Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

13 comment(s)

A lot of people who missed the debate last Friday by the five mayoral candidates want to know who won. The truth is no one trounced anybody. All the candidates had their savoury moments and sticky embarrassments.

Mayor Norm McFarlane, who some think is in trouble, was the scrappiest. Coun. Ivan Court, high off a poll showing him in the lead, was the safest.

Deputy Mayor Michelle Hooton was the most polished, having been schooled three years ago when she ran and lost for the Tories in a provincial byelection. Coun. John Ferguson, normally so outspoken he's being sued by McFarlane, was the most even and level-headed.

First-time candidate Mike Richardson was the biggest surprise because few had heard of him before and he wasn't a nutter as many had suspected. He turned out to be more articulate than at least half the members of council.

On the issues, the debate provided the electorate with some fairly clear choices. If you're happy with the way the city's being run and the direction it's going, McFarlane's your man. He's proud of Saint John's economic upsurge and takes credit for winning jobs through his ceaseless lobbying and deal-making.

Court wouldn't make big changes to the way city hall's run, with one important difference: He says he won't offer any special deals, taxation or otherwise, to big industry. He was the fiercest opponent of the mayor's multimillion tax concession for Canaport LNG. Unlike the mayor, he won't lower the tax rate and consider hiring a private company to help fix the city's water problems.

Hooton and Ferguson are promising bigger tax cuts and more accountability from city hall. The deputy mayor has championed public consultations and the lowest tax rate, whereas benchmarking city services and the city employees' ugly pension deficit are Ferguson's big causes. On the LNG tax concession, Hooton voted against, Ferguson for.

Which brings us to Richardson. Many people were left wondering what he believes in or what he'll fight for because he talked mostly about consulting the public. Richardson went so far as to say on every big issue, he'll ask citizens to mail in ballots, a huge undertaking that would be difficult to pull off and certainly unique in Canada.

The neophyte represents a new kind of politician who's painfully aware of electoral indifference and declining voter participation.

The easiest out for people who don't want to take the time to inform themselves and vote is to dismiss all politicians as untrustworthy. Richardson is the youngest candidate and he probably hears this from a lot of his younger friends and colleagues. Statistically speaking, younger people are less likely to vote.

To counter public hostility, the new strategy is to consult people to death on everything.

Richardson is not alone in this camp. Hooton, of course, made this a centrepiece of her platform, but so did the popular at-large candidate Danny Jardine. The polar opposite was at-large councillor candidate Chris Titus, an old school politician who argued during his debate that people want to vote for leaders, not followers.

It's anyone's guess if more consultations will appeal to voters as a whole. Seniors form a powerful voting bloc in Saint John, and they tend to take their voting rights more seriously. But that doesn't mean they sit back in their armchairs between elections and let politicians do as they please.

The pitch for public consultations went over well at the six municipal debates, but it's still hard to tell if that's what most people really want.

The crowds, for the most part, were keeners or partisans, and it would be foolhardy to think they're representative of the larger population.

The one true consultation on the idea will be election day May 12.

John Chilibeck is a Telegraph-Journal reporter. He writes about issues that affect the Saint John region. He can be reached at chilibeck.john@telegraphjournal.com or by calling 645-3267.