Downtown Hamilton - WWI Victory Bonds Rally
This post's title is perhaps personal counselling's best starting point. While it's effective in almost all situations involving people, from little kids' demands to workplace disputes, here I'm asking it in regards to local politics.
Hand-in-hand with this question (and I'll get to the reason for asking it in just a bit) is my personally held belief -as stated elsewhere on this blog- that before you can even begin to address a problem, you really need to understand as much as you can about the problem. (Yes, I've dealt with this in my ten-part series on 'What is a 'downtown', and how come Stoney Creek's bites the Big One as much as it does?')
The 'problem' is our current dissatisfaction over City Council.
'Vote 'em out!' seems to be the rallying cry on many fronts. (Which is kinda odd...seeing as how few currently holding office have thrown their hats into the ring, and moreover, how few wards are, at this point, uncontested. This slant is from info I was given fairly recently...but don't quote me.) As if a new batch of people is the answer.
Is it?
I had a very, very interesting email exchange with Ryan McGreal of 'Raise the Hammer' last week about elections. About what people might look for in candidates, to get the best councillors elected. Now, Ryan and I have had our moments in the past. Ideological rough spots. But the truth is that there's very little that separates the way we see a good many issues...our difference lie mostly with arbitrary labels the tangentially philosophical, which have the least to do with quality of Life of all the factors and variables being discussed. (Sorry for being vague here, but I'm trying not to derail myself.)
In his response to my enquiry, Ryan presented some fantastic viewpoints. Ones I'd love to share...but I can't, because they're his, and he's informed me of his intention to publish an article based on his thoughts at some point closer to the actual municipal election.
What I can tell you is that at the core of what he suggests is an absolute need for engagement. Not just on the part of the councillors. But also -actually, more importantly, really- on the part of the voters. The populace. In order to ensure that what gets done in each ward, for each ward, to each ward reflects what those constituents want. (Or at least more than it has in recent history.)
So here I ask my initial question, the title of this editorial: 'What do you want?'
I'm asking this of the average citizen. The average voter. You.
Do you want to vote, then hand off the reins of power to the councillor (and Mayor) that you elect and not have to be bothered with stuff? Leave them to it, trusting that they're competent and that they're going to get the job done, while you return to living your life? After all, isn't that why we pay politicians, so we don't have to spend the time making sure the business of the City is being properly attended to?
Or do you want to play a bigger role in how the City is governed, maintain your engagement with your councillor by way of the ward online site, by emails, by 'town hall meetings', by online versions of the same?
I happen to agree with Ryan. I think it's a brilliant observation. I think that it speaks to the very essence of being a good citizen, of being a good community member, a good neighbour, a good part of your family. Instead of 'entitlement', we're talking about 'engagement'. Instead of 'Us and Them', we're talking about...well, just 'Us'.
This notion connects to that other reference I made: developing as full an understanding of what's wrong, what's gone wrong. What actually happened over the past four years? People are carping, there's a fair amount of discontent, but what decisions were made, why were they made that way, how else could they have been made...? Did our politicians actually screw up? Why do people feel such dissatisfaction about their City government, why do they feel so disenfranchised, so impotent? More to the point here: would increased engagement on the part of the average voter throughout a councillor's term prevent some of this discontent?
Whatever the inherent flaws are in politics, I'm not sure that merely raising our fists in righteous indignation is going to accomplish much beyond fooling us into believing that we're actually doing something to change what is so clearly not working...or at least not working as well as it could. As well as it should.
So I suppose the next question to be asked, one that will be the subject of another crack at all this at a future date, is 'How do we generate a better sense of political engagement amongst citizens?' Not just 'How do we increase voter turnout?' but 'How does maintaining political engagement become part of a person's lifestyle?' How do we make that value system shift to that paradigm?
Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I'm always interested in feedback, differing opinions, even contrarian blasts...as long as they're delivered with decorum...with panache and flair always helping.