SUBMISSION OF RECOMMENDATIONS BY SHEILA JACOBSON of BRAMPTON, ONTARIO THE CITIZENS ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO AND

Transcription

1 Page 1 of 7. SUBMISSION OF RECOMMENDATIONS BY SHEILA JACOBSON of BRAMPTON, ONTARIO TO THE CITIZENS ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO AND THE DEMOCRATIC RENEWAL SECRETARIAT OF ONTARIO January 31, (1) MAKE VOTING MANDATORY BY LAW: Having a 20% - 25% voter turnout in Municipal Elections is unacceptable. As a result of this chronically low voter turnout in Municipal Elections, the majority of citizens living in a particular Municipality, who wish to see new people on their City & Regional Councils, cannot change the composition of their City & Regional Councils, because the majority of voters don t vote in Municipal Elections. We need to enforce the Democratic system at the Municipal level because we have seen that with a chronically low voter turnout of only 20% - 25%, it seems to always be the same people who vote for the same incumbent Councilors, election after election. The majority of City & Regional Councilors in Ontario have been in their Council Seats for decades, & their performance on the job has become stale & ineffective. Yet, with the same voters voting for their favorite incumbent on Council, election after election, at the Municipal level, we see the same Councilors being put back into office term after term. Some clever Councilors who know which of their constituents vote regularly, & also support these specific Councilors, make sure to keep only these particular voters happy during the political term, knowing well that if only those regular voters are kept happy in the particular Ward of the incumbent Councilor, that Councilor will be sure to get re-elected into Office. There is mandatory voting in General Elections in Australia, & their political system seems to work very well, &, perhaps, better than ours, as it reflects the political will of the majority of Australians in accordance with the definition of Democracy, & there seems to be less disappointment among its citizens when it comes to their elected Government because it was truly voted into power by the majority of Australians. (2) CITY and REGIONAL COUNCILORS SHOULD BE ALLOWED ONLY 2 TERMS IN OFFICE IN ANY GIVEN POSITION: The population of Ontario is growing rapidly, especially in urban areas, & with more & more people settling in our Ontario cities, suburbs, & towns, we need to ensure that the changing face of our Ontario populations are reflected on the Councils of those areas. Even the President of the United States, the most powerful country in the world, is limited to only 2 terms in Office, after which there is a new President in the White House. The population of the U.S. is changing just as rapidly as our urban populations in Canada, & political issues change with

2 Page 2 of 7. time, bringing a need for new perspectives & ideas to the political landscape. Also, with the Political Term in Office at the Municipal level having been extended to 4 years, 2 terms in Office will give a Councilor a total of 8 years, either served consecutively or separately, & 8 years is a very long time. We need to put in a process that will break the grip of incumbency at the Municipal level, & by limiting all Councilors to just 2 terms of 4 years each, for a total of 8 years in any one position on Council, we will see Councils across Ontario become more responsive to the overall populations of those areas. After 2 terms in a particular position on Council, Councilors may run for Office in another Council position, & if elected in that new position, they may remain there for only 2 terms, for a total of 8 years in that new position, & so on. If a Municipal Politician were to be at each of the 3 levels of Council for 8 years at each level City Councilor, Regional Councilor, & Mayor that totals 24 years in political service at the Municipal level, & 24 years is a very long time. Yet, as we see today, in Brampton, there is at least one City Councilors who has been in political office since the late-1960s, almost without a break. That is too long to allow anyone to feed at the public trough. After a lengthy 8 years on Council, in any one Council Seat, it is unlikely that we will see many Councilors be as effective in their job as they had perhaps been when they were in their first couple of terms in Office. (3) CANDIDATES WHO HAVE LOST TWICE IN MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS, RUNNING IN ANY POSITION SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO RUN AGAIN IN A MUNICIPAL ELECTION: Losing Candidates who lose election after election at the Municipal level only serve to split the votes of good candidates, but never win themselves. Many losing Candidates who run election after election, put their name on the ballot just to prevent another Candidate from winning, or helping an incumbent win, by splitting the vote among voters from their own particular ethnic, racial, or cultural voting group. In the City of Mississauga, during the Nov. 2006, Municipal Election in Ontario, we saw some 26 Candidates on the ballot for one of the Council Seats, many of whom had lost in several past Municipal Elections. In Toronto, there were over 45 Candidates running for Mayor, in the last Municipal Election of Nov. 2006, splitting the vote extensively, & causing the incumbent Mayor, David Miller to be re-elected. This is one of the reasons why we see so many incumbents, most of whom are white, get re-elected in Municipal Elections, in areas with majority non-white populations, election after election.

