News   Apr 26, 2024
Sustainability Month: ReHousing — A Multiplex How-To Guide Explores What’s Possible in the Yellowbelt
 745     3 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Mattamy's Soleil and Mile & Creek Condos in Milton’s Flourishing Landscape
 250     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Galleria on the Park Soon to Welcome First Residents of Masterplanned Community
 735     0 

Next Mayor of Toronto?

So, and I'm not being ridiculous here, raise the Mayor's salary as high as one million dollars, and councilors 4/5th of that.
Click to expand...

I think that would be very excessive and don't agree with it, but it's interesting to note that anyone managing a private sector organization the size of the City of Toronto would be making far more than that.
 
Maybe we'd be better off in a situation where our politicians are more like a board of directors, and government is run by competent managers hired by this board. Pay them what private sector managers with similar responsibilities would make, give them free reign, and set demanding operational targets for to meet.
 
David Miller finds little fault of his own in strike

He's furious at the cadre of councillors who tried to strike down the deal negotiated with city workers. He's maddened by what he calls the "recasting of history" that in his view has marked the whole sorry affair.

What Miller does not admit are the miscalculations made in positioning the negotiations in the minds of the public, selling them on a deal he now says he knew he could not deliver and exposing his own flank to a collective of councillors calling themselves the Responsible Government Group. Perhaps due to a mayor's office that appears to be structurally sheltered, not nimble, non-strategic, Miller's momentary failure, if it is only momentary, is not so much the deal itself but the politics of the deal.

As he sifts the entrails of the 39-day strike he finds little fault of his own. "We always knew we'd have to give somewhere," he says of the negotiations that culminated most surprisingly with the option of the continued accrual of 18 sick days annually for city workers. "We achieved our goal. I really can't accept that anyone can see it in any other light whatsoever."
 
Eug said:
David Miller finds little fault of his own in strike

He's furious at the cadre of councillors who tried to strike down the deal negotiated with city workers. He's maddened by what he calls the "recasting of history" that in his view has marked the whole sorry affair.

What Miller does not admit are the miscalculations made in positioning the negotiations in the minds of the public, selling them on a deal he now says he knew he could not deliver and exposing his own flank to a collective of councillors calling themselves the Responsible Government Group. Perhaps due to a mayor's office that appears to be structurally sheltered, not nimble, non-strategic, Miller's momentary failure, if it is only momentary, is not so much the deal itself but the politics of the deal.

As he sifts the entrails of the 39-day strike he finds little fault of his own. "We always knew we'd have to give somewhere," he says of the negotiations that culminated most surprisingly with the option of the continued accrual of 18 sick days annually for city workers. "We achieved our goal. I really can't accept that anyone can see it in any other light whatsoever."
Click to expand...

I have to say, the city didn't get a very good deal. If this is what they were going to settle for, I don't know why they couldn't have gotten it much earlier.
 
unimaginative2 said:
I think that would be very excessive and don't agree with it, but it's interesting to note that anyone managing a private sector organization the size of the City of Toronto would be making far more than that.
Click to expand...

True, although if anyone is getting paid too much, it's exactly those managers and CEOs whose compensation has risen far faster than anyone else's.
 
afransen said:
Maybe we'd be better off in a situation where our politicians are more like a board of directors, and government is run by competent managers hired by this board. Pay them what private sector managers with similar responsibilities would make, give them free reign, and set demanding operational targets for to meet.
Click to expand...

That's essentially how government works. Deputy Ministers and the city managers are the CEOs in government. The politicians are the board of directors.
 
Umm, I don't think so. Deputy ministers are not given free reign to represent their departments like a EVP would for an operating unit of their company. They are totally beholden to their political masters.

The board of directors approves major expenditures, and strategic direction. They don't draft every piddling policy and get involved in the day-to-day operations the way politicians do. Politicians are poisoning what should be an apolitical aspect of government: operating effectively to meet the high-level expectations set to them by the caucus/legislature. I don't blame civil servants for getting fed up with the bullshit political meddling in matters that are not political.
 
afransen said:
Umm, I don't think so. Deputy ministers are not given free reign to represent their departments like a EVP would for an operating unit of their company. They are totally beholden to their political masters.

