Comment 29749

By Deputy Dawg (anonymous) | Posted March 26, 2009 at 10:12:08

While I too am not in favour of the current 'party system' for a municipal government, there is something to be said about a 'team' slate of candidates who all speak of similar goals and objectives for the municipality. I am not convinced that the rural areas will be excluded, as there is a dire need for rural inclusion when it comes to matters of Hamilton planning.

Term limits should be set by the voter. The problem is, and I hate to say it, is that the voter is not well educated with municipal matters, and as such only votes with the one they are most familiar. Consider this, as an average voter, which is more important to you... Your concern over matters which effect your immediate surroundings (ie- speeding in your neighbourhood, neighbourhood parks, pot holes on your street, your Councilor attending neighbourhood meetings, et al)? Or, matters which effect the greater City (ie- culture and rec, waste management, waste water management, police services, et al)? Statistically speaking, voters view the first question as being more important than the second question...the proof is in the high rate of incumbents re-elected.

Another consideration could be to form an Executive Team, similar to that of Winnipeg. The other is to push for Community Councils...something which is greatly lacking and needed in this City. We don't need to set Term Limits, we need to engage citizens to allow them the opportunity to hold those elected accountable!

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools