Huh? What just happened?

Dr. Nili Kaplan-Myrth (far right) and her crew of volunteers held a Jabapalooza COVID-19 vaccination clinic for children five to 11years old on September 5 on Fourth Avenue just west of Bank Street. PHOTO: LIZ MCKEEN
Flags fly at half mast at schools and federal buildings to honour the passing of Queen Elizabeth II. She reigned for 70 of the 100 years of Glebe Collegiate.

The Ontario government has passed legislation giving increased powers to the mayor of Ottawa (and Toronto, of course). They are given the power to veto bylaws if they conflict with provincial priorities and the ability to hire and fire senior staff and to write the city’s budget. Strong mayors indeed!

While the mayor of Toronto is all in favour of increased powers for himself, the same is not true in Ottawa, where both the incumbent mayor and two of the front-runner candidates in the upcoming election have said they are against the bill. And yet it passed in the Ontario legislature with record speed and, need I point out, with no public consultation.

The bill is titled “Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022,” but I think some will agree that the building-homes part is merely a transparent attempt to link the bill with an incontrovertible good. The bill actually has nothing to do with housing.

What then is it for? I have to admit, it’s a puzzle. What is the motive for such a move on the part of the province? I tend to put it down to a personal hobbyhorse of the current premier, originating from watching his brother Rob flounder as mayor of Toronto. Maybe someone has a better answer.

Well then, what effect will it likely have? Again, it’s difficult to say. It will likely change the dynamic at City Hall, where until now the mayor has had a single vote just like everyone else. If he, she or they can now overrule Council by vetoing bylaws, does that mean the temperament, beliefs and biases of the individual who sits in the mayor’s chair at any given time will become paramount? More important than sound policy and progressive action? Where does consulting the public fit in this scenario (I suspect nowhere)?

And given the many unanswered questions raised by this act, where was the fire? Why the undue haste to make a change that no one really understands and no one asked for?

– Liz McKeen

Share this