écrasé à l'Aéroport Pearson de Toronto, les 309 personnes à bord ont survécu en grande partie grâce à une évacuation rapide coordonnée par les agents de bord. Le ratio était d'un agent de bord pour 30 passagers et les huit issues de secours étaient surveillées», a-t-il ajouté. «De toute évidence, le ratio d'un agent de bord pour 50 sièges passagers offre un niveau de sécurité inférieur à la norme actuelle. Par conséquent, il faut maintenir le ratio éprouvé d'un agent de bord pour 40 passagers. D'ailleurs, le rapport d'évaluation des risques de Transports Canada publié en juillet 2003 concluait que le ratio d'un pour 50 n'est pas aussi sécuritaire». «Puisque Transports Canada est prêt à mettre la sécurité des passagers en danger, le Comité permanent des transports, de l'infrastructure et des collectivités de la Chambre des communes doit maintenant mener une enquête publique sur le projet de modification règlementaire», a conclu Michel Cournoyer. Le SCFP représente plus de 10,000 agents de bord à l'emploi d'Air Canada, Air Transat, Calm Air, Canadian North, Canjet, Cathay Pacific, First Air et Sunwing.
  4. 1-50 Regulation in Effect for all Aircrafts as of August 1, 2015 Transport Canada has announced that the 1:50 ratio will be the new regulation in effect for both wide and narrow-bodied aircraft effective August 1, 2015. Airlines will be able to “flip flop” between the former 1:40 ratio and the new 1:50 ratio according to their operational requirements. Exit doors may also be left uncovered on wide-bodied aircraft, a major change from previous proposed regulations. Your Union views this development as a completely unacceptable and unnecessary risk to the safety of both crewmembers and the public. In changing the regulation without the usual consultation process, Transport Canada and the Harper government continue to act on behalf of the airline industry and in a manner that is without sufficient parliamentary and public scrutiny. Decades of privatization, deregulation and hyper-competition have led to a relentless drive to cut labour costs. Transport Canada makes no secret of this, and has calculated that the regulation will allow operators to achieve cost savings of $288,469,940 during the next ten years by reducing the number of Flight Attendants and associated costs including salaries, hotel stays and per diems. To read the new regulation, please see: http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2015/2015-06-17/html/sor-dors127-eng.php. For the federal government and its transportation officials to so baldly place profit over safety is a national disgrace. It appears this government has learned nothing from the rail tragedy in Lac Megantic, which has also been linked to deregulation and the loosening of safety rules Your Union is reviewing all available options to continue our legal fight against the 1:50. We will update you on our intended response as soon as possible. We also look forward to the upcoming federal election, which we are confident will oust Harper and elect a government that supports worker rights and public safety. But to achieve that goal, our members must do their part. The Airline Division Political Action Committee will be working hard between now and the election to turn out Flight Attendants to vote. We will bring the full weight of our safety expertise forward to the new government and the public. Our research on this issue has been extensive, and is grounded in the real life understanding of the safety risks associated with reduced cabin crew. In fact, we believe our members’ real life experience is the best possible evidence that 1:50 jeopardizes safety, disrupts service, and reduces the job satisfaction and morale of Flight Attendants. During the past several months we have been compiling our members’ stories about the effect of 1:50. In the coming weeks, we will publish a series of bulletins that capture the voices of members describing how 1:50 has affected them on and off the job. Each bulletin will describe a different aspect of how 1:50 has affected them, including at work where members report increased fatigue, anxiety about decreased safety and service; and at home, where members report reduced income, greater stress and depression, and harm to personal relationships and overall wellbeing. These stories are gleaned from the responses of well over 100 Flight Attendants who responded to questionnaires made available by the Component and CUPE Local 4092. We encourage members to continue to share their stories in the months to come. Please follow the next bulletins. Your Union remains committed to fighting the 1:50 ratio on the legal, regulatory, and political levels. http://accomponent.ca/
