OUR VIEW: Democratic Race Good for Cities

It’s official, the race is on between Montreal and Vancouver. And that’s good news for all citizens and our democracy.

Earlier this June, Think City board chair Neil Monckton told 1,000 delegates at the fifth Montreal Citizens’ Summit that by 2012 Vancouver, under Mayor Gregor Robertson, was poised to become Canada’s most democratic city. Fellow panelist and Mayor of Montreal, Gerald Tremblay, offered a very different view. It was great that Vancouver was trying to play catch up, said Montreal’s mayor, but his city was the leader on all things democratic, and Montreal would stay on top.

Friendly banter notwithstanding, Montreal’s democratic leadership is a claim that Tremblay can readily defend given the significant democratic reforms he has overseen during his two terms as mayor of Canada’s second largest city. Montreal’s council has not only talked the talk, it has also walked the walk since 2001. When you look at his city’s accomplishments, Mayor Tremblay is quite right. Vancouver has a lot of catching up to do.

Under Tremblay’s leadership, Montreal now has an independent and permanent democracy task force lead by a prominent community activist. It elects neighbourhood councils to administer major annual operating and capital budgets. There is an office of public consultation for all major civic projects, an independent ombudsman to investigate citizen complaints, and even a participatory capital budget in the neighbourhood of Plateau-Mont Royal.

However, the most substantial democratic tool that Tremblay is proud to trumpet is the Montreal Citizens’ Charter that was brought into effect three years ago. The charter has become the centrepiece of Montreal’s democratic reforms and has been copied all over the world since it earned the spotlight at the United Nations World Urban Forum held in Vancouver in June 2006. For Tremblay, the charter was essential for building a future rooted in the qualities valued by all citizens and his city council – openness, respect, solidarity, transparency, and democracy.

A strong claim from Mayor Tremblay, but one that is also echoed by those outside city hall’s power structures. Dimitri Roussopoulos, an independent community activist and the chair of Montreal’s democracy task force believes the most important contribution the charter has made to civic life is how it defines city hall’s relationship to citizens. The charter clearly spells out the city’s obligations to citizens and vice versa, laying them out in a concrete fashion. Moreover, if citizens have an issue or concern with their rights, it provides the public with a very clear path of recourse through the office of the ombudsman.

Later this summer, the charter may be further strengthened when Tremblay’s council votes on giving citizens the right to put issues on the municipal ballot through an initiative process. If the charter’s initiative mechanism is approved, the mayor and his democracy task force chair know that this will put citizens on a more level playing field with elected officials and city staff.

In the race for the title of Canada’s most democratic city, Montreal is the clear frontrunner among the big eight cities. And Tremblay is dead right. If Vancouver wants to get into the game, Mayor Robertson must move forward with his promises to reform local democracy in Vancouver. A citizens' charter is an excellent place to start.

Think City has supported such an initiative since 2005 and would very much like to see council adopt a made-in-Vancouver version of the Montreal charter. More importantly, the process of developing the charter would lay a solid foundation for implementing the mayor’s other promised reforms.

Since its election last November, Vancouver’s new council has been consumed with all things Olympic. However, last fall, the mayor as candidate committed to a number of democratic changes.

Mayor Robertson said he would create a citizens engagement unit that would see staff reassigned to lead and coordinate public consultation for major public initiatives, including Listening to Vancouver, an annual series of consultations and workshops where the public can share ideas, and guide the government. The unit would also provide recommendations to improve civic participation city-wide, including a strategy to increase the involvement of multi-cultural communities, refugees, and non-citizens in the democratic process.

The mayor also promised to press the BC government on establishing campaign finance limits for the 2011 municipal election. Mayor Robertson also committed his administration to studying reforms to the at-large system with specific emphasis on boosting neighbourhood-based representation, and putting these changes to plebiscite in the 2011 municipal election.

