Democratic Reform and Civic Engagement
As requested, here is some space to talk about democratic reforms and civic engagement.
Setting the Agenda 2010
What's your vision for Toronto?
-
Recent Comments
David Robertson on Cycling Infrastructure Desmond Cole on Democratic Reform and Civic… Raj on Welcome to Setting the Agenda … MS on Cycling Infrastructure DN on Cycling Infrastructure
November 20, 2009 at 3:56 pm |
We do not use the advantages of technology in forwarding initiatives to improve civic engagement. On a day to day basis, right now, we rely on private media companies to choose and give attention to the issues that produce public debate. This is not democratic. Private companies seek to produce profit, and so pick the cute sound bites and, usually, negative, stories. “If it bleeds, it leads”. This does not contribute to meaningful debate on visionary issues. What kind of city/society do we want? Looking forward, what do we want to achieve? Pop-media simply turns us into reactionaries to what may befall us.
Technology has sufficiently advanced to permit: internet voting, timely referendums, public consultations online (what I am doing right now proves this). Future vision: when elections occur, vans are strategically locate all over the city. People walk in, are identified by biometrics and can vote. Not only vote, but they can call up individual candidate platforms; if a incumbent, they can see voting records. They vote when convenient, 24/7 even. Extend this: when important issues arise, vans are sent out to take the ACCURATE pulse of constituents.
We must not only make the most of technologies, but also have a “Citizen Bill of Rights” which lays out what a citizen’s responsibilities are and what their elected officials duties are.
I am in favour of mandatory voting. Fines for those that do not, with exceptions for medical emergencies. We must turn the corner on voter apathy.
As to elected incumbents – we should have term limits: maximum two consecutive. We should also have junior and senior councillors for each ward, to permit maximum access to constituents.
November 23, 2009 at 5:48 pm |
I get a bit antsy whenever talk of referendums and recall systems are mentioned. Read an article on California a while back that directly links the financial disaster the State is facing with referendums. Essentially they are to easily taken over by right wing and left wing interests and are extremely divisive and polarizing and create political gridlock ending in disaster.
I do agree with term limits but 4 would be a great advance on what we have now where we have 20 and 30 year deadwood clogging the system. Moscoe anyone. Also agree that technology can easily make politicians more accountable by making them put forward their platforms on issues and be judged on them.
November 24, 2009 at 2:48 pm |
CPAC for municipal politics? I expect that it would be inexpensive to produce and no doubt (by times) about as exciting as watching paint dry. Nevertheless, it can’t help but broaden penetration of issues and may tend to promote accountability.
November 22, 2009 at 2:48 pm |
Nobody’s talking about party politics at city hall here yet.
I am thinking that perhaps Toronto has passed a plateau of sorts as it gained in size and complexity of issues dealt with, as well as a budget that exceeds some provinces.
The City of Toronto act has allowed for significant changes to city governance. An executive committee, more powers for the Mayor, community councils, etc.
Yet when I watch city hall proceedings and compare them to those of a decade or so ago, it seems city council debates are individualistic, and though there are obvious voting blocks, personal points of view, often of the councillor only, seem to take precedence. The level of civility, respect and quality of debate often is appalling. It seems to have gotten worse since amalgamation and I really believe the city council worked more effectively before that time. Perhaps because we had true neighbouthood cultures.
However, we seem to have crossed a point of no return.
Should we embrace party politics and add on cabinet like posts, and all that goes with party politics? Would it be better if citizens voted for party platforms?
One of the issues is that much of what Toronto does now requires city-wide thinking, not just local ward protectorates. This is why I lean somewhat to the party model.
What do others think?
November 22, 2009 at 4:37 pm |
There is now a new page to discuss a party system.
November 23, 2009 at 3:03 am |
I’m not sure whether it belongs here in Democratic reform file, or in a ‘migration issues’ of its own – but a big way to encourage a wealth of new people to get involved, especially in a city as diverse as Toronto, is to raise the issue for discussion on whether the right to vote should be extended beyond citizens to permanent residents living in the city.
I’ll refer folks to the iVoteToronto site (http://www.ivotetoronto.org) for more info.
November 23, 2009 at 3:47 am |
Council should revisit the old nugget of implementing a ban on corporate and union donations to candidates running for city council. Several councillors receive large sums of money from Developers and other sources … removing said contributions may inspire candidates to aggressively re-engage with their communities and positively outreach to their citizen constituents.
November 23, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
Bryan
I don’t disagree with eliminating corporate or union contributions but in the bigger piscture Toronto has a much lower level of Developer or Corporate donations than other GTA municipalities. Several Councillors also look to union contributions. I think the bigger question is the Lobbyist Registry that gives City Public Unions and Private Unions like the Building Trades exemptions from the Registry and this greatly distorts opinions of Councillors more than changing the rules on Contributions. There is a huge difference between an exemption for a non profit like the Toronto Food Bank and a CUPE or Building Trades rep who while none profit are representing the personal financial interests of their members that may well be at odds to the bests interests of the City.
December 4, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
Here’s a suggestion for reform: let’s extend municipal voting rights to all permanent residents of our city, regardless of their immigration status. Everyone who chooses to live in our city has a stake in Toronto’s prosperity. Every resident should have the right to vote for their mayor, city councillor and school board trustee.
The I Vote Toronto campaign has been advocating such a change for more than a year. So far, 67 local and provincial organizations have endorsed our proposal. Furthermore, this idea has been employed in jurisdictions all over the world. Given that Toronto receives approximately 50,000 newcomers each year, we must do more to engage new residents immediately. The sooner we do, the sooner they will contribute to buildong our city.