Early in January, Spacing’s Dale Duncan wrote about the “Rising Right” of Toronto city council. The post garnered a good number of comments and a variety of opinions. We thought it would be a good idea to get a random sample of how Spacing readers feel about this subject.
This question is: Do you think Toronto City Council should adopt a political party system?
photo by Miles Storey
15 comments
Term limits would make a big difference.
To me a party system really only amplifies the current problems. And it leads to a US style polarization of everything from the channels one watches to who is the dog catcher.
The mayor of Toronto has to have a good working relationship with the Ontario premier. I feel that Miller and McGuinty have that, and I think that it would be a much harder thing to have if Miller were formally an “NDP mayor”.
What Scott said. There are a few too many lifers or lifer-wannabees around council. Say four terms (16 years) should be enough for anyone, although I wouldn’t count a mayoral term.
I would go for 2 in and then 1 term out. 8 Years is a really long time in City time.
It’s tough not to agree with term limits. I would argue for 2 terms rather than the 4 proposed by Mr. Dowling. 8 years is long enough for anyone to be terrible at a job and in this case, I think you have to plan for the lowest common denominator.
A party system would be disastrous in Toronto, especially if one were created in the current council. The division between the mayor’s camp and his detractors is seemingly so definite that we’d risk a 2 party system. If our friends to the south have shown us anything, it’s that a 2 party system is the premiere enemy of democracy. If you encourage councillors to “pick sides” you eliminate an environment of free thinking and replace it with tribe mentality. Councillors (like MPPs and MPs) end up voting the party line, rather than their conscience.
I’d love hear an argument for party politics in Toronto. Perhaps some think that if the mayor were a member of the same party that was in power at the provincial or federal level that we’d get more help from Queen’s Park, Parliament or both. That’s fine and dandy, until there’s a power shift at any level and then we could easily find ourselves more alone than we are now.
What’s worse is if a party, like the Liberals, is in control of the province and has a majority of councillors at City Hall, you can end up with just as much paralysis as we have now. The provincial Libs could silence the councillor Libs easily. This scenario can create a culture where the province is controlling the directive of councillors. Yet councillors need to be accountable to their constituents. A party system as city hall would just create more havoc.
More importantly, city council’s structure functions as a co-op, not a parliament. We would have to change the way council operates AGAIN in order for a party system to work. What ails this council is a lack of quality councillors with the concerns of their residents as the forefront. We currently have a majority of councillors who are either tripping over their on ideology or their own ego.
There are so many arguments against a party system that I could go on all day. The only reason this is being discussed, I believe, is due to a lack of leadership and/or inspired and effective politicians. Its also being discussed becuz the Right of council (Ootes, Ford, Holyday, Stintz) are in the minority of council and somehow think a city party based on conservative values will get them back in control. I think its a recipe that would shut out almost all conservative voices at City Hall if Toronto’s federal and provincial voting records are any indication. While I often disagree with the Grumpy Right, those voices need to be at the table and not systematically shut out (this kind of discussion also reminds me of the district redistribution that is happening the US in regards to the House of Reps). If the Right goes down this road they are sealing their own destiny. 75% of Toronto usually votes centre-left and we would be left with a council of Liberals and NDPers and a few independents.
Personally, I would suggest a three term limit. Small tweaks are worth exploring, not another radical overhaul.
Terms limits are fundamentally undemocratic. I have the right, as an elector, to whoever I damn well want representing me, and if my councillor has put in two terms of solid work, why should I be forced to change?
Yes, there is an incumbency advantage, particularly at the municipal level, and that’s almost certainly keeping old useless turds in office. But I don’t have a problem with incumbents. I have a problem with old useless turds.
The fact that we have a council packed with stale lifers is really just a symptom of a larger problem, which is that we have a detached and uninterested electorate drawn to familiar names like moths to a flame, and accordingly incapable of holding representatives to proper account. Term limit laws are a way of throwing your hands in the air and claiming its impossible to fix the electorate’s irritating habit of re-electing familiar names, so we should just ban it outright.
One thing that party labels do accomplish, like it or not, is make the act of purging a council of perceived failures much more user-friendly. If Miller and his allies win public approval for their priorities, the electorate can readily whack those who stalled and frustrated their efforts. If Miller and his allies screw everything up, the trusted lieutenants should go down with the ship along with the captain.
Yes, the implement can be more of a club than a scalpel at times, but that’s better than the emery board that municipal elections seem to be at present, only sloughing off those cells that are actually dead.
Tom> ” I have the right, as an elector, to whoever I damn well want representing me”
Of those on the ballot.
When the Greater Toronto Area is broken off to become Canada’s eleventh province, then we’ll talk. 🙂
I’d be fine with a 2/1/2/1 system as others have proposed but two terms in all might be a little short. I would expect a councillor to do his/her best work in the second and third terms having learned the ropes in the first but I suspect some slacking off might have kicked in by the fourth one.
People should have phases to their lives, not be councillors or councillors in waiting from 21 to 75.
Sorry to be off topic, but i just had to comment on what an amazing photo that is at the top of the post.
I am very uncomfortable with the idea of parties using their “influence” at city hall.But the reality is that representatives of political parties are there.
Montreal (where I grew up) has had municipal political parties for years. Mayor Drapeau was mayor and also party leader, as is the current mayor.
Voters learn young that you’d better vote for the ward candidate from the winning party, because if you’re represented by a pol from the losing party you can be sure your ward will be ingnored. To have anything positive happen in your Montreal neighbourhood you need to be represented by a councillor from the mayor’s party. It just amplifies municipal porkbarreling – not ny choice for my city of Toronto.
Let’s make the candidates even more independent and free thinking, hopefully they can be pragmatic as well and work together on issues.
Get the lazy Left/Right mentality out, locally as well as provincially and federally.
Political parties are like brands. They don’t help people make better choices, they just make their choices simpler.