Thinking outside Hamilton’s ward boundary lines
We should be thinking of blowing up the system to bring real reform, not minor tinkering
There’s not much appetite, it seems, to tackle the topic of ward boundaries these days, even though we’re paying consultants a handsome chunk of change ($270,000) to undertake a review of the existing ward system. That’s a healthy contract for some lucky firm. How hard can this be after all? It seems no one really cares.
I find that odd, given the lingering acrimony stemming from amalgamation. Scratch the topic of area-rating and the fur flies, but ward boundaries? People are hitting snooze.
In 2012 council said they’d attend to it in early 2015. Then they wanted to wait until after the 2016 census data was available, delaying the inevitable pain it was sure to cause, for both their careers and constituents. But it can’t be put off and it shouldn’t be put off; it’s too important.
The consultants have come up with three possible scenarios. None of them spark much interest, there is no innovation or originality in thinking, in fact, it’s more of the same old, same old. Redraw to reflect federal wards, add another ward, or change the lines to better represent the population. That’s what $270,000 buys? I feel ripped off.
The response from the citizenry has been abysmal. It could just be summer, but more people seem to be concerned about whether they get to keep their historic town names than changing their representational boundaries. But I guess it doesn’t really matter.
When anyone can stand for election in any ward, what use are the ward boundaries in the first place?
Take that recent debacle of democracy, the byelection in Ward 7, where the seat was taken by a candidate who lived in Ward 8 and with a win representing a mere 4.75 per cent of the total eligible Ward 7 voters. With a crowded slate of 22 candidates, the vote fractured any semblance of unity and demonstrated the importance of name-recognition and incumbency in the ultimate of all popularity contests, politics.
If residency isn’t an issue for election purposes, I suggest the boundaries are irrelevant to representation. If anyone can do the job with no knowledge of the ward issues or connections to the community, why not open it up altogether and get rid of these silly lines that only serve to divide us. There is no unity in ward divisions.
I reviewed the recommendations and I’m a little ho-hum too. I want big change. I want revolutionary change. If we’re spending money to review the system, let’s blue sky this opportunity and fix a system we all know isn’t working; a system where “winners” have more votes against them than for them and where parachute candidates make a mockery of local experience and those with roots in and ties to the community.
I know I’m combining ward boundaries and electoral reform, but how can we have one without the other. That’s like putting a used band-aid on a festering wound. Not much use in healing the body politic.
And it so badly needs healing. It is sick and sore and tired of being played and punched by politicians who promise big ideas and fail to deliver. Not just here at city council, but at every level of government.
I don’t think I’m the first to accuse city council of being dysfunctional. I don’t have space to list the many instances where council couldn’t get its act together. I’ll just drop the two most recent instances and enough said: the stadium and the LRT. A major impediment in reaching consensus on many issues is the ward system itself, which pits communities against neighbouring communities and fosters the creation of little fiefdoms for career politicians. A “what’s in it for me and my ward” attitude takes precedence over what’s best for all of Hamilton. We waste time and money and opportunity holding on to long-standing grudges that keep us mired in the mud of indecision. Aren’t you tired of it yet?
I think that $270,000 is a lot of money. That could buy an affordable housing unit that would make a difference in the life of Hamilton families into perpetuity; or until it was sold at a sure profit. I want to see something new, innovative and revolutionary coming out of this process for our money.
How about the removal of ward boundaries altogether and a revolving system of elected representatives, maybe 5 councillors every two years? Or, maybe smaller wards, say 4, Hamilton squared, with the core quartered, 4 candidates per ward and ranked ballot voting. This first past the post process is returning losers and calling them winners. That has to stop.
Here’s your chance people. Don’t you have something to say?
Margaret Shkimba is a writer who lives in Hamilton. She can be reached at menrvasofia@gmail.com or you can “Friend” her on Facebook and follow her on Twitter (@menrvasofia)