3 Page 3 of 7. (4) THE CHAIR OF REGIONAL MUNICIPALITIES SHOULD BE ELECTED DIRECTLY BY THE VOTERS OF THE REGION, & NOT BY JUST THE ELECTED REGIONAL COUNCILORS: So far, the Chair of the individual Regional Municipalities is not held accountable to the public, which it serves. This is undemocratic, & must be changed. Given the long-time incumbency of Council members on City & Regional Councils, these groups have become cliques that elect their long-time pal or buddy, over & over again, to the position of Regional Chair, without the direct consent of the public voters through the electoral process. (5) THERE MUST BE AN OPPOSITION COUNCIL PUT INTO PLACE AT MUNICIPAL LEVEL TO WATCH OVER THE ELECTED COUNCILORS: The basic structure of the Canadian Constitution is founded on the principle of having a ruling elected group in power, who have obtained the majority of the votes from open and publicly held elections, AND a second group, who can be considered the runners up from that same election, being given the mandate and functions of an Opposition Group who performs the check and balance of public scrutiny to question and highlight the activities of the ruling group. This necessary balanced process ensures that decisions of Government are properly thought out and reduces the likelihood of Government decisions that are against the public interest. Canada has this balanced system only in the Federal and Provincial levels of Government to comply with its Constitutional obligations to the People. However the Province of Ontario has failed to apply these same basic Democratic principles which are the cornerstone of the Canadian Constitutional Government by not creating the same system of balance in Municipal level Government, although it is very simple and without any real cost to do so. What is required is, very simply, that the second runners up in each of the Wards and Mayoral races be given the right as a mandate to function as the Opposition Council to the ruling council. The Opposition Council would simply be given access to all information equal to what the ruling council members get, and have the right to be present during all council meetings including in-camera meetings of all municipal councils, with the right to ask questions and give comment on and about recommendations and decisions to the council, before any decision is made, on each and every council and committee decision without exception. This process requires a very nominal amendment to the Municipal Act, stating simply that the Second Runner up in each election (or the third runner up if the second declines, and so on) be treated as equal to and given access to all information equal to that of the elected members, be given equal status to speak in council and committee meetings, and be given the equal right to sit in all in-camera meetings; but the Opposition Council will lack any voting power in the municipal decisions themselves. As matters now stand in Municipal Council, long-time Councilors make secret decisions in in-camera council meetings, & the public is not aware of these decisions, & we have seen too many abuses of political power by incumbent Councilors who are not held accountable through any in-house scrutiny. The need for an Opposition Council is urgent.

4 Page 4 of 7. (6) THE VOTING PROCESS IN MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS SHOULD NOT BE LEFT UP TO BUREAUCRATS OR CIVIL SERVANTS IN MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: In this last Municipal Election of November 13, 2006, the City Clerk of the City of Brampton arbitrarily changed the voting process that resulted in voters being able to vote multiple times, & although there has been a huge outcry among voters, not much has been done so far to correct the situation because these City Bureaucrats are not held accountable for their actions, even when their actions violate the democratic rights of voters, & corrupt the democratic process. The City Clerk of Brampton, decided NOT to divide the Voters List alphabetically at the Voting Polls, in order to expedite the voting process. This meant that every table in the voting room had a full alphabetical list of voters in that area who were eligible to vote, & who were coming to that polling station to vote. This gave voters who may have wanted to vote multiple times, to come in & pick-up a ballot at one of the many tables, all of whom had the full alphabetical voters list, & have the name of that voter crossed off the voters list at that particular table, without that voter s name being crossed off the voters list at the other tables in that same voting location. That same voter could then come back to vote, & go to a different table that also had a full alphabetical voters list, but that hadn t had that particular voter s name crossed off the list, & that voter could now get another ballot to vote again. This process could be repeated many times, & a voter was able to vote again & again, if he or she chose to do so. The altered voting process in Brampton in this last Municipal Election of November 13, 2006, seemed to help the incumbents the most, all of whom, except 2, won & were re-elected with a landslide even though the widespread feeling among Bramptonians prior to this last Municipal Election was that a a change was badly needed at the Council level. The explanation given to Bramptonians by the City Clerk for having changed the Voting process, was this same duplication of the full alphabetical voters list at every table in a polling station, has been done in Toronto for years. I then spoke to the person responsible for putting our Democratic Voting Process at risk Janet Andrews of the City of Toronto s Elections She told me that most people don t cheat! And that The duplication of the full alphabetical voters list at each table in the voting hall was done to speed up voting process, in much the same way that we see the process in Banks with their bank tellers. The Voting Process is NOT a banking process Nor are we paying these City Clerks & other City Bureaucrats to make their own job easier by not having to manage huge crowds that might line up more at some of the tables with the alphabetical groups that represent more voters names. It seems that our City Clerks & other Municipal City Bureaucrats are jeopardizing our society s Democratic Rights in order to make their own job easier. WE MUST PROTECT & PRESERVE OUR DEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS, & ENSURE THAT WE FOLLOW ALL THE TRIED AND TRUE VOTING STEPS, SO VOTERS WHO MAY HAVE THE INTENTION TO CHEAT THE SYSTEM BY VOTING SEVERAL TIMES, ARE PREVENTED FROM DOING SO. Our Democratic system hasn t been created for the convenience for these City Clerks, such as Janet Andrews, who, after some questioning from me, admitted that they don t have the time to check every single one of the Alphabetical Voters List to in every polling station to see if the same voter s

