Fewer Politicians - Less Democracy

Everybody loves democracy and hates politicians. It doesn't make sense but it's a fact and it's what drives ideas like Mike Harris's "Fewer Politicians Act" which created megacities and recent proposals to reduce the size of Ottawa City Council.

But what does it really mean. Well it means less representation and more work for the people's representatives. Properly performed, a politician's job is already a 24 hour a day job. The more people a politician has to represent the less time he can spend representing each voter/taxpayer.

In municipal politics what that means is that elected representatives have to depend more on city staff for information and advice, and in Ottawa that means more power to the development industry because Ottawa's city administration is developer driven.

Hopefully our new City council will see the flaws in this proposal from the new mayor's election campaign and maintain the peoples representation on council and not give even more power to developers in running our city.

How Dumb Does Randall Denley Really Think We Are

Randall Denley would have us all believe that the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) is an impartial body designed to protect citizen's interests from the actions of big bad government and that it is the only recourse citizens have to appeal municipal government decisions.

He states, in the Ottawa Citizen:

the candidate this week released a proposal to abolish the Ontario Municipal Board. He would like to extend the iron fist to council in general, so that council decisions would not be appealable to any other body.

An attempt to extinguish an individual's right to appeal a council decision is legally dubious at best. The individual's right to challenge a government decision is fundamental to our system. Doucet's idea would hurt communities, not just developers.

As a citizen, I have been involved with appeals to the OMB, as well as applications for judicial review, the process by which decisions by governments, including municipal governments, and governmental administrative bodies can be reviewed by the courts.

Randal Denley would have us believe that he is unaware of judicial review in Ontario. Does anyone really believe that an experienced journalist covering provincial and municipal affairs is not aware of judicial review.

No other province has the equivalent of the OMB. Abolishing the OMB will simply mean that appeals of municipal government decisions will be heard by real courts with real judges not by a developers kangaroo court presided over by corporate lackeys.

There is a word for statements that are made knowing them to be untrue.

Only One Choice or One Choice For Change

With Alex Cullen officially out of the race for Ottawa Mayor the race becomes a three way race between Mayor Larry O'Brien, former Mayor Jim Watson and the man with a vision, Clive Doucet.

Unfortunately with the flawd municipal election process that we have many may feel that their only choice is to vote for Jim Watson. Watson is attractive to the left and right for different reasons.

To right wingers who simply cannot bring themselves to vote for their philosophic choice of Larry O'Brien, due to his demonstrated incompetence, Watson is a safe choice - not too radical and someone who will not change the way things are done at City Hall.

To left wingers who fear another O'Brien victory, Watson is portrayed by the media as the only candidate who can stop O'Brien and and as a moderate and a safe choice.

The question for voters is whether safe mediocrity is really what they want or do they want real change to the developer driven administration at Ottawa City Hall. In that case there is only one choice and that choice is Clive Doucet.

Municipal Elections Suck

So why do municipal elections suck.

Because the way the system works now all too often the least preferred candidate wins rather than the most preferred candidate.

This results from the fact that there are often a large number of candidates, many of whom may share a similar philosophy and similar policies and who appeal to the same group of voters. For simplicity sake lets divide the candidates (and voters) into alphas and betas, for want of better terms.

Various scenarios can come into play here but for demonstration purposes lets look at a simple one. Let us say there are three alpha candidates that share 60% of the vote roughly and one beta candidate with 40% of the vote. Let us assume, reasonably, that the beta candidate is the last choice of almost all of the alpha voters. And let us assume, also reasonably, that while all the alpha voters may have individual preferences all the alpha candidates are acceptable to almost all of the alpha voters.

Under our present electoral system the beta candidate, the last choice of the majority of voters and the one acceptable to only a minority of voters would get elected. Similar situations can happen with different numbers of candidates and different breakdowns with either beta or alpha candidates benefiting from the flaw in the system.

Another effect of this of course is that people realize this is happening and "strategic voting" comes into play and voters attempt to avoid this by voting for their second or third choices instead of their first, depending on who the media says has the best chance of winning. Such a situation deprives voters of the ability to vote for their first choice and gives the media an inordinate (and undemocratic) amount of power in choosing who gets elected.

There is an alternative - system that allows voters to vote for their first choice amongst acceptable candidates and not vote for unacceptable candidates. Instead of voting for one candidate you would rank the candidates in order of preference, ranking as many candidates as you wish and avoiding ranking unacceptable candidates if you do not wish to. The votes would be tabulated electronically dropping the bottom candidates from the list and redistributing their votes to the voters next choice until a candidate receives over 50% of the vote.

