Reports & Newsletters

*************************************************************************************************************

For our newest edition of the Clarion Call, click here!  Read why electoral reform is needed, even in the light of its defeat in Ontario. 

*************************************************************************************************************

For our submission (in .pdf) to the Ontario Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform, recommending a run-off system, click here.

*******************************************************************************************************************************

 LOCAL REFORM INITIATIVE

"There are many who say that municipal government is 'closest' to the citizen. That is, it delivers the services that many receive on a day-to-day basis – from water to snow removal – and the citizen’s representatives are much more accessible than those in the provincial or national capital. This was true. Perhaps, in a way, it still is. However, the truth is that our local communities aren’t nearly as ‘close’ as we think. Much of the money that pays for those services comes from a different level. Our councillors now, quite often, are no easier to see or talk to than our MPPs, MLAs, or MPs. And municipalities are not really governments at all, but corporations overseen and overwhelmed by provincial authorities.

We’re not saying this situation is right or wrong, good or bad. What we are saying is that it must change. Our system is about 150 years old and it no longer works well enough; not for the people. We at the Mad River Institute believe that the time has come to make changes that will benefit Canadians. In this vein, we present our first paper on changing for the better our system of government.

Our Local Reform Initiative proposes what we believe are improvements, fitting with our goals. First, there is the question of what municipal government should do. Much of our public discourse, these days, is spent on giving cities more powers to accomplish their duties. Unfortunately, no one’s really bothering to consider if these are reasonable duties, and if municipalities can handle them, even with more control.

Second, we look at the realities of virtually unrestrained urban growth. It is our belief this could be rectified with relative ease, if politicians would simply be somewhat innovative and actually exert the power of government. Of course, this would entail them overcoming their fear and avarice.

Third, it is our view that citizens can be given a greater role in defining what they want for their communities. Too often, senior government simply rolls over municipalities, and even local councillors roll over the wishes of people. In the 21st century, citizens are much better able to take part in their democracy. We see ways to do this, as well as make people want to participate.

Finally, our Institute believes in fairer taxation. The property tax is inherently unfair and needs reform. We believe there is a way to make it progressive; either that or it should be eliminated."

(To download in .pdf, just hit the above link.  For another format, contact us.)

*************************************************************************************************************

 

CLARION CALL (our newsletter)

November 2007 -- Our Ontario election edition

April 2007 -- Includes our proposal to establish a commuter tax

August 2006 -- Includes our evaluation of the proposed Federal Accountability Act

July 2006 -- Includes an evaluation of the federal Liberal leadership candidates, with our view of their chances.

(To download in .pdf, just hit the above link.  For another format, contact us.)

********************************************************************************************************************************************************

‘Politicians make too much money.’

It’s a view held by many, if not most, people. But is it a fair view?

The modern reality is that the salaries of most politicians are now determined by comparisons with elites in the private sector, or are automatically hiked by raises for public sector employees. We do not agree this is a fair and in neither case is there an examination of the fundamental basis of the pay. For example, a city council may have taken a small 2% increase this year, but was their original $24,000 per year salary fair to start with?

In our report, "Political Fair Pay", the Mad River Institute for Political Studies has looked at the salaries of federal Members of Parliament, provincial MLAs, MPPs, MNAs, and MHAs, and municipal councillors, and we have devised rational formulae we believe are a more equitable way to determine politicians’ pay. However, unlike the methods generally used now, we have based our calculations on the median salaries of regular Canadians. It is our belief that, in a democracy, the representatives of the people cannot receive pay that pushes them onto a socio-economic level that makes them incapable of understanding the everyday lives of those they supposedly represent.

To see our report (in .pdf), just click on this link: Political Fair Pay

To see what your federal or provincial representatives are paid (in .xls), check this link: Salaries