Another long goodbye for board of control

By PAUL BERTON, London Frre Press, Sep 14 2008

London's board of control is a dead duck. It's a dead duck because it's the only one of its kind in Canada and it's an anachronism. It's a dead duck because Londoners (at least those who vote) have said it should be a dead duck. It's a dead duck because, for better or worse, taxpayers want a smaller city council and that's one of the easiest ways to achieve that. And it's a dead duck because a governance task force, which has been deliberating endlessly about a council overhaul, has recommended -- again -- that it be scrapped.

There will be public meetings to discuss the matter next Tuesday, and again Sept. 23, 30 and Oct. 2. If past interest in the task force's work and historic voter turnout in London's municipal elections are any indication, there should be plenty of room for any interested parties at the meetings. It's an important issue, but it isn't a sexy one for most Londoners. And it's been going on so long. The last referendum, after decades of formal and informal debate, was ignored, perhaps for good reasons (a minority of Londoners cast a ballot). A subsequent challenge from a citizen's group and an order from the Ontario Municipal Board to redraw London's wards followed. The task force, the third in 14 years, has been deliberating since 2007. So a lot of people have spent a lot of time and money and thought on this, and we would be well advised to listen to them carefully. But while we want an effective council, and hope a restructuring will make it more functional, we can't be assured of that. We know the advantages of citywide representatives, but we know the winners aren't necessarily those best suited for the job. We know winning a citywide seat takes a lot of money or a lot of name recognition -- or both. We like the idea of ward boundaries that make sense and are easy to understand, but we know that's sometimes a challenge depending on the neighbourhood. We like the idea of one council member per ward, but we know there are advantages to having two. We accept the theory there's always room for improvement in the structure of council, but we know in our hearts that the most important thing is not how things are structured, but who is working for us in that structure. As usual, it's all about the people, not the system.