Ah, Bill 20. Thursday's contribution to what there is to fight about. Had the UCP government introduced a bill to enforce compulsory church attendance, Friday could hardly have seen a greater disturbance in The Force. Talk shows buzzing with hot resentment, NDP flaks whipping up indignation and big-city mayors trying to sound Churchillian in their resistance to this infringement upon municipal rights.Yes, it was that overblown. For the issue is not about municipal rights. Beyond the duties and powers defined in the Municipalities Act, I'm not sure the phrase even means anything.However, Premier Danielle Smith — justly and to her satisfaction famous for demanding Ottawa stay in its lane — evidently feels the same about city governments that jump the curb and is taking the opportunity that being in office affords, to re-paint the lines.I say that with some relief.It is, for example, an unseemly use of municipal power to redefine as hate speech what the Charter of Rights and Freedoms considers a citizen’s right to free expression. For example, the City of Calgary passed a bylaw making it an offence punishable by fines and even imprisonment to protest drag queen story hour on public property. Its actions were — among many other things, such as despicable — what lawyers call ultra vires. Were the situation tested in court, the city would be almost certainly found to have acted outside its legal authority. If Bill 20 makes some of these people think twice, I'm all for it.A further example is if cities deal directly with the federal government, as the prime minister is presently inviting them to do with offers of taxpayer money for housing.Legally, cities are children of the province. This is true across Canada, not just in Alberta. As mentioned above, their powers and duties are defined by provincial legislation, not federal. If things go wrong, it is for the province to sort out. Local politicians often have delusions of grandeur (and not infrequently of adequacy) but them’s the facts. And by the way, those who bristle with indignation that a provincial government might remove a dysfunctional municipal politician or even a whole council full of them should recognize that this is already the law — if you know anybody in Chestermere, ask them — and the sad experience of Premier Smith herself; she was a member of a dysfunctional Calgary school board that was fired by the provincial government 25 years ago.It is therefore through this lens — that of the constitutional subordination of municipalities to provinces — that the ongoing Trudeau Liberal campaign to hand out taxpayer money from federal sources to towns and cities, must be seen.The federal motives are not obscure.First, they have created the problem of a shortage of homes for people. (And now want somebody else to blame.)Second, institutional Ottawa is also for different reasons resentful of provincial prerogative, and has been so for years. (This is not just the incumbent prime minister’s work. As economist Tom Courchene points out, Ottawa knee-capped the provinces back in the '90s.)By plying towns and cities with money they’ve borrowed, their goal is first to insist on federal priorities in climate change and density and on a longer time scale, to undercut provincial prerogative.It is only a bit of a stretch to compare it the creepy man across the street trying to win the attention of your teenage daughter with inappropriate gifts and a promise that she can borrow his car any time.That would not be a situation a parent could ignore and now especially, given the shoving match between Smith and the Trudeau Liberals over keeping electricity flowing on dark days and cold nights, any attempt to isolate the Government of Alberta from its own citizens must be seen for what it is. And Smith does.Now, it is fair to object that this may all be so, but meanwhile real people have a real problem finding a place to live, so never mind the professorial arguments, what’s the plan for them?Let’s say money is the solution. I’m not sure that it is; more money alone does not produce more construction workers, or short circuit municipal gate-keeping. But suppose that a $100 million from Ottawa here and $400 million there was really the solution. Let Ottawa transfer enveloped but unconditional funds to the provinces, and have the provinces work things out with the authorities that constitutionally are their subordinate levels of government. This will never happen of course and even if it did, the same old noisy crowd that loves the NDP and sees anything Smith does as toxic by definition, would still say she’s a witch.The solution is inevitably prosaic. Municipal councils first need to stop thinking of themselves as governing city states. First do a good job of fixing the potholes, and forget about social engineering.Second, reallocate (not hire) people to fast track development of municipal lands. At times like this, the recollection of great collective efforts of the past come to mind. If it’s possible to build 2,700 Liberty ships (and their Canadian equivalents) in four years — one of the great and undersung achievements of the Second World War — might it be possible to build 2,600 multi-family dwellings in the same time, if the bureaucratic games were stopped? Even a tenth of that would help.Otherwise, take Bill 20, the Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 2024 for what it says it is: It is to amend the rules governing the conduct of local elected officials once on council, as well as the overall administration and operation of municipal authorities in Alberta.Many people would say it’s about time. To those, I would add this, "Yes... and while I know you just want to be left alone to live your life, recognize that there is a noisy minority on the left who want to decide how you will live it. The solution is to change things in your city council. Are you mad enough yet, to unite behind a candidate who thinks as you do (just one, please) and get busy unseating the people who make Legislation such as Bill 20 necessary, and take back your city hall?"
