Hello from sunny (then dark and windy, then sunny again) Calgary. I’m here for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference, and while I’ve been sick the whole time (this mask is starting to chafe!) the conference has been almost as restorative and reinvigorating as I had hoped. It’s hard to describe how just being in a place of new ideas and relationships can stimulate fresh thoughts and energy that I can then bring back to Brighton, but I’m so glad I’m here to experience it.
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities, like the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, is like an industry association for municipalities. It’s how we collectively lobby the federal government (just as AMO lobbies the provincial government); and provide support for one another through shared information, not least at the annual conference.
The workshops have covered a lot of important ground, from a how-to on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion on the first day that felt like drinking from a fire hose of good information, to a look at how Montreal is changing the way that they respond to mental health crises to de-escalate situations and divert them from the responsibility of the police today. In an hour or so I will also attend a workshop on Community Adaptation to Climate Risks, as well as funding that’s available to support such adaptation plans.
Today we also voted on resolutions about issues that FCM would advocate for in the future. I spoke in favour of a resolution that would have asked the federal government to fund municipalities buying ecologically sensitive lands within our boundaries; sadly, that resolution did not pass. But other resolutions did pass, including one advocating for federal support for food banks, another for federal support for women’s shelters and ending violence against women, and a resolution asking for governments of all types to work together to address the increasing level of harassment and abuse that elected officials experience, particularly women and people from equity-seeking groups. That last resolution was amended to include a statement calling on elected officials themselves to model this through respectful dialogue and disagreement instead of the kind of hostile politics that is increasingly common.
Along those lines, today and yesterday both included “political keynotes.” Yesterday’s first keynote was from Scott Aitcheson from the Conservative Party of Canada, and I must say that his speech was shockingly hostile toward municipalities. He blamed municipalities for the high cost of housing, and threatened that when (not if!) Pierre Poilievre is Prime Minister any municipality that doesn’t meet his quota for new housing starts will lose funding. Somehow, this toxic grandstanding still managed to get some cheers (just at the name of Poilievre, not at any of the actual content of the speech, so far as I can recall). That made me stop and think a little bit: why would a speech that many (everyone I’ve talked to) found to be weirdly hostile and insulting, and mostly devoid of actual content in terms of policy or partnerships, still prompt some people to cheer? There’s something about the political right at the moment that I still can’t figure out, but obviously it’s resonating for some.
Just before dinner yesterday Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took the stage, having flown directly from D-Day events in France. While his speech was a pretty standard stump speech, I must admit that his rhetorical skills are impressive; he made it look very easy, and his only dig against his opponents was to point out that he offers partnerships while the Conservatives make threats. An easy point, after the stunning speech from Aitcheson earlier. He also took questions from the audience, acknowledging his government’s failure to deliver on ending boil-water advisories in many First Nations and deftly handling an accusation of slandering the oil and gas sector by explaining the need for Alberta’s energy sector to continue to innovate toward the lower-carbon markets the rest of the world is buying into. I have many criticisms of Justin Trudeau and his government, going all the way back to 2015, but of the two political keynotes yesterday his was far more informative, genuine, collaborative, and even humble. I think those things matter in politics, maybe now more than ever, so I want to give credit where it is due.
Today’s political keynotes were also excellent. Jagmeet Singh was very patient this morning, waiting for our policy resolutions to finish before he addressed us. He similarly seemed collaborative and genuine, and spoke at length about the need for housing solutions that include co-ops and purpose-built low-cost housing solutions, things that I’m quite passionate about. He emphasized, without naming politicians or parties, that finger-pointing to different levels of government is not helpful; sure, certain policies can be criticized, but he emphasized partnership rather than division.
When Elizabeth May took the stage just before lunch, the crowd sang happy birthday to her; she turns 70 tomorrow, but she’s still going strong. Elizabeth has a gift for being genuinely, exuberantly, bluntly herself: she remembered working well with Danielle Smith to make pancakes at the Calgary Stampede, while also rolling her eyes and saying that lately Smith “makes me nostalgic for the days of Ralph Klein!” But even her sharpest barbs are couched in the care she shows to everyone, even her political opposites. Her speech (and subsequent Q&A) also heavily featured the need for collaboration and partnerships; she proposed borrowing an idea from Australia, to form a council of Canadian governments that includes federal, provincial, municipal, and Indigenous governments, all at the same table. That idea got a lot of applause, and her Q&A ended with a standing ovation.
A major theme of this conference is FCM’s proposal for a new “growth framework” for municipalities – a new funding strategy that would increase federal transfers directly to municipalities while also getting the provinces to do likewise. Each of the political keynotes included asking the speaker about that idea; Trudeau and Singh said they are open to it, though Trudeau pointed out that it’s difficult for the federal government to work directly with municipalities when their respective provinces won’t allow it, a reference to Alberta’s recent move to make it illegal for Alberta municipalities to accept direct federal resources. May agreed with the proposal, only noting that FCM’s proposal wasn’t enough – Greens have long advocated for moving even more funding to the most local level of government. All three of them were in sharp contrast to the Conservatives, who threatened to reduce funding and offered little recognition of the increasing need at the municipal level.
All in all, I was encouraged by the tone of the political keynotes. I recently wrote about being very disheartened by the political keynotes at the OSUM conference, where provincial politicians gave similar talks that were decidedly less collaborative; while the provincial Greens and NDP were policy oriented and kept out of negative politicking, the provincial PC and Liberal politicians had been extremely combative. At this conference, only the CPC was engaged in the negative politicking, and the contrast with the positive and collaborative notes from everyone else was very stark. I hope we can continue to see the angry fringe isolated from the larger political conversation, because we have a lot to gain from working together and much to lose through partisan bickering and marking territory. It feels good to be even a little bit hopeful about the state of our national politics for a change!
I’m sure to have more reflections from this conference, but they’ll have to wait for next week – now I’m off to another workshop!