5 Page 5 of 7. name has been crossed out on more than one voters alphabetical list in that polling station, which would indicate that that voter had voted more than once. Our Democratic Election Processes are not put into place to make the job of Bureaucrats easy these Bureaucrats are being paid to do their job in accordance with the spirit of democracy, & to uphold the democratic rights of our democratic society. The justification that I ve heard from both the City Clerk of Brampton, & Janet Andrews of the City of Toronto s Elections Office, is that these changes to the voting process were made to make voting faster for the voters. I told both these people that they can add more tables with more splits in the voters alphabetical list to accommodate voters with last names that fall into the more popular alphabet groups, & to reduce the number of tables with alphabetical groups that have fewer last names of voters. But the City Clerk of Brampton insisted that she would continue doing the same voting process as was done in the last Municipal Election of Nov. 2006, as long as Toronto is doing it too. And Janet Andrews of the City of Toronto s Elections Office, insisted that she has will continue to carry out the same voting process because she feels that voters are mostly honest, & that speeding up the voting process, (which, of course also makes her job easier), is more important than putting long-proven checks-and-balances in place to protect society s Democratic Rights. The worst part of all this, was that the City Clerk of Brampton told the local Brampton Guardian Newspaper, that anyone who did indeed vote more than once in that Nov Municipal Election, should come forward, & they would be charged! There were many voters who told the local paper the Brampton Guardian that they did indeed vote more than once, but they wouldn t give their name because they didn t want to be charged. Yet, the City Clerk of Brampton expects such multiple voters to come forward & admit that they broke the law, & face charges. In the same line of thinking, perhaps, we should get rid of our Police Force & just wait for criminals to come forward admit to crimes they have committed. I don t know how our Gov t. has allowed such bizarre, naïve, & unconscionable thinking to prevail among the Bureaucrats who have been entrusted with upholding our Democratic Rights & Processes. If anyone should be charged with violating the Democratic Process, it should be these City Clerks & Municipal Bureaucrats, such as Janet Andrews, & the City Clerk of Brampton, (& possibly others), who have violated the Democratic Process in Elections to give blind opportunity to voters who may have been inclined to vote multiple times, & cheat the democratic process. I found Janet Andrews of the City of Toronto s Elections Office, to be in gross violation of the Democratic Process, & she should be removed from her position, with cause, as well as anyone else who exhibits such callous indifference to society s Democratic Rights. We need to send a tough message to these City Clerks & Municipal Bureaucrats that they are there to do their job of upholding our Democratic Process in Elections, & they are not there to find ways & means to make their own job easier & faster, at the expense of our society s Democratic Rights. In this last Municipal Election of Nov. 2006, one of the new City Councilors elected in Brampton had lost in at least two of the previous Municipal Elections in 2003, & Many in the particular