Ah, Bill 20. Thursday's contribution to what there is to fight about. Had the UCP government introduced a bill to enforce compulsory church attendance, Friday could hardly have seen a greater disturbance in The Force. Talk shows buzzing with hot resentment, NDP flaks whipping up indignation and big-city mayors trying to sound Churchillian in their resistance to this infringement upon municipal rights.Yes, it was that overblown. For the issue is not about municipal rights. Beyond the duties and powers defined in the Municipalities Act, I'm not sure the phrase even means anything.However, Premier Danielle Smith — justly and to her satisfaction famous for demanding Ottawa stay in its lane — evidently feels the same about city governments that jump the curb and is taking the opportunity that being in office affords, to re-paint the lines.I say that with some relief.It is, for example, an unseemly use of municipal power to redefine as hate speech what the Charter of Rights and Freedoms considers a citizen’s right to free expression. For example, the City of Calgary passed a bylaw making it an offence punishable by fines and even imprisonment to protest drag queen story hour on public property. Its actions were — among many other things, such as despicable — what lawyers call ultra vires. Were the situation tested in court, the city would be almost certainly found to have acted outside its legal authority. If Bill 20 makes some of these people think twice, I'm all for it.A further example is if cities deal directly with the federal government, as the prime minister is presently inviting them to do with offers of taxpayer money for housing.Legally, cities are children of the province. This is true across Canada, not just in Alberta. As mentioned above, their powers and duties are defined by provincial legislation, not federal. If things go wrong, it is for the province to sort out. Local politicians often have delusions of grandeur (and not infrequently of adequacy) but them’s the facts. And by the way, those who bristle with indignation that a provincial government might remove a dysfunctional municipal politician or even a whole council full of them should recognize that this is already the law — if you know anybody in Chestermere, ask them — and the sad experience of Premier Smith herself; she was a member of a dysfunctional Calgary school board that was fired by the provincial government 25 years ago.It is therefore through this lens — that of the constitutional subordination of municipalities to provinces — that the ongoing Trudeau Liberal campaign to hand out taxpayer money from federal sources to towns and cities, must be seen.The federal motives are not obscure.First, they have created the problem of a shortage of homes for people. (And now want somebody else to blame.)Second, institutional Ottawa is also for different reasons resentful of provincial prerogative, and has been so for years. (This is not just the incumbent prime minister’s work. As economist Tom Courchene points out, Ottawa knee-capped the provinces back in the '90s.)By plying towns and cities with money they’ve borrowed, their goal is first to insist on federal priorities in climate change and density and on a longer time scale, to undercut provincial prerogative.It is only a bit of a stretch to compare it the creepy man across the street trying to win the attention of your teenage daughter with inappropriate gifts and a promise that she can borrow his car any time.That would not be a situation a parent could ignore and now especially, given the shoving match between Smith and the Trudeau Liberals over keeping electricity flowing on dark days and cold nights, any attempt to isolate the Government of Alberta from its own citizens must be seen for what it is. And Smith does.Now, it is fair to object that this may all be so, but meanwhile real people have a real problem finding a place to live, so never mind the professorial arguments, what’s the plan for them?Let’s say money is the solution. I’m not sure that it is; more money alone does not produce more construction workers, or short circuit municipal gate-keeping. But suppose that a $100 million from Ottawa here and $400 million there was really the solution. Let Ottawa transfer enveloped but unconditional funds to the provinces, and have the provinces work things out with the authorities that constitutionally are their subordinate levels of government. This will never happen of course and even if it did, the same old noisy crowd that loves the NDP and sees anything Smith does as toxic by definition, would still say she’s a witch.The solution is inevitably prosaic. Municipal councils first need to stop thinking of themselves as governing city states. First do a good job of fixing the potholes, and forget about social engineering.Second, reallocate (not hire) people to fast track development of municipal lands. At times like this, the recollection of great collective efforts of the past come to mind. If it’s possible to build 2,700 Liberty ships (and their Canadian equivalents) in four years — one of the great and undersung achievements of the Second World War — might it be possible to build 2,600 multi-family dwellings in the same time, if the bureaucratic games were stopped? Even a tenth of that would help.Otherwise, take Bill 20, the Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 2024 for what it says it is: It is to amend the rules governing the conduct of local elected officials once on council, as well as the overall administration and operation of municipal authorities in Alberta.Many people would say it’s about time. To those, I would add this, "Yes... and while I know you just want to be left alone to live your life, recognize that there is a noisy minority on the left who want to decide how you will live it. The solution is to change things in your city council. Are you mad enough yet, to unite behind a candidate who thinks as you do (just one, please) and get busy unseating the people who make Legislation such as Bill 20 necessary, and take back your city hall?"