  5. J'ai hâte que l'effet PQ se fasse ressentir sur les prix de l'immobilier ... *** Montréal «sévèrement inabordable» Publié le 22 janvier 2013 à 06h26 | Mis à jour le 22 janvier 2013 à 10h25 Maxime Bergeron La Presse L'époque où le marché immobilier montréalais était considéré comme une aubaine est loin, très loin derrière. La métropole est aujourd'hui jugée «sévèrement inabordable», aux côtés de Vancouver et de Toronto. Aussi: Nouvelles règles hypothécaires: impact énorme sur les Montréalais Dans son neuvième classement annuel publié hier, la firme américaine Demographia dresse le palmarès de 337 villes de la planète. Le Canada - et surtout ses grandes villes - y fait encore une fois mauvaise figure. «L'accessibilité des maisons a peu changé dans les principaux marchés métropolitains du Canada, qui sont dans l'ensemble considérés comme sérieusement inabordables», écrivent les chercheurs de la firme, établie en Illinois. Selon les barèmes utilisés par Demographia - et par bon nombre d'analystes -, un marché immobilier est abordable lorsque le prix médian d'une propriété équivaut à moins de trois fois le revenu brut médian des ménages. Quand ce facteur est de 3,1 à 4, le marché est considéré comme «modérément inabordable»; de 4,1 à 5, «sérieusement inabordable»; et à plus de 5,1, «sévèrement inabordable». Le facteur global des grandes villes canadiennes est passé de 4,5 à 4,7 depuis un an, indique l'étude. Avec un multiple de 9,5, Vancouver demeure de loin la ville la plus inaccessible du pays et la deuxième du monde après Hong Kong. Toronto et Montréal, pour leur part, sont «à surveiller», a observé hier l'économiste Hélène Bégin, du Mouvement Desjardins. Le ratio s'est établi à 5,9 dans la Ville reine, et à 5,2 dans la métropole québécoise, toutes deux considérées comme «sévèrement inabordables» par Demographia. Le prix médian des propriétés s'élevait à 287 300$ à Montréal au troisième trimestre de 2012, tandis que le revenu médian des ménages était de 56 700$, souligne l'étude. À Toronto, c'était 430 200$ pour 73 300$, et à Vancouver, 621 300$ pour 65 200$. Les trois marchés les plus abordables du pays sont Moncton, Saint-Jean (Nouveau-Brunswick) et Windsor (Ontario), avec des ratios de moins de 2,5. Surévaluation extrême Le Canada dans son ensemble est perçu comme l'un des pays les plus surévalués de la planète en matière d'immobilier. Selon un classement publié à la mi-janvier par The Economist, les prix sont surévalués de 34% par rapport aux revenus moyens des ménages, devancés seulement par ceux de la France (35%). Lorsqu'on évalue la valeur des maisons par rapport au loyer moyen, le Canada obtient la pire cote de tous les pays industrialisés, d'après The Economist. La surévaluation atteint alors 78%, comparativement à 69% à Hong Kong, 57% à Singapour et 50% en France. À l'autre bout du spectre, les prix sont largement sous-évalués au Japon, aux États-Unis et en Allemagne, indique le magazine. Ces chiffres extrêmes donnent des arguments aux observateurs qui estiment que le Canada flirte avec une bulle immobilière, d'autant plus que l'endettement des ménages atteint des records. Plusieurs analystes s'attendent à une certaine correction des prix à court et à moyen terme. Sans surprise, le classement publié hier par la firme Demographia reflète bien la déflation des prix aux États-Unis. Parmi les 337 marchés mondiaux étudiés, les 20 plus abordables sont dans ce pays. Le ratio prix/revenu des 51 plus grandes villes américaines s'établit à 3,1. Detroit est la ville la moins chère. Le prix médian des maisons y atteint 75 700$, tandis que le revenu des ménages s'établit à 49 800$, ce qui donne un multiple de 1,5. «Ce ratio extraordinairement bas est le résultat du déclin économique extrême de cette ville», indiquent les chercheurs de Demographia. Hong Kong conserve la palme des prix les plus stratosphériques de la planète, avec un ratio de 13,5. Vancouver demeure deuxième, bien que la baisse des prix des derniers mois ait fait reculer son ratio de 10,6 à 9,5. Honolulu, à Hawaii, est troisième (9,3). ------------------- Acheter une maison au Canada ABORDABLE Indice médian: 3 ou moins Charlottetown (Île-du-Prince-Édouard) Fredericton (Nouveau-Brunswick) Moncton (Nouveau-Brunswick) Saguenay (Québec) Saint John (Nouveau-Brunswick) Thunder Bay (Ontario) Trois-Rivières (Québec) Windsor (Ontario) TRÈS INABORDABLE Indice médian: 5,1 et plus Abbotsford (Colombie-Britannique) Kelowna (Colombie-Britannique) Montréal Toronto (Ontario) Vancouver (Colombie-Britannique) Victoria (Colombie-Britannique)
  6. Le ratio de solvabilité du régime de retraite moyen a reculé de 27% en 2008, passant de 96% en début d'année à 69% vers la fin. Pour en lire plus...
