This week's edition has a staff editorial that I recommend reading. Entitled 'Grinding out a new council', it makes a handful of good points about the current state of affairs in Hamilton, both critical and salutary. However, where it excels is in the final bits, which I'm going to take the liberty of excerpting here:
"Is it frustrating to watch adults act like children in a school yard? Yes. Would a new crop of people change how Hamilton council works? Not really.
Over the last 10 years there has only been four new people elected to council. Truth be told, some Hamilton residents like what they see around the council table. Their interests and voices are represented in their own unique fashion. And while Hamilton’s council hijinks are unusual in some respects, they are not as over the top as in other municipalities, such as Vaughan, Toronto, or Windsor.
One of the untold aspects of Hamilton’s councillors is they are as attuned to their constituents’ needs as any politician can be. They are sensitive to criticism, responsive to homeowners wants, and demanding of city staff to accommodate their residents’ needs.
It’s easy to “throw da bums out,” to make a change, but what type of “change” are you getting?"
I applaud the effort put into the editorial. It's one of the more honest and objective pieces I've come across since the start of the election season.
I hope that the newspaper's readers take the time to read it, and give a little more thought about how they're going to vote, and why.
(And I may as well add that I appreciated how much column space was afforded coverage of local political issues above and beyond the usual...even though my take on the Ward 9 debate at the Royal Canadian Legion was markedly different.)