Goldenberg Commission

1. What are Toronto's basic problems?

2. What is undemocratic about the three-year term?

3. What will the Communist Party propose?

HE GOLDENBERG report to
the Ontario government
“tends to perpetuate” and

“might even intensify” differen-
ces between different areas of
Metropolitan Toronto.

This accusation is made by
Mrs. Phyllis Clarké, chairman of
the Metro Toronto Committee of
the Communist Party, when in-
terviewed by the Canadian Trib-
une.

The one-man royal commis-
sion of lawyer-economist H. Carl
Goldenberg, appointed by ‘the
provincial government two years
ago, proposed a four-city muni-
cipal structure for Metro Toron-
to, to replace the present setup
of 13 municipalities.

The four cities would be To-

ronto, North York, Scarboro and
Etobicoke. Toronto would. re-
ceive a 50 percent gain in area.
It would take in the suburbs of
York, Swansea, Forest Hill, Lea-
side and Eas. York.

In a brief to the Goldenberg
-commission last year the Com-
munist Party had favored total
amalgamation. It urged the prov-
incial government “to take over
the financial responsibility of all
costs of bringing all services up
to the highest level of services
of any of the 13 municipalities
before amalgamation.”

But there isn’t “anything in
the Goldenberg report that
works in that direction at all,”
“says Mrs. Clarke.

She describes the basic prob-
lem in the Metro area as one of
an “increasing tax load on hous-
es and on real-estate property.”
This is a result of the “vast, ne-
cessary expansion of municipal
services.” But the expansion is
taking place “without changes
being made at national and prov-
incial levels in terms of the fin-
ancial abilities of the munici-
palities to meet all these in-
creased new needs.”

She adds that “municipal gov-
ernments across Canada are in a
financial crisis and we are not
exempt from it in Toronto.” The
Goldenberg proposals ‘do not
get at that essential problem of
how municipal governments,
with their limited tax base, are

MRS. PHYLLIS CLARKE

going to continue to provide for
the sort of services we want as
citizens at the municipal level.”

Nor does the report solve the

-problem “of the need for unified

services across the Metro area.”

Mrs. Clarke says that “we are.

essentially one city and whether
we have better or worse service
at the municipal level shouldn’t
depend on which part of Metro
we live in.”

Mrs. Clarke describes the elec-
toral setup proposed in the Gol-

denberg report as “an improve- -

erpetuates differenc

ment” over what exists at pre-was the proposal to have Metro

sent. “In our brief to the com-
mission we had asked that there
be direct election to Metro coun-
cil,” she says, “and I’m pleased
to see it is proposed in the re-
port.”

But there are also undemocra-
tic features, “for example, the
extension of the term of office
to three years.” ;

She feels there has been a
“tendency at municipal levels to
try and. extend the number of
years people are in office. The
longer.the term, the’ more cer-
tain a monopoly of council de-
velops, which is less democra-
tic.’

Asked if there was any vali-
dity in the argument that a one-
year term does not give an elec-
ted body time to come to grips
with the problems, Mrs. Clarke
replied:

“I don’t think the length of
the term determines how well a
council comes to grips with the
problems. There are many ways
in which people can express,
through an election, their views
about the gamut of things muni-
cipal bodies deal with, that af-
fect every day of their lives.
The drive for longer terms has
essentially been a drive to get
away from the voters.”

Another undemocratic feature

council appoint a-chairman. Gol-
denberg’s only argument for this,
says Mrs. Clarke, is that the
‘expense of a campaign would
tend to lead to either big-busi-
ness or political-party domina-
tion in the election.

“I know of municipalities in
Canada, Edmonton for example,
where there are provisions for
public funds for all candidates,”
she says. “As a result, campaigns
are not based on who has the
most money. The voters have a
chance to choose on the basis
of real merits.”

She feels this should overcome
Goldenberg’s objections to a
popularly-elected metro chair-
man.

In_ rejecting amalgamation,
Goldenberg had commented that
“neat and tidy solutions to com-
plex problems of government are
not necessarily applicable or
practical.”

This sounds rather “philoso-
phical” retorts Mrs. Clarke, “and
not very much of an argument
against amalgamation,”

The proposal to eliminate
the board of control would force

_Mrs, Clarke, who has run for

that office in the past, to do

could become “a hot
potato that will burn
the fingers of the Robarts
administration,” says Bruce
Magnuson, Ontario leader
of the Communist Party.
He said the report “per-
petuates” economic inequa-
lities and political fragmen-
tation. The reason is “the
undeniable fact that big-
business enterprises refuse
to accept their fair share

It's a ‘hot potato’

HE Goldenberg report .

of the cost of civic ser-
vices, education, health,
welfare and the cost of
servicing the mounting
debt structure.”

What the area needs
most, said Magnuson, “is a
uniform tax structure, uni-
formity of services and a
unified and democratic
form of administration.”

He called on the provin-
cial government to assume
a much larger share: of
costs of education, health
and social welfare, and to

~

take over and liquidate the
debt structure.

He also urged the pro-
vince to assume the costs
of bringing about amalga-
mation “under a properly
and democratically-consti-
tuted civic government.”

The Goldenberg report,
he concluded, “should be
put on the shelf by the
Ontario government.” The
people of Toronto “ought
to lose no time in making
their views known to mem-
bers of the Legislature.”

y,

es

says Mrs. Clarke.

fs
E- :
1965—PACIFIC TRIBUN™”

“some looking for whet?
run in future elections:

But the proposal for an
tive elected from W!
council “will be rather fod
mocratic.” Election of M%
sons on a citywide basis,
at least one or two at
setting their caps for ™
ality campaign of thé
does not lead to good
the board of control.

On other prop osal
Clarke outlines her V#
lows:

—The proposal that the
chairman sit on thé,
Transit Commission: —
have preferred seeing *
that the TTC becomé
ment of Metro. Perhap®
the old-age pension®
have received their tra”
es.”

—Proposed eliminatidy
partial tax exemption: fe
volves about 80 perce
homes in the city %,,
and will mean highe ,
all of them. Our brief
that the partial grade?
emption be exten
whole Metro area.

av
—Proposed Metro $°
with 11 school distri,
voter I am going to
learn not only wh
ward is, but a new ®
trict that has no rel@
the ward. I will havé
keep track of two S&
tions of municipal
that don’t have to Dé
arated. The Metro 8°",
is a step in the righ no
but it should have be ..
the municipal council

What will the ey
Party propose now?

At the moment,
of the published
wouldn’t want to, we
ket statement, say “nd
posed to everythin& |
tainly wouldn’t want
favor everything 1

mote
rr

mer
S

“tT am sure the
mittee: of our party
study all the recom
before we make
statement in that reg®