Smitherman or Tory Pre-Election Decision Highlights the Problem

by John Laforet
posted on September 13th, 2009 at 10:56:11 am

Simply put, our municipal election system sucks. There are some very real challenges in guarenteeing a free and fair municipal election. There are legitimacy concerns in the eyes of some when turn out is so low. Many aspects of election procedure in Toronto favour incumbents and hurt the chances of a first time challenger to an incumbent Mayor or Councillor. There is also the flagrant use of staff, promotional materials and media advantage that sees incumbents able to steam roll weaker opponents. I recall meeting many voters in the 2006 election who told me that the Constituency Assistant to the Councillor for their area was making calls on behalf of the incumbent. The idea being if the incumbent had helped someone, the staff member who had done the helping would call the voter to remind them and put some pressure on them to support their boss. Not only does it breach ethics rules at City Hall, it’s also so transparently gross, I don’t know how anyone with any sense of integrity can do it. That being said, it demonstrates how perverted our municipal democracy has become.

I have a number of views on reform to the municipal system that I would support. Broadly speaking – a broader ability for Toronto residents to participate through ease of registration, location of polling stations, earlier access to the voters list, and a ‘Challenger’s advocate’ working at City Hall ensuring no abuse of public resources or unfair incumbency advantage are used by incumbents. But in this post, I’m going to focus on the voting system as it seems to the the unmentioned reality that is causing this ‘Smitherman/Tory’ thing in the first place.

The voting system allows for a first past the post result that allows someone to win office in an election where a minority of voters vote, and a minority of the minority who chose to vote elect the winner. David Miller’s 2006 election saw him win with 56% of ballots cast by just 39% of the eligible voting population. 56% of the vote in the context of the 2006 municipal election represents the will of just 22% of the eligible voting public.

In an election where nearly forty candidates sought the office of Mayor, and at least three of them staged very serious campaigns – first past the post isn’t cutting it. Consider that 61% of voters are so disallusioned they currently don’t bother to vote. Is the solution for two serious candidates to get together and decide how best to solidify the 1 in 5 Torontonians it would take to defeat the current Mayor ? Or, is the solution to adopt a voting system where voters could rank candidates for Mayor, Council and Trustee by order of preference, embracing the diversity of grassroots opinion found in a municipal election?

I expect no one will be surprised to know casting a ballot for George Smitherman isn’t something I am prepared to do under any circumstances. He and Dalton McGuinty are equally responsible for my current status as a political independent as it relates to the Provincial scene. Smitherman attacked my community, calling residents absurd, accused them of working themselves into an ‘artificial lather’ in addition to lying about the conduct of Toronto Hydro. He politicized an issue we had not, he attacked us as he tried to legislate our rights to participate in our democracy, through decision making, away.

The day before Smitherman’s first attack on Scarborough residents – I still considered myself an Ontario Liberal and was preparing to renew my membership. The day after, with virtually no time to think about it, as I was doing a flurry of press to defend my community, I wrote:

“As someone who has traditionally been a Liberal both in the card carrying sense and the ideological sense, being pitted between my community and party is not a comfortable position to be in. I joined the Liberal Party when I was 14. I came home from the hospital to Guildwood. Choosing between the two was not difficult. It was principled.” On the Conservative Payroll? NIMBY? Nuclear Lobbyist? Unemployed and Without a Life? No, Not Me. – February 11th 2009

My refusal to support George Smitherman for any electoral office is equally principled.

I don’t want a backroom deal to deprive me of my right to have a choice between all interested candidates for Mayor, while knowing my vote won’t be either ‘wasted’ or part of a vote split that elects the person I don’t want to office.

As I wait for Smitherman and Tory to work it out, I can only imagine how positive an impact electoral reform at the municipal election would have at engaging voters, strengthening our democracy and ending the strangle hold incumbents have on democracy in our City.

I can say with some certainty, should George Smitherman seek the office of Mayor, I will be actively involved in that campaign in addition to the by-election to replace him in the legislature. I know I will not be alone. I encourage anyone else with strong views on this to contact me and get involved in the future of our City.

My hope is that our next municipal council, or provincial legislature will decide after this election to modernize our voting system in Toronto, something I support and hope you do too.