Canada's Mayors Don't Want Conservatives

[maplesyrup]

Mayors warn against Conservative victory

A group of Canadian mayors is warning voters that a Conservative victory in the upcoming election would mean big trouble for the country's municipalities.

"If they (Conservatives) get elected, everything we've worked for some 20 years is going to be to put on hold while they pursue their right-wing Conservative agenda," Vancouver's Mayor Larry Campbell told the Toronto Star.

He made the comments after a private meeting of 22 mayors attending the National Forum of Economic Growth of the Big Cities in Canada.

Campbell says "the barbarians are at the gate," and "It's time for us to make a stand here."

The mayors' group, known as the BC-22, hasn't put its support behind a party officially, but Prime Minister Paul Martin did sit in on the mayors' caucus.

"How can I sit down with the President of the United States and talk about improvement of infrastructure unless, in fact, I come and sit down with the mayors of the great municipalities where that infrastructure takes place," Martin said.

Susan Fennell, Mayor of Brampton, Ont., said all three federal leaders were invited to go to the annual Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference.

Harper was the only one to decline.

"The absence of the Conservative leader by choice speaks volumes," Fennell said. "That says there is no (Conservative) municipal agenda."

Canadians are usually closest to their municipal politicians. I wonder what kind of impact these mayors will have.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Larry Campbell a right wing conservatve???

Get off it

I know that alot of those mayors are probably liberal, so they would support Paul Martin of course. Under my understanding the conservative's believe in helping out big cities, and small farming towns. Which is much better than Martin's plan to only help out large municipalities.

[maplesyrup]

Harper was a no-show at their conference. Layton & Martin attended. If Harper keeps up his "bubble" performance he could blow it.

[August1991]

The Constitution makes it clear that municipal affairs are entirely within provincial jurisdiction. Trudeau once had a minister of urban affairs but this was abolished.

It should be the provincial governments who negotiate with cities. (These mayors want money.)

IME, successful city politicians avoid getting into the fray during provincial or federal elections.

[Argus]

Harper was a no-show at their conference. Layton & Martin attended. If Harper keeps up his "bubble" performance he could blow it. 

Harper had absolutely nothing to gain by attending and being lambasted by a bunch of liberal and ndp mayors who are salivating at the prospect of getting direct, no strings attached, federal money.

As has already been pointed out, most are Liberal or NDP. The thought of Ottawa's Bob Chiarelli, or Toronto's David Miller or Vancouver's Larry Campbell endorsing a conservative party is utterly ludicrous just to begin with. But add in their hope of mana from heaven, free fed money Martin has promised that they can do whatever they want with, and they're all eager to tar the Tories.

The tories have promised money, too, but they would give it to the provinces to disperse, and that's not what these money grubbing, power hungry mayors want. If they have personal control of the money they can use it to reward supporters, to improve things THEY want to improve, not what the cities actually need.

[Bionic Antboy]

Harper was a no-show at their conference. Layton & Martin attended. If Harper keeps up his "bubble" performance he could blow it.  

Harper had absolutely nothing to gain by attending and being lambasted by a bunch of liberal and ndp mayors who are salivating at the prospect of getting direct, no strings attached, federal money.

(snip)

The tories have promised money, too, but they would give it to the provinces to disperse, and that's not what these money grubbing, power hungry mayors want. If they have personal control of the money they can use it to reward supporters, to improve things THEY want to improve, not what the cities actually need.

Actually, I think city mayors have a pretty good idea on what needs to improve. By rethinking the current "trickle down" method of getting money back to the municipalities and finding a better way is an improvement, regardless of political stripe.

As for your comment about "free fed money", where the heck does that money come from, hmmm?

That's right, the taxpayers, many of whom live in urban centres. Cities should be able to appeal to the feds.

For example, Toronto could fairly easily become it's own city-province, and probably manage itself much better than what happened under the aegis of the provincial Tory gov't. Not that I necessarily support the notion... it smacks me as unCanadian

There's a reason why the mayors are looking for a new deal, because the status quo is ungainly.

[August1991]

Cities should be able to appeal to the feds.

That's not what the Constitution says. Municipal affairs, like education, are local matters best governed in a country like Canada at the provincial level. Harper is dead right on this one. Martin and Layton are the ones grandstanding. You can guess Duceppe's position.

[Bionic Antboy]

Cities should be able to appeal to the feds.

That's not what the Constitution says. Municipal affairs, like education, are local matters best governed in a country like Canada at the provincial level. Harper is dead right on this one. Martin and Layton are the ones grandstanding. You can guess Duceppe's position.

That's why amending the Constitution wouldn't be such a bad idea. Nothing wrong with a little political reform.

[August1991]

That's why amending the Constitution wouldn't be such a bad idea. Nothing wrong with a little political reform.

No provincial premier would agree to sharing municipal affairs with the feds. It would be unthinkable in Quebec.

Nor should it be, either. Local matters are best decided at the provincial level. This is not merely the Canadian way but it also makes practical sense.

Many of the boondoggles arise when the feds try to manage at the local level.

[maplesyrup]

Gee, and I thought the federales are constantly intervening, so we would have high national standards, and to distribute the equalization payments, in order to protect the economically weaker areas.

If we are overgoverned, perhaps we should abolish the provinces (just kidding, sort of).

[Bionic Antboy]

Gee, and I thought the federales are constantly intervening, so we would have high national standards, and to distribute the equalization payments, in order to protect the economically weaker areas.

If we are overgoverned, perhaps we should abolish the provinces (just kidding, sort of).

heheh...

There needs to be a new balance. Harper's opinion on the subject is that the status quo is just fine, when it's not. It sure doesn't seem that way in Toronto.

Then again, that's probably because we've had a decade of anti-Torontoism sitting in Queen's Park (not sure if the McGuinty era is going to be much better... we'll have to wait and see).

[August1991]

Harper's opinion on the subject is that the status quo is just fine, when it's not.

Harper is not in favour of the status quo at all. The whole point of the firewall remark was to state that the line between federal and provincial jurisdiction should be respected.

Then again, that's probably because we've had a decade of anti-Torontoism sitting in Queen's Park

Isn't Toronto called Hogtown?

[takeanumber]

Harper is not in favour of the status quo at all. The whole point of the firewall remark was to state that the line between federal and provincial jurisdiction should be respected.

There are areas of co-responsibility.

So rural Alberta should be able to trounce Canadian values.

Pass me another Gettymander please.

[August1991]

There are areas of co-responsibility.

Yes, immigration for example. (Why don't BC and Ontario get involved as Quebec has done?) Municipal affairs are not a shared responsibility.

So rural Alberta should be able to trounce Canadian values.

Sorry, you've lost me there. Do you mean that 10 or so Tory MPs from rural Albertan ridings are going to dictate how the other 290 some odd MPs vote?