We need to fix what doesn’t work, not amalgamation

As he makes clear in a letter to the editor, published in Thursday’s paper, Cambridge culture stalwart Brad McEwen will “vehemently oppose” the imposition of a one-tier municipal structure for Waterloo Region.

I agree with almost every point he makes: Amalgamation would not be more efficient and save money, even if the number of “politicians” — i.e. elected representatives — were drastically reduced.

It is a prospect that could have disastrous effects, not only on our local democracy, but also on arts, culture and heritage everywhere in the region.

That’s not to say that our current municipal structure, which was ordered into place by the province 45 years ago, is perfect.

The question is, what is the likelihood that some kind of new arrangement will be imposed on us before the Doug Ford era has run its course?

My guess is greater than 50 per cent.

That leaves those of us who are disturbed by this prospect with a range of options:

One is to begin vehemently opposing such a move every step of the way.

Another is to keep still, and let come what may.

Alternatively, we could launch a serious effort to determine what kind of structure would serve us best.

It might also be wise to develop a strategy for how to cope if and when a new order not of our own choosing is implemented.

McEwen mentions the Citizens for Better Government, which he describes as “a group that, in the Mike Harris days, lobbied for removal of the municipal governments of Waterloo, Cambridge and the townships.”

That’s not quite accurate. It was actually during the Dalton McGuinty era that this group was active. After it became apparent that there was never going to be a groundswell of support for a unified municipal structure, a leadership emerged that chose to concentrate on the merger of Kitchener and Waterloo instead.

I can attest to this because I was there, almost from the beginning.

This was not long after the formation of the Prosperity Council of Waterloo Region, and the announcement that “founding and funding a regionwide body to support the arts” had been chosen as one of five priorities for the region’s business community.

When the Citizens for Better Government formed, I was told that my participation as executive director of the Waterloo Regional Arts Council was close to mandatory.

When I expressed serious misgivings about amalgamation, I was reassured that this was to be an openminded discussion.

I’m not sure the minds around that table were ever fully receptive to all options.

But they were open enough to invite Andrew Sancton, a University of Western Ontario political science professor well known for his informed opposition to simple amalgamation schemes, to come and talk with us.

Sancton’s advice to the group has been a major influence on my thinking on these subjects ever since.

He began by expressing full sympathy for our predicament. Awkward from the outset, there are only two places left beyond the Greater Toronto Area that still have to make do with this two-tier system — Waterloo and Niagara.

Making the choice amalgamation, pro or con, would not only divide the community into opposing camps, but also undermine any progress that may have been made toward co-operation and adaptation.

Instead, his advice was to choose up to five things that are clearly not working in the current system, and fix them.

When all the major glitches are solved, the attitude might become “well, we’ve eliminated all the serious problems, so let’s carry on” or “we’ve come this far, so we might as well go all the way.” Either way, we all win. Almost everyone around the table agreed that the way in which arts and culture are handled in our current system belongs at or near the top of the list of problems ripe for a solution.

That’s even more true now, in the wake of the utter failure of the Prosperity Council’s grand plan for cultural development in our region, than it was ten-plus years ago.