Under this system the least preferred candidate would never be elected and the elected candidate would always be acceptable to the majority of voters.

This would allow voters to vote for their first choice knowing that if their first choice was not amongst the top vote recipients their vote would be transferred to their second choice and not become a de facto vote for the candidate they least liked. Strategic voting would be eliminated and all candidates would know how much real first ballot support they had and candidates would not be penalized because the media tells everyone they do not have a chance.

This type of system, of course, would not just work in municipal elections. Indeed, this is the type of system that the United Kingdom is going to hold a referendum on.

Using such a system in Ontario municipal elections would be an excellent place for us to start. While it is likely too late to introduce in this years election it may very well not be too late to add a question to the ballot in the November election to find out what voters think of the system.

Mayor's Task Force Misses The Point

According to the Ottawa Citizen

"The mayor's task force on governance found that city council does not operate effectively and cannot provide the strategic leadership the City of Ottawa needs because of systemic problems with governance," says the report from the panel, which includes former Carleton University president Richard Van Loon and is headed by University of Ottawa government expert David Zussman.

The Citizen article further states:

To combat this, the task force recommends creating an executive level in municipal government, the mayor and city councillors who chair various standing committees, to set a firm agenda.

Zussman said this group would then drive the city-wide political agenda at council, making it more likely that other councillors would take a larger view of the issues before deciding how to vote.

The mayor's task force misses the point, or perhaps it was supposed to miss the point. There is no structural problem. The city has functioned well in the past and will function well in the future. The problem will be fixed at the next election, or possibly sooner, depending on the verdict in the mayor's bribery trial.

The problem of lack of leadership and lack of vision is because the city has a mayor who has no clue about politics and leading a municipal government. It has been clear from the start when he refused to learn about the city administration or even attend a city council meeting before being elected.

It has cost the city dearly, especially when compared to what could have been if the voters had chosen differently and elected a proven leader knowledgeable and skilled in municipal politics with a long record of accomplishments.

Should Public Transit Be Declared An Essential Service

As an environmentalist, I am inclined to say yes to that question because of the extensive environmental benefits provided by public transit systems, the main one, of course, being the fact that it reduces automobile use considerably and in some cases can make car ownership unnecessary.

But the first question we have to answer is what does that mean.

If public transit is essential, like police and health care services, then it must be provided. There must be legislation requiring municipalities above a certain size to provide a public transit service.

If public transit is essential, then it must be publicly provided. It cannot be left to the whims of the private sector that will only provide service where it is profitable.

It must be a meaningful service so the legislation must provide standards of service that must be provided.

It must also be affordable to all citizens, especially lower income citizens. In order to do this fares must only be used to cover a portion of the costs, no more than fifty percent.

Since municipalities have the least effective and least equitable taxing powers of all levels of government, funding must be provided by all three levels of government, municipal, provincial and federal.

And for it to be effective in getting people to make permanent lifestyle changes it must be reliable and provided without interruption.

This would require removing the right to strike from workers and the right to lock-out workers during labour disputes from management and replacing it with a fair system of compulsory arbitration when negotiations and mediation fail. It should also be noted that despite whatever legislation may be in place strong unions always maintain the ability to strike if the alternative measures are not applied fairly.

Legislation declaring public transit an essential service must include all of these factors if we are truly treating it as an essential service. It has to be a lot more than just taking rights away from workers.

While we are discussing declaring services essential for their environmental benefits, I would suggest that a comprehensive system of commuter bike routes also be declared an essential service that must be provided by all municipalities.

Another Majority, Another Coup – Ottawa City Budget Passed

A majority of the members of Ottawa City Council passed the City budget last night and according to the Ottawa Citizen a "coup" has been staged by a "coalition" on Ottawa City Council and President Stephen Harper Mayor Larry O'Brien doesn't like it. How dare this coalition go against the elected President Mayor.

The city’s 2009 budget debates took a dramatic turn Monday night when a group of councillors, not including Mayor Larry O’Brien, brought and passed a package motion that results in 4.9-per-cent property-tax increase and avoids serious program cuts.

It was a coup from a new coalition on council made up of some very strange political bedfellows, and Mr. O’Brien was powerless to stop it.

As the Citizen reported:

Council had managed to close the gap by several million, and the meeting was heading into debate on some of the of more serious cuts to bus routes.

It was then that the coalition made its move with the package motion tabled by College Councillor Rick Chiarelli.

The coalition declined to make many of the cuts that more than 200 people had argued against during last week’s public submissions portion of the budget process.

Apparently if your not a right wing minority then your just another "coalition" imposing a "coup" and it just isn't right.