In addition to these reforms, the mayor also pledged his strong support for the following five democratic reform options that Think City developed with citizens and community groups as part of the year-long Dream Vancouver project leading up to the November 2008 elections:

  1. The city should replace the at-large system with another electoral system (e.g., wards, proportional representation).
  2. The city should provide more funding and other resources to foster citizen-directed activities in neighbourhoods (e.g., area councils, childcare/seniors care, community gardens, etc.).
  3. The city should establish an independent office of public consultation to ensure all city consultation processes are transparent, credible and effective.
  4. The city should provide citizens with direct ways to set city council priorities between elections (e.g., ongoing democratic reform through a citizens’ assembly or annual/capital budget development through participatory budgeting).
  5. The city should create a public engagement strategy for multicultural communities.


If the city acts on Think City’s Dream Vancouver options above, along with the policies outlined in the Vision Vancouver platform, then we will see a dramatic shift in the democratic life of the city by 2012. However, time is ticking on Mayor Robertson’s mandate and so far not a single public action has been taken on any of these sweeping changes.

But there are signs that city hall is making moves on the democratic agenda at last. Vision Vancouver councillor Andrea Reimer is taking a lead role on these initiatives and has told Think City she is asking her fellow councillors to consider developing a citizens' charter for Vancouver.

But as Montreal’s Mayor Tremblay knows, reforming democratic life in his city has taken his administration eight years and the considerable combined efforts of elected officials, staff and citizens. Vancouver is no different – change won’t happen unless our mayor makes his democratic agenda a priority and soon.

It’s time to get moving, Mayor Robertson. You don’t want to lose the race.

Neil Monckton's complete speech to the Montreal Citizens' Summit is available here.

curious.

i'm a little late coming to this (just came over from frances bula's blog), but the bit about montreal is stutter-inducing. it's so disconnected from the reality of that city that i just have to throw up a few quick notes:

1. as we all know, far from being transparent, tremblay's regime has been exposed as culpable in nearly a dozen corruption scandals over the past couple years, we're talking money in envelopes, city land sold at 1/10th the value, mafia money laundering sort of stuff. and the man obfuscated at every possible turn.

2. the borough system was brought in as a sort of compromise measure after the merger fiasco that brough tremblay to power, but it was the man himself who first began the clawback process, by assuming the powers of the ville-marie mayoralty in a power struggle with a political rival who occupied that position.

3. the fantastic idea of "voter initiatives" (which i, a high info montrealer, heard of only once) is nowhere on the politcal map, and the mayor would be insane to bring it forward (as he'd almost certainly be immediately recalled).

4. the large montreal city council is a mini commons run by a smaller cabinet structure, the 'executive council', which the mayor rules with an iron first. after his shock re-election in 2009, that is, after two terms, he finally appointed two opposition members to minor positions in the executive council. the borough councils and mayoralties have nothing to do with tremblay, and were not an iniative of his.

5. the number and substance of the building projects this guy's team has rammed through is like nothing a vancouverite could father: a downtown super development (griffintown), a freeway extention (720 east), a cultural precint (quartier des spectacles), a downtown super hospital (chum), a skyscraper in a lowrise district (angus), the st viateur street extension, several incursions onto precious mountain greenspace (which is ostensibly protected), and many more. some were rammed through without a udp process, some had truncated consultation phases, some were not approved by staff and then approved by council, there were various ways in which the process was circumvented, but the point is that these guys circumvent the process as a matter of course. future projects that'll be rammed through: metro extension, streetcar line, the postal yards.

i mean, montreal's public service is notoriously inefficient, its procurement process notoriously corrupt, its blue collar workers notoriously lazy and overpaid, its political class notoriously autocratic. in short, this city is nothing like what you describe.

Democratic Reforms

Never mind the Charter - that's nice in theory, but something more concrete would be more useful. Since #1 is probably dependent on the results of a referendum, get going with #'s 2, 3, 4, and 5. Funding and resources for neighbourhood-based area councils were something that the now-defunct Neighbour-to-Neighbour group lobbied for and which the Vancouver City Planning Commission recommended after a public consultation when I was on it from 2003-05, only to have that dropped when the NPA formed the majority in Nov 2005. Participatory budgeting is also something we have flirted with previously but never got past the preliminary stage. #3 would be very nice indeed, because from my experience Council and Park Board do try to undergo public consultation in most cases, but the transparency, credibility, and effectiveness are sometimes lacking and leave people frustrated with the process.

Democratic City

We will not be a democratic city if all the city council meetings are proceeded by an in camera meeting.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.