  7. Toronto : Moving on out - to 905 Crazy' property taxes have forced the hand of hundreds of T.O. businesses in recent years By BRYN WEESE, SUN MEDIA Three years ago, Les Liversidge packed up his successful law office and moved out of Toronto. He didn't go far. Liversidge took his practice, his law books and his taxes across Steeles Ave. into Markham. It wasn't a move he wanted to make, rather a "simple business decision" to escape Toronto's "crazy" taxes. He's far from alone. Hundreds, if not thousands of Toronto's businesses over the past several years have packed up their shops, factories and offices and moved to the 905. In the iconic Danforth area, for example, 30% of retailers there now won't be around next year, according to a neighbourhood business survey. Toronto's high commercial property taxes are making rents uncompetitive and unaffordable, city business groups say. 'MOM AND POP BAKERY' "If you're paying $10,000 in taxes for your little mom and pop bakery, you'd have to bake a lot of buns just to pay your tax bill," said Judith Andrew, vice-president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business in Ontario, which has more than 4,000 members in Toronto. "I could see for many people, unless you absolutely had to be in the city, you'd want to run your business somewhere else." Liversidge sold his Willowdale office (a house he "loved" that had been converted into a commercial space) at Yonge St. and Steeles Ave. when it no longer "made sense" to keep it because of burdensome taxes. "I don't remember what my taxes were when I bought (the building) in 1992, which to me means they were not significant," Liversidge said. He recalls paying somewhere in the neighbourhood of $6,000 and $8,000 in taxes annually. But a dozen years later, thanks to property tax changes, provincial downloading, double digit spending and tax increases by city council, Liversidge's tax bill, like those of every business in Toronto, went through the roof. His taxes hit $27,000 a year by 2005. "More significant, I think, was a lack of predictability," Liversidge said. "I had no confidence that commercial real estate taxes would be controlled in any reasonable way," he said. He now rents about the same amount of space in a new, modest-sized three-storey office building. His rent is less than what his taxes were in 2004 in Toronto, even though the two buildings are only about five minutes apart. JOB GROWTH STAGNANT "I would much prefer to be in Toronto, but it makes no sense," Liversidge said. "If this building was located 300 yards south (on the other side of Steeles in Toronto), I don't think I could afford it." In 2005, the property taxes on a 250,000-square-foot office in the 905 were roughly $800,000 less than in Toronto. These numbers come from a study the City of Toronto conducted and are the most recent available. Business groups, however, maintain the numbers are still reasonably accurate and applicable today. As a consequence, employment growth in the 905 skyrocketed while job growth in the city has been stagnant and even suffered erosion. Between 2000 and 2006, the 905 region added more than 300,000 jobs while Toronto lost 23,700 jobs. Looking further back, over the past two decades, the 905 has added 800,000 jobs while employment in Toronto is still about 20,000 below its peak in 1989. Back in 2002, a city report optimistically projected 1.84 million new jobs would be created by 2031, a number officials now suggest is less a "goal" and more a "target." The falloff is in part attributable to migration of business, particularly small and medium-sized companies, in everything from manufacturing, and accommodation to administrative support and transportation. Toronto's commercial and industrial taxes are higher than its neighbours for several reasons. In part, relatively lower residential property taxes have put more of a burden on businesses operating in the city. "It's all well and good to cushion residents ... however, at a certain point, people don't have to be here and they do leave," Andrew said. Also in part, Toronto's business education tax rates are higher than those paid in the 905. That's supposed to change, but not until 2014. The bottom line, for business, is a tax disparity they can't afford to ignore. Cindy Anisman, a spokesman for Kingsdown Sleep Systems, credits moving from the intersection of Hwys. 401 and 400 to Vaughan two years ago with their company's growing success. Their facility in Vaughan is 120,000 square feet and employs more than 100 people. "We needed to expand our business, and the only place that you could actually find an area big enough was north in Vaughan," she said. "Taxes are lower, and utilities in a brand new building are a lot cheaper, too." 