November 24, 2007
Lately, the former Mayor of Winnipeg, Glen Murray, wrote an interesting and amusing column in The Star newspaper, about the struggles between Toronto and the Ontario government. This relates to the budget confrontation in the city council which climaxed last October 22nd.
Murray imagines Toronto as a mistreated woman with much going for her, but caught in a relationship she gets less out of than she deserves. He implies that Toronto is in part a victim of envy and decries the "stupid anti-Toronto sentiment in the country".
But Toronto also has some 'self confidence' problems that keep her in this situation. Murray says that every time Toronto city council sees light at the end of the tunnel, they "order more tunnel". This refers to it's reluctance to raise taxes.
Murray identifies this as at least partly the effect of endless criticism of the city's management of its finances. The city is very efficiently run, yet is in constant danger of "sliding into the financial abyss". Murray suggests that the provincial government is not the best of money managers either, and the "citizens of Toronto" can and should be trusted with "the keys to the piggy bank".
But Toronto's financial problem is built into the constitutional framework of the country, and will require a massive public mobilisation to change. Politics in Canada is still very much among elite groups, with the idea of citizen participation largely rebuffed.
This is demonstrated by this latest budget conflict, which could have been headed off by better consultation with the citizenry. Mayor Miller finally realised this and began handing out the yellow scarves, rallying the public to preserve their services. Yet he and his faction on council still would not make even symbolic reductions in their own perquisites of office.
budget crunch
The city's budget problem has been developing since at least 1991. Provincial governments of all parties have 'downloaded' increasing responsibility to the city, without new revenues with which to fund them. The city has been using up reserve funds and getting short term 'bail outs' from the province in order to maintain services. It was against a wall where it could raise taxes or cut services, or run an illegal deficit.
Various Ontario governments have given the city various tax "tools" and tax "room" in order to handle its increased expenses. The city politicians have been reluctant to use them and be blamed for creating or increasing taxes, but also because there has been no agreement from the province to stop the downloads. Mayor Miller finally decided to use these tools and create two new taxes. These will not solve the city's financial bind; taxes must rise again next year, and into the foreseeable future.
By one vote, these taxes were put on hold by the council. Some councillors wanted to use the delay to force Miller to "trim the fat" before raising taxes, meaning; cut programs they do not like, usually social programs. Others wanted to wait until after the provincial election to see if the province would grant new bail outs or 'upload' some of the unfunded obligations from the city.
When the new taxes passed, some applauded this as evidence that the city had somehow 'grown up' and taken responsibility for its own problems, meaning; conceding that the problems are strictly local. But the city on its own cannot solve the underlying problem and the annual crises will continue until the province acts more reasonably.
city bashing
Perhaps a more benevolent provincial government will eventually come along, but the basic problem is that, for historical reasons, cities in Canada have no power.
Empires and nation states since the middle ages have used municipal corporations as a means of controlling the population. Canada was established by bureaucrats who were fearful that the American revolution would be repeated in Canada. They did everything possible to restrict local democracy.
They created a system of different classes of local government with different powers, which the central government could alter at will. Cities were used to control their populations; the population were not allowed to be citizens of their city. Large cities are now home to most Canadians, yet they continue to be mere instruments of the provinces.
climbing the ladder
Effort is being made to win for Canadian cities and their citizens some of the powers enjoyed elsewhere. And Vancouver, protected by a city charter, has escaped the destructive interference from it's province which plagues other Canadian metropolises.
But many European cities are provinces in themselves. Legally, it would not be hard to make Toronto a separate province; it only needs the consent of the federal government, the province of Ontario, and of course the people of Toronto.
In recent years the "Porto Allegre" movement has spread over the world. The actual citizens of city are able to plan the budgets of their city by a process of participatory democracy, bringing the public up to the 'delegated authority' level on Arnstein's ladder.
Arnstein is a political scientist. Her ladder of citizen participation has eight rungs on it, ranging from citizen control down to manipulation. It is worth an article by itself.
Vancouver and Montreal are making some progress in this regard, but nobody is giving the people of Toronto the chance, and the people are not demanding it. Before the budget snit the level of public participation was at the 'non-participation/therapy' stage, meaning 'get over it, go back to your knitting'. Miller brought it up to the 'informing' level within the 'tokenism' range.
In contrast, in the Brazilian city of Porto Allegre civic or state/provincial officials were wise enough to delegate authority to the public. They created a participatory budgeting system for the city; 'delegated power' within Arnstein's classification. This has become a model for local democracy in many countries.
"...we don't get no respect..."
For Toronto, neither the civic or provincial authorities have any interest in developing a participatory system with which to engage the public in their city's problems. Given the attitude of provincial governments in Ontario, a city charter for Toronto is unlikely, let alone creating a province of Toronto.
For the foreseeable future, nothing can stop Toronto's "evil uncle" from downloading costs onto the city of Toronto, insuring an annual firestorm over new and increased taxes.
The present city government has shown it would rather continue this way than mobilise the citizens by seriously engaging them in the government. This would be the most powerful strategy against the province and against the "trim the fat" faction.
Perhaps the people of Toronto will take out an ad in the personals section asking for a nicer province to take them over. Perhaps they will undertake the organising necessary to vote in a more enlightened mayor and council, which would then lead an effective fight to gain for Toronto the powers appropriate to a 'free' city and a 'hub' city.
tr
credit www.qaz.ca/racoon.html