The board of directors approves major expenditures, and strategic direction. They don't draft every piddling policy and get involved in the day-to-day operations the way politicians do. Politicians are poisoning what should be an apolitical aspect of government: operating effectively to meet the high-level expectations set to them by the caucus/legislature. I don't blame civil servants for getting fed up with the bullshit political meddling in matters that are not political.
Click to expand...

You don't sound like you've ever worked in government.
 
The little I know about city council comes from soundbites and quotes in the Star. However, after watching the council proceedings a few days back, it's clear that as far as oratory skills are concerned, Miller blows everyone away.

I'm not sure just how influential debates are for municipal elections, but if some low-key Michael Thompson or wise-ass Minnan Wong were facing Miller, not even a paltry seven-year record would provide suitable ammunition to overtake His Blondness' collected speaking style.
 
If by "political operatives" you mean the people that the public have elected to run the government, then in some cases, yes. The extent depends on the government, which party is in power, and the individual minister. But I think most people will tell you that the bigger problem is the bureaucracy impeding the implementation of policies on which the government was elected, and not the elected government "meddling" with the way the bureaucracy wants to run things. That's not to say that the bureaucracy isn't often unfairly maligned.

I'd also add that the complete lack of any power and influence held by boards of directors of most major public companies is a major contributor to the corporate governance crisis we see today. If they got more involved in "piddling" operational issues and didn't just leave an unaccountable CEO to his or her own devices, we'd have a lot fewer instances of fiddling with the books and obscene compensation packages.
 
Last edited:
^
From what I've seen, most of the time the public service is seen to be "impeding" on legislative aims, it is because something completely ridiculous has been legislated. Every time something goes wrong federally, the Tories get sand in their panties and start blaming some kind of fifth columnists in the public service. Look at how governments routinely ignore public sector advice vis a vis things like budgeting (Kevin Page), crime (Insite), transportation (congestion pricing) or zoning (Leslieville SmartCenter).

I'm inclined to agree with afransen on the general division of responsibilities between professional civil servants and elected representatives. Politicians rarely have the skills, inclination or proper facilities to deal with issues beyond oversight and strategic focuses. Their involvement in projects above that level almost always just politicizes and bogs down the professionals.
 
I work for the Ontario Government. The best way to explain it is probably as a two-way street with DMs and Ministers meeting in the middle. Think of it as an hour glass shape. Obviously I can't speak for every Ministry because some play a more important political role than others. However, many or most of the initiatives are actually started and put forth to Cabinet by the bureaucracy. DMs have an immense amount of power as they determine what makes it out of the ministry and gets put on the Minister and Cabinet's plate. Other than the odd pet project put in a platform for election, it's very much a hand's off process for the acting government. Actually, in most cases, I would say that the political side of government has a limited idea of what is actually going on behind the scenes.


EDIT: I agree with Whoaccio's last paragraph. It's near impossible for any elected representative to have a grasp of every issue in their department or ministry. The great thing about DMs and Assistant DMs is that they have a long memory. So when the Minister goes to the DM and says we should consider doing X, the DM can turn around and say "we tried that five years ago and it didn't work". With the constant shuffling of Ministers and changes in government, it would be a mess if the power shifted towards elected officials.
 
Last edited:
unimaginative2 said:
If by "political operatives" you mean the people that the public have elected to run the government, then in some cases, yes. The extent depends on the government, which party is in power, and the individual minister. But I think most people will tell you that the bigger problem is the bureaucracy impeding the implementation of policies on which the government was elected, and not the elected government "meddling" with the way the bureaucracy wants to run things. That's not to say that the bureaucracy isn't often unfairly maligned.

I'd also add that the complete lack of any power and influence held by boards of directors of most major public companies is a major contributor to the corporate governance crisis we see today. If they got more involved in "piddling" operational issues and didn't just leave an unaccountable CEO to his or her own devices, we'd have a lot fewer instances of fiddling with the books and obscene compensation packages.
Click to expand...

Boards approve compensation, and everyone involved has a legal responsibility to present accounting statements that are accurate. I`m not sure what you`re getting at. Some boards haven`t done good jobs, and sometimes they are fired, too.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top