'NO-BRAINER TO MOVE' "It was a no-brainer to move," she added. "We're just sorry we didn't make this move earlier." Toronto officials are fully aware of the taxation problem, and council has passed several new measures to try to stop the bleeding. Three months ago, the city started a new program that allows manufacturers to improve their buildings or create a new building and get a "tax holiday" from higher taxes for a decade on the upgrade. "It's the first of its kind anywhere, I believe," Christine Raissis, director of the city's strategic growth and sector services, told the Sunday Sun. For the past few years, the city has also waived development charges on new commercial and industrial buildings, which it collects to pay for infrastructure such as roads and sewers. "We forgo those, partly on the basis that our business and commercial property taxes are higher, so we're trying to do what we can in the short term to balance that (tax) differential," said Randy McLean, the city's economic policy manager. "We're forgiving the front end development charges because we want the jobs." It makes a difference. For a 100,000-square-foot industrial or small office development, those charges would amount to $827,000. Toronto has also implemented a three-year-old plan to lower its commercial to residential property tax ratio to 2.5 to 1 within 10 years from its current 4-1 ratio -- to narrow the gap between what homeowners pay relative to business owners. It's still dramatically higher than ratios in 905 communities but Andrew from the CFIB said at least Toronto is "heading in the right direction." Other critics are less understanding. "The city's proposal to bring the tax ratio in line ... is worthless because, at a minimum you're looking at 10 years before they achieve that level," said Lionel Miskin, v-p of the Toronto Association of Business Improvement Areas. "And each year your taxes still go up, but the residential tax rate is going up faster than the commercial rate." "Maybe people will be happy about it in 10 years, if there is anyone working in the city anymore," he added. "I would say it is a crisis situation." But Toronto council isn't the only level of government responsible for this city's jobs and businesses relocating to the 905. Provincial education taxes are also a sore point. In 2007, the Ontario government unveiled plans to equalize business education taxes across the province. 'VITALITY IN THE CITY' Historically, Toronto's Business Education Taxes were significantly higher than those paid in the GTA and will remain higher until the province completes its equalization plan in 2014. Steven Sorensen, who chairs the Toronto Office Coalition, argues city and provincial measures need to be put in place sooner if the city is serious about retaining businesses and creating jobs. "I think the benefits of introducing these measures in a more prompt fashion would pay off many times over in terms of the economic growth and vitality in the city," he said. The city counters the cost of lowering the commercial tax ratio sooner would cost $600 million to $700 million. However, the argument of when to lower taxes may be moot. For the Toronto Association of Business Improvement Areas, the only real solution to the city's high business taxation woes is to develop a new taxation system. The BIA association believes Ontario's property tax assessment system, which regularly updates the tax value of properties, is flawed and unfair. The CFIB also thinks the city needs to focus on its core duties -- roads, public health, welfare and parks -- and curtail its spending habits to make Toronto more tax competitive. In fact, a recent survey of its Toronto members -- all of them small and medium-sized businesses -- found 86% think the city needs to eliminate wasteful spending. Among other things, the CFIB wants the city to contract out more services for competitive bidding, and do away with its fair wage policy, which requires private non-union companies doing work for the city to pay their employees city rates. But the city, for its part, rejects the notion Toronto's taxes are posing a crisis for the business community. In fact, the city argues, there are currently three new skyscrapers being built in the downtown core for a total estimated investment of about $1 billion. BANKS, STOCK EXCHANGE The city is still the financial capital of Canada, home to the headquarters of five of the country's six national banks, 90% of Canada's foreign banks and the nation's largest stock exchange. There is also growth in several important industries, namely computer systems, finance, health and education, which Raissis argues creates a synergy with the outlying areas of Toronto, whose specialty is mainly manufacturing. "The performance of 905 is important to Toronto, and the performance of Toronto is important to 905," she said. "It's one economic region, but it's not homogeneous." "We are not here to compete against the 905, we're all here as a region to present Toronto as an international market place," she said.