6 Page 6 of 7. ethnic community from which this particular City Councilor comes from, told me that this person is widely disliked by them. Yet, this particular individual managed to win the Municipal Election this time, in Nov Many voters in the Ward where this particular new Candidate won the City Council Seat, are wondering if the altered voting process, which allowed voters to vote multiple times, may have given this particular Candidate an advantage over the others, one of whom was the visibleminority incumbent who was widely liked. The voting process at Municipal level should be conducted by an objective, third-party, such as a major, national, Accounting Firm. The selection process of Academy Award Winners in Hollywood is carried out by a major, international Accounting Firm, such as Price Waterhouse, in order to keep the process as fair & objective as possible. There is a great deal of money riding on the films chosen for an Academy Award, & so the interests of stakeholders are keenly protected at the Academy Awards by a highly reputable Accounting Firm. Similarly, there is a great deal of money involved in running any major city in Ontario, & it is only prudent that the interest of taxpayers be keenly protected by having the Municipal Election run by a major Accounting Firm. And any changes to the voting process must be approved by the Provincial Government, & must not be left up to any Bureaucrats. (7) THE CITIZENSHIP OF VOTERS SHOULD BE VERIFIED MORE THOROUGHLY: In every election in our cities, there are too many voters who are not Canadian citizens, but Election Officials are often too dismissive about suggestions that there are too many non-citizens voting in our Elections. It seems that our Election Officials prefer to operate with a sense of denial that anything untoward might be taking place in our elections. In areas where there are huge numbers of immigrant, non-citizen populations, as we see in the Toronto & Greater Toronto Areas, there are clear indications of newly-arrived persons to Canada that do vote, & there have been cases of incumbents or even non-incumbent candidates in elections who seek out such newly-arrived persons in their political riding or ward to come out & vote for that particular candidate. However, when others in the neighbourhood report such illegal voter participation, there is a round of denials by the suspects, & vigorous cover-up of the facts. We have to stop being naïve about the intentions of people anywhere these days, as we see more & more people who come to Canada from unconscionable societies that have no respect for democracy, & will take any advantage that is made available to them to cheat our society s processes. I am a visible-minority person, & I am well aware of the sort of blatant disregard for democracy, & the impunity with which unconscionable people from non-democratic societies proceed to cheat us & take advantage of our trust & naivety in elections. In Provincial & Federal Elections, we see dishonest individuals wishing to become the Candidate for a particular Political Party, bring people to vote in the nomination, who are not citizens of Canada. As a result of this practice, we often get Candidates who are of bad character who choose to cheat our Democratic process, & who are being chosen by non-citizens of Canada to run in our Canadian General Elections. And we do see such dishonest individuals then get elected in a General Election to our Provincial or Federal Parliament.

7 Page 7 of 7. We cannot blame these dishonest individuals for taking advantage of our trusting nature in the election process. IT IS OUR FAULT, AS CANADIANS, FOR ALLOWING TOO MANY HOLES TO EXIST IN OUR DEMOCRATIC ELECTION PROCESS. We need to tighten the democratic process, from the nomination stage of candidates, to the final voting process in any election, & putting in such checks-and-balances to protect our democracy shouldn t & doesn t cost much more than a piece of paper to toughen up the legislation regarding these democratic processes. (8) EVERY CANDIDATE RUNNING IN A MUNICIPAL ELECTION MUST BE REQUIRED TO PASS AN ORAL & WRITTEN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEST WHICH IS TO BE ADMINISTERED BY A LOCAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTOR: In too many elections to date, we have struggled to understand the so-called English spoken & written by many of the Candidates running in these elections. In this last Municipal Election, in Brampton, one of the two new Councilors that was elected, barely speaks enough English to be understood, & his written English in the speech he read on TV made little grammatical sense, & was cluttered with uncommon terminology & burdened with a thick accent. We as Canadians of all races, ethnicities, & cultures, must come to understand & accept that the ability to speak good, standard, Canadian English is a necessity in public office, & we should not shy away from recognizing & enforcing this fundamental requirement that Candidates be able to communicate in English, or French (depending on the population s language preference), both of which are the Official Languages of Canada, in order to serve the public effectively. If we don t enforce the requirement that Candidates speak good, standard, Canadian English, we will continue to promote the unfortunate patchwork quilt of cultures & languages that has kept too many minorities excluded from participating in the mainstream, & not having a sense of belonging to Canada. All Candidates running in Elections, especially in Municipal Elections, must be required to pass a Standard English Language Test both spoken & written to be put together by a local, Community College, & administered by the City Clerk s Dept. ************************************************************************************* SUBMITTED ON JANUARY 31, 2007, BY: Sheila Jacobson 19 Penguin Lane Brampton, Ontario L6R 2C1 Tel. No.: (905)