People are pretty cynical about politics in Canada, especially here in Alberta. Some people really have contempt for elected officials and for candidates. And so, when they find a candidate that seems real to them or a political party that reflects their perspective it can be really powerful.
So, to paraphrase Jeff Blodgett, instead of just talking about policy positions or trying to be all things to all people, I like to talk about our convictions, our values, what we hold dear, how did we come to hold these and why someone is running for office, what's their motivation for running? Those things are really important, and in fact, I believe that most voters are looking for that, as opposed to whether or not the person is on the right side of a given issue.
So it was with great interest that I read the following statement made by Alberta Party Leader Sue Huff when she was in Hinton; "People always want to know where we fall on the political spectrum," said Huff. "But we are resisting being pigeon-holed. Our opinions will vary from issue to issue. We want to do the same as municipal leaders. Look at what is best for the community."
I couldn’t agree more with Huff’s perspective, what an encouraging message to hear from a provincial political party leader!
I believe that if we could take the lessons learned and the experience gained at a municipal level and apply it at the provincial level, our province would be much more effectively governed.
I would, however, add to her statement and say further, “Our discussions will take place publically just like they do at a municipal level and we will encourage our members to share diverse opinions and perspectives during our public discussions.” Finally I would add “and when we are making decisions, we will make our decisions based on what is in the best interests of the community as a whole (sec 153a).”
For those that think that the confidentiality of Caucus is what allows the tough discussions to take place I would say “have you tried this?” The Municipal Governance Act enables, nay – demands, open, transparent and accountable public discussion yet still ensures that confidentiality exists where and when it is needed in order to allow good governance to take place and where legalities necessitate it.
That’s why I believe that municipal politics has so much to offer at the provincial level.
Not only are we mandated (sec 244) through the Act to have balanced budgets and always spend within our means, as limited as they are, as elected leaders we must identify which services are most needed at a community level, which services are most desired in the community and then make the decisions as to which services we are going to provide, and then we are held responsible – every day, in our shops and work places, for our leadership and decisions. But, and here’s the kicker, we do all of this in the public forum, in open meetings, under the watchful eye of the citizens that we serve.
Almost all of our meetings are open to the public (sec 197/198). At the local level it is the norm to have open, public meetings, not the exception. Any time that a Council gets together in numbers large enough to form quorum, then the public must be notified, and invited (sec 195).
At the local level we face the same pressures that a provincial government is faced with. We have special interest groups trying to influence our decisions, we have limited funds with which to balance needed services and the associated budgets, we deal with public security, social services, land management and planning, we provide public services and governance and we have differing opinions on how to solve our community concerns. We too have political pressures, but we deal with those pressures in the public forum - and that is good for democracy.
As a citizen servant leader I encourage our municipal council to consider the diversity of opinion and perspectives that our citizenry would have on any given subject, after all, it is rare indeed that as citizens we all share the same opinion on the issues that affect our community and ourselves personally. A person just needs to go down to one of our local coffee shops if they want to hear diversity of opinion.
As the head of council my job as Mayor is to ensure that each of our councillors has the opportunity to be heard on any given subject and I especially defend the right of the differing point of view to be brought forward for consideration. I believe that diversity is strength.
I believe that the most important role of leadership in governance is not to state the leader’s position and then try to bend colleagues to his will, but rather to encourage the debate, find the common ground, seek the intent, judge the commitment and encourage collaboration. And once this is done and a decision has been reached, the leader’s role is then to put voice to the will of the majority and represent the decision of government as a whole, and by doing so, represent the citizens that we were elected to serve.
Good governance should reflect the broad range of public opinion and perspective that is embodied in the general population, and we should bring that diversity to the debate when setting policy.
Great leadership has the confidence to encourage that debate to happen, not just set a mandate and expect others to follow. Leaders should vigorously seek that diversity, to actively gather strong, opinionated people around them to discuss the issues of the day, and rather than mandate the will of the leader, reflect the will of the majority. And of course, when the time for discussion is over, then the leader must end the discussion and move to action, after all the purpose of leadership is to lead.
Today, more than ever, strong leadership is needed in Alberta. Leadership that can be surrounded by strong individuals, each with diverse perspective and each willing to stand up and speak for what they believe is in the best interests of the citizens they serve.
I believe that this leadership can be found at the local level, at the municipal level, and I applaud Sue Huff and the Alberta Party for bringing this discussion to the Provincial level for consideration. The timing couldn’t be better.
Good comments Glenn ... you make it sound easy - and really the process of open debate on issues is quite easy...finding common ground ... making decisions on information received through the debate and diversity of opinions --- all striving to reach an outcome that represents the citizens interests and concerns...
ReplyDeletenow - back to the budget for Tuesday's meeting.
I like the comparison to municipal politics, it gives people something concrete to imagine when thinking about how the Alberta Party might govern.
ReplyDeleteWell said Glenn. I couldn't agree with you more. A measure of a great leader should be someone who does surround her/himself with "strong, opinionated people". It is also of great importance to encourage debate and to listen carefully. A leader must also be brave because once the issues are discussed and a decision is taken it is the leader's responsibility to be the public voice of the decision whether it is popular or not.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this, being a municipal politician myself. It is not about labels, though people still try to foist them on us. The open meetings, and diversity of opinions help to make the democratic process just a little more accessible.
ReplyDeleteA great leader must be able to practice what she/he preaches. This doesn't usually happen.
ReplyDeleteGreat leaders don't have to tell others they are great leaders. Others will be able to see they are great leaders. If you have to tell others, you aren't a great leader.
In reply to Anonymous at 6:19
ReplyDeleteI agree with your comments.
As a matter of fact I subscribe to Jim Collins view of leadership as outlined in his book Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don't
Collins refers to a Level 5 Leader as "...an individual who is very humble on a personal level, but who possesses a great deal of drive and desire to succeed, where “success” is not personal, but defined by creating something great that will outlast their time at the helm. These are people with an unwavering will and commitment to do what is necessary to drive their organization to the top.” Collins
In answer to the question “Why Greatness?” Collins replies “Because it’s not really that much harder to be great than good, and if you’re not motivated to greatness, perhaps you should consider doing something else where you are.”
Yes, a strong leader who surrounds themselves with smart, opionated people and encourages debate would be good. However, I still think that where a person stands on an issue is very important. When I ask "where do you stand on this issue?", should I care more about the answer, or just how eloquently the answer is worded?
ReplyDelete