Do You Hate Young People

Do young people annoy the hell out of you. Then you need the Mosquito Youth Repellent. The Mosquito, created by Welsh inventor Howard Stapleton, emits a pulsing noise above 16,000 hertz that capitalizes on the fact most humans can catch the mind-numbing frequency only between the age of 13 and 25.

Bureaucrats from the City of Montreal are studying whether the device could legally be used to clear young drug dealers and bums from scary city tunnels, but the machine is already a hit among some West Coast businesses.

"It's awesome," said Lisa Deacon, manager of the 57 Below Bar and Liquor Store in New Westminster, B.C. The bar was one of the first North American businesses to try the device, in 2006. It turns on at night and keeps away all the young punks who hang out at the SkyTrain station."

Two Mac's convenience stores in Victoria have used the Mosquito to clear out drug dealers while two others in Richmond, B.C., have used the squealing machine to clear massive crowds of teenagers.

I thought the “no teenagers allowed” signs I have seen in coffee shops were abhorrent enough. The mentality that the future leaders of our communities and our country are all punks and drug dealers and “bums” is disgusting.

It is one thing for ignorant business people to somehow think attacking their future customers would be a good thing. It is a completely different thing for public officials to consider such a discriminatory attack on young citizens.

This device, and the mentality behind it, calls for the addition of age to the prohibited grounds for discrimination in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and all federal and provincial human rights legislation.

Bossership vs Leadership - Part II of The Larry O'Brien Saga

On Wednesday, September 12, 2007 I stated in: Bossership vs Leadership - The Failure of Ottawa Mayor Larry O'Brien:

"Ironically many voted for Larry O’Brien because he was not a politician, but his lack of political skills have been his downfall. He may, or may not, be a great private sector boss, who is used to making the decision and telling everyone else what to do, but he obviously lacks the political skills necessary to build the consensus and coalitions necessary to get things done in municipal government."

Apparently he has finally figured this out as the Ottawa Citizen reports that: Mr. O'Brien, a former CEO, said he's realized that the autocratic approach often taken in business simply doesn't work in municipal government. "The one thing I never had to do in business was compromise to get ideas through," he said. "It's not like that here."

I wonder how long someone with such a slow learning curve would last in his private sector company.

Bossership vs Leadership - The Failure of Ottawa Mayor Larry O'Brien

It is not a year into his mandate yet, but clearly his record is clear. Larry O’Brien is probably the biggest disappointment in Ottawa history. While a majority of voters clearly believed we needed a change from Bob Chiarelli’s mediocre leadership, this is not what they expected. Indeed, the most disappointed are his own supporters. But even those of us who opposed O’Brien did not expect this. In fact, some of us realized that he could not do too much damage with just one vote on council and hoped that his hyped high tech private sector background might even provide some innovative ideas. But there were none. While we expected policies and leadership in a direction we disagreed with, this complete failure of leadership was not expected..

Rather than recap all the failures of our new mayor I will refer you to Dawg's Blawg: Bull in a china shop, where he does an excellent job of summarizing them.

In hindsight we should not have been surprised. For all they hype about his background as a high technology leader, in reality he was the boss of a gloried temporary help agency that made his money by taking a cut of the salaries of people who worked for other companies or the federal government.

We had our first clear clues that Larry O’Brien was not up for the job when he admitted to never attending a City Council meeting, and made no effort to attend any, even after announcing his candidacy, and saw no need to learn the structure of city government until after he was elected.

Ironically many voted for Larry O’Brien because he was not a politician, but his lack of political skills have been his downfall. He may, or may not, be a great private sector boss, who is used to making the decision and telling everyone else what to do, but he obviously lacks the political skills necessary to build the consensus and coalitions necessary to get things done in municipal government.

Larry O’Brien is simply not a leader. He has clearly demonstrated that. He was clearly a boss masquerading as a leader. It is easy to get people to follow you when you are the one signing the pay cheques. But when, as mayor, he started hiring people not accustomed to being “yes men” he saw his key staff resigning in droves, as he refused to listen to the people he hired to give him advice.

What Larry O’Brien has done is demonstrate clearly that mayors are not as powerful as people think. The mayor is just one member of council. We forget that sometimes because we see the accomplishments of great mayors of the past in this city and others. In fact their accomplishments did not come because they had power, not because they were the bosses. Their accomplishments came because they showed leadership. Larry O’Brien has clearly not shown any leadership as Mayor of Ottawa.

It appears that Larry O’Brien may even be recognizing his own failures as a leader and giving up on trying to be the leader and trying to be the boss instead, by attempting to take over the role of the City Manager. That is not his role. If Larry O’Brien does not want to lead this city he can sit back and fulfill his ceremonial duties and let City Council run the city without him.