In this time of toxic politics, municipal government is largely an outlier.
Sure, there are occasional spats and disagreements, but, at least during my years on Barrie city council, there was none of the division we currently see in Ottawa, Toronto and Washington where people on opposite sides seem to have a complete inability to get along or be civil to one another.
In contrast, name-calling at the local level is almost non-existent.
Why is this? I have a few theories.
First, there are no formal political parties at the municipal level. There is no leader or party whip telling councillors how they must vote on a particular issue, under threat of losing the party’s support if they don’t fall in line.
Municipal councillors are free to vote on each issue as they feel is appropriate – and, in my experience, they almost always do so based on what they think is best for the municipality. Those on opposite sides of one issue will often work together on another, perhaps at the same meeting. There’s no incentive to make enemies.
Second, there is no government and opposition. There is no party in power and no party seeking power so there are no “sides.” One group is not constantly criticizing the other, trying to put those in power in the worst possible light in the hope of gaining an advantage at the polls.
Third, everyone on municipal councils is equal. Everyone has one vote, everyone has the same chance to introduce ideas or speak on an issue. There are no cabinet members and no backbenchers.
The result, in my mind, is the best form of government in Canada.
Which is why it is puzzling that some people seem determined to destroy the good things about municipal politics.
In Alberta, the provincial government of the United Conservative Party’s Danielle Smith has introduced legislation allowing political parties on ballots. For now, it will just apply to the two largest cities, Calgary and Edmonton, but it could be expanded to other municipalities in the future.
Candidates for city council won’t have to run as members of a party, but the odds will be stacked against them if they don’t. That’s because there will be spending limits for individuals and also spending limits for parties. Anyone running as an independent will have a smaller budget to reach voters because party members will have their own budgets plus the party budget.
Municipal politicians in the two cities have been vocal in their criticism of the changes. Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek called them “the kiss of death to local representation and local democracy.”
Why is Premier Smith doing this? She claims it is in the interest of “transparency,” often a word politicians use when they want to sound like they are doing something in the public’s interest when they are actually doing the very opposite.
In Smith’s case, she pointed to single-use item bylaws – i.e. no plastic bags or containers – that were introduced in the two cities despite no one campaigning on the idea during the municipal elections. Seriously.
Her critics suggest Smith, upset over municipal councils that are more centrist and left-leaning than she would prefer, is trying to change the rules to encourage councils more to her liking.
Here in Ontario, we saw Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservative government introduce its strong mayors legislation, which chipped away at the principle that all council members are equal.
Under the new powers, Ontario mayors can override some bylaws and pass others with only one-third of the support of council. Under the new rules, an incentive has been created for councillors to curry favour with the mayor, rather than act independently.
In other words, the change makes city councils more like Queen’s Park, where premiers can basically act like kings between elections.
When it comes to municipal politics, it seems to be a case of “if it ain’t broke, break it.”
