'That Smell'? Part Two

Photo property of Tim Noble and Sue Webster

I'm a 'reason behind the reason' sort of guy. I'm more fascinated by what motivates people to react, to behave in particular ways than I am in what's seen in the moment. 

In Part One of this series, I touched on the general attitude of that portion of Hamiltonians that is resistent to improving the way we deal with our household rubbish. The idea that we've convinced ourselves that we shouldn't have to be bothered to do anything more than put bags of all-in-one waste out at the curb, that our rights-of-entitlement trump any notion of the 'common good', or that we simply don't have the time to deal with such...well, crap. 

All fine and good; we live in selfish times. 

But tied into this, contributing to the formula, magnifying the process are several elements. 

The first, quite frankly, is leadership. 

Leadership that's not somehow modified (I'd say 'perverted')  by considerations of re-election. 

Look; I'm all for councillors being available to their constituents, hearing them out, weighing their input, all of that. But we effectively hire these people to be able to take all the information available to them...such as City Hall Staff recommendations...and lead. 

You know; the idea of taking people whose welfare they've been charged with managing from one place...to another. 

The 'one place' vis a vis garbage and recycling? The old-school default of 'put it all in a green bag'. And 'another'? The default that has us diverting as much material away from our landfills as is possible, with blue and green bins taking the lion's share. (I believe the current goal is a 65% diversion rate.)

If Hamilton can't set a goal, or stick to an Official Plan or a Secondary one, if it can't get the basics right, then why should anyone harbour the belief that this city's fate is in the kind of hands that are possessed of vision and imagination and incentive and initiative of the sort that's required for us to become the next great version of us we're capably of becoming?

Frankly, what I've seen unfold recently regarding Councils response to 'illegal dumping' and the perceived 'correlation' between it and the amount of containers of garbage being allowed (please note the term 'container'. It's not 'bag'.) does not instill confidence. At all. And frankly makes me wonder if, while there are always accusations of 'undue influence' regarding corporations or big-wig solo entities, that there's some 'undue influence' unfolding on a much more basic level, one that's closer aligned with thoughts of  re-election than great local governance. 

To be concluded in Part Three.