Municipal Elections Aren't About Left or Right - They're About Getting It Right

Municipal Elections Aren't About Left or Right - They're About Getting It Right By Mr. ‘X’ ~ John Mutton, Former Mayor of Clarington CENTRAL EXCLUSIVE As we move deeper into a municipal election, I think we need to remind ourselves of something that is becoming increasingly lost in today's political environment: Municipal government should be about the good of the community - not party politics. I have met candidates in this election who would probably describe themselves as being on the right. I have met candidates from the left. I have met centrists. And I have met others who simply don't fit comfortably into any political box. In my view, some of the strongest candidates are the ones who don't start the conversation by asking whether an idea is conservative, liberal, left-wing or right-wing. They ask a much simpler question: Is it good for our community? That is the kind of thinking municipal government desperately needs. Fiscal Responsibility Is Not a Political Ideology There are people across the political spectrum who possess an excellent sense of fiscal responsibility. You don't need a Conservative membership card to understand a balance sheet. You don't need a Liberal membership card to understand infrastructure. And you don't need an NDP membership card to care about social programs. In fact, perhaps municipal government works best when councillors leave their party cards at the door. Every person elected to council has a responsibility to treat taxpayers' money prudently. That isn't right-wing. It isn't left-wing. It's responsible government. But fiscal responsibility also doesn't mean cutting everything in sight. Quite the opposite. The purpose of controlling spending is to ensure that we have the financial capacity to properly fund the things municipal government is actually responsible for delivering. Fiscal Responsibility and Social Responsibility Can Coexist This is where I think our political conversation has gone badly off course. Some people have been conditioned to believe that fiscal responsibility and social responsibility are competing philosophies. They aren't. A municipality can be fiscally disciplined while also caring deeply about its residents. We need good roads. We need bridges and sidewalks. We need safe drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. We need fire protection and emergency services. We need parks, recreation and community infrastructure. And municipalities have important responsibilities connected to housing, transit and social services, particularly at the regional level. These things cost money. A lot of money. And if municipal governments continually expand into discretionary programs and activities while their core infrastructure deteriorates, eventually something has to give. Usually, it is the taxpayer. Review What Government Is Actually Doing That is why I continue to advocate for a comprehensive services and mandate review. Put everything municipal government does on the table. Ask what is legislatively required. Ask what is essential to the operation and safety of the community. Ask what delivers measurable value to residents. And then have the courage to ask another question: What are we spending money on that municipal government does not need to be doing? That doesn't automatically mean eliminating every discretionary service. Some discretionary programs provide tremendous community value. But every dollar should have to compete for priority. If a program is consuming taxpayer dollars while roads, bridges, fire services, housing responsibilities or other essential infrastructure are underfunded, council should be prepared to reconsider that spending. And here is the part people sometimes miss: Saving money in one area can allow us to spend more where people genuinely need it. A services review isn't necessarily about spending less. It is about spending better. If we eliminate programs that no longer make sense and redirect those dollars into infrastructure, housing, emergency services, recreation or social programs where municipalities have genuine responsibilities, we can simultaneously become more fiscally responsible and more socially responsible. The Best Candidates Challenge Their Own Side Media and social media have increasingly conditioned people to line up on one side or the other. Left versus right. Conservative versus progressive. Us versus them. Municipal government cannot afford that mentality. The candidates who have impressed me most during this election are those prepared to challenge the conventional thinking of whichever political camp they may personally come from. A fiscally conservative candidate should still be able to say: "This social program is necessary, it is working, and we should properly fund it." A socially progressive candidate should be equally capable of saying: "This program isn't working, it isn't a municipal priority, and taxpayers shouldn't continue paying for it." That isn't abandoning your principles. That is leadership. Fix the Roads and Strengthen the Social Fabric There should be nothing contradictory about wanting excellent infrastructure and strong social infrastructure. There should be nothing contradictory about demanding value for taxpayers while protecting vulnerable residents. And there should be nothing contradictory about reducing unnecessary spending while increasing investment in services that actually matter. That is what mature municipal government looks like. The next generation of municipal leaders should not be elected because they perfectly represent the political left or political right. They should be elected because they understand budgets, infrastructure, community needs and the responsibility that comes with spending someone else's money. They should understand that every dollar wasted on yesterday's political pet project is a dollar that cannot repair tomorrow's bridge, support a housing initiative, improve a park, replace aging infrastructure or strengthen an essential service. Leave the Party Cards at the Door Municipal councils don't need ideological warriors. They need problem solvers. They need people willing to examine every program, every service and every expenditure without first asking which political tribe will applaud the decision. Fiscal responsibility without social responsibility can lose sight of the people government exists to serve. Social responsibility without fiscal responsibility eventually becomes financially unsustainable. Good municipal government requires both. So as voters evaluate candidates in this election, perhaps the question shouldn't be: Is this candidate left-wing or right-wing? Perhaps the better questions are: Can they manage our money? Do they understand what municipal government is responsible for? Will they protect our infrastructure? Will they care for the people who genuinely need municipal services? And will they have the courage to stop spending money on things that no longer make sense? Those are not left-wing principles. They are not right-wing principles. They are community principles. And municipal elections should ultimately be about one thing: Not left. Not right. Moving our community forward.