Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferreth
I'm kinda hoping Nenshi take a bit more thoughtful approach to the PnR fee rather than scrap vs. keep.
|
Personally, Ferreth's approach sounds quite sensible. However, I suspect that if Mr. Nenshi does take such an approach it could have consequences that reach further than people's use of the transit system.
It seems to me that in the recent election, Mr. Nenshi's campaign was able to re-engage many people who wouldn't normally vote or be interested in civic politics (that may be stating the obvious
). I could be wrong, but I personally doubt that that was because he was tweeting or had a facebook page.
It seems to me that voter disengagement is principally due to a cynicism that politicians always say one thing at election time and then never come through on what they said after election. Disengagement is the result of disappointment with those elected - i.e., of repeated iterations of voting for people who sound promising but in the end don't do what they said they would do.
I realize that the reason for "say one thing - something else ends up happening" is much more complex than just 'politicians are dishonest', and that such a perception of politics may not really be fair. Nevertheless, I think the net result is still disillusionment in politicians and government and therefore the whole electoral process.
I think the reason that Mr. Nenshi engaged so many people is that for the first time in a long time, people believed that change was actually possible.
He gave people a reason to think that he would actually come through with what he said: his ideas weren't merely pleasant fluff but rather seemed to be concrete proposals SUPPORTED by research and reasoning. That gave me the hope that "Hey, maybe these changes ARE possible...", and I suspect that I'm not alone.
Now that he's been elected, I think he can do far more to disengage voters than he did to engage them simply by not coming through on his 'promises'. It would harden the notion that politicians, despite how they may seem at election time, are all the same, etc. I realize that Mr. Nenshi is just one vote on a council of 15, but his ideas weren't couched in terms of 'as long as everyone else will agree' and so that's not what people will remember.
Mr. Nenshi was unequivocal about the $3.00 PNR fee:
"Naheed has called the imposition of this fee the single worst decision this Council has made – and that’s saying something!" (from his Better Idea #5). He has repeatedly stated or implied that he wants to remove the PNR fee. To now say "well, maybe we should study it first" would undermine his credibility at least somewhat.
With all said, I don't know if coming through on a single issue is really all that important. I'm more trying to make the point that because of his success at re-engaging the electorate, its all the more important that he comes through on what he campaigned on.
Perhaps my ramble would be more appropriate in the Municipal Politics thread, but its Ferreth and Freeweed's fault - their posts got me thinking about this...
Of course, I'm more than happy to have this moved if that would be best (I just don't know how to do it...)
Prev
Linear Mode
