No. It will not accurately reflect, represent the city

The Ontario government is raising its clarion call to reduce the size of Toronto’s government. Why now? Why in this way?

We’ve all heard the calls for “fewer politicians” and for a “more efficient government.” Yet, municipal governments are nimble, efficient and collaborative by design. It can appear less structured at times; however, it is designed to be highly accountable and representative of local communities.

Bills 5 and 31 have moved beyond a discussion about three more or 22 less councillors. What has occurred is a rushed conversation about intergovernmental affairs, the value of municipalities, the process by which Toronto City Council conducts itself and how communities should be represented.

Since the forced amalgamation of Toronto, there has been an evolution in the actual and assumed roles of municipal governments. Cities around the world are increasingly wielding significant economic and legislative clout.

The Toronto Census Metropolitan Area alone accounts for approximately 18 per cent of Canada’s GDP. To maintain that economic prowess requires political leadership from municipalities. Toronto City Council focuses not only on enhancing the economic climate, but also on creating the community-based ecosystem that makes it an attractive place to live, work and play.

The previous Ontario government took tentative steps toward increasing Toronto’s autonomy and recognizing its complexity with the City of Toronto Act. Amongst permissions that were granted to Toronto was the right to selfdetermine its local governance structure, including how many representatives were elected. Accordingly, in 2013, then-Councillor Doug Ford and 22 other members of Toronto City Council voted to retain an outside consultant to review and make recommendations on updating Toronto’s ward boundaries. The purpose was “to reflect effective representation within Toronto.”

After extensive consultation with the public, deliberations by Toronto City Council, as well as the courts, it was agreed that redrawing Toronto into a 47-ward model from the current 44 was appropriate. The 25-ward model was rejected. What remains critical in any governance discussion is to appreciate what is expected of Toronto City Council. It is responsible for governing Canada’s largest city, the fourth largest city in North America, the third largest transit program in North America, and a population of about 2.8 million.

People are often surprised to know that during every meeting members of Toronto City Council review agendas containing approximately 400 items of varying size and complexity from local community councils, the executive committee, standing committees, and various agencies and boards. This includes the most recent (2018) tax supported operating budget of $11.12 billion and a 10-year capital budget and plan of $25.98 billion. In addition, there are hundreds of provincial regulations that intersect with municipalities.

Simply put, if you can see it, smell it, hear it, touch it or taste it, municipalities are responsible for it in some form or another. Beyond legislative programming, municipalities have accountability requirements that other orders of government should consider adopting. First and foremost, as required by legislation, municipalities conduct meetings in open forums, except in very limited circumstances, and staff are held to public account for their reports. While this is the norm for municipalities, it can appear inefficient or cumbersome to those who are used to cabinet-style decision-making.

Further, politicians frequently like to talk about the “democratic deficit” and the need to empower backbenchers and opposition members in the federal and provincial systems.

In municipal government there are no backbenchers. Without party affiliations or mayoral vetoes, the mayor and councillors need to discuss issues, collaborate and find consensus amongst a majority of their colleagues in order to move issues forward. In municipal government, all local representatives can and should contribute.

Toronto faces some unique challenges, opportunities and structural issues. To adequately reflect and represent the communities that Toronto City Council serves, and build toward the future, I believe Torontonians are better represented by the revised 47-ward system than 25. The convention postamalgamation had been approximately two councillors for each Toronto riding. That general standard merits maintaining in Toronto. However, what Bill 5 and Bill 31 have raised is a new question for intergovernmental affairs watchers: If the Ontario legislature’s standard is now the gold standard for Toronto, what does this mean for Ontario’s other 444 municipalities? One thing is certain, politics is never boring.