Terms limits needed for mayor, councillors

In a recent interview, U.S. President Barack Obama said that he’d “rather be a really good one-term President than a mediocre two-term President.” He noted that “there is a tendency in Washington to think that our job description as elected officials is to get re-elected. That’s not our job description. Our job description is to solve problems and to help people.”

What Obama identifies as an American issue is also prevalent around the world. As the municipal election fires up, it seems like not even City Hall can shield itself from this phenomenon of self-serving politics.

Here in Toronto, first-time politicians Rocco Rossi and Sarah Thomson have both based their election campaigns on replacing an old, dysfunctional group called City Council. According to Thomson, “we must get our career politicians out and bring in fresh thinking and new ideas.” To Rossi, “talented individuals who used to be part of the solution are now part of the problem because, quite frankly, they have stayed too long.”

It seems like the same rhetoric arises every election. But how do we ensure that we get a continuous inflow of fresh, creative ideas? How do we keep our politicians from rotting in their offices from complacency? A two-term limit is the answer.

The idea of imposing a term limit for the Mayor and City Councillors is not a revolutionary idea. Simply by browsing through the comments on this site, anyone can see that more than one Torontonian would advocate for such a measure.

But make no mistake – term limits do not imply that no one is capable of holding public office. Limits certainly are not there to keep people out. What they do is effectively ensure that our politicians are willing to do what is necessary for the public good rather than what will re-elect them for another term.

This, unfortunately, is not the case currently.

According to Lowell Kwan, a soon-to-be voter, "politicians never seem to interact with their constituents unless there's an election. Once they're voted in, they disappear into 'public office' and never seem to come out."

Politics should not be viewed as a pleasant job to settle into towards the end of one’s career. Politicians are elected to tackle tough issues, not sit on them. A two-term limit encourages thoughtful, creative ideas for the issues of today while allowing for long-term planning. It also offers the opportunity for other political candidates to take the lead before things get too comfortable.

However, some would argue voters themselves should dictate who remains in office, and that less capable individuals will get weeded out. But, according to Stephen Thiele, president of The Toronto Party, with 80 to 85 per cent of incumbents remaining in office, the weeding out of politicians hardly ever occurs.

Others will point out the fact that more capable politicians who are meant to stay will not be able to. But with 2.48 million people in Toronto, there must be more passionate and capable individuals out there than the main contenders we see in the media. New voices would have a more even playing field, as the numbers of long-standing politicians with solid financial foundations would decrease.

As the quotes mentioned earlier in this article, more new faces in office makes for a variety of fresh perspectives which better represent the people. And politicians who are not focused on winning the next election and hunting for sponsorships for their re-election campaigns will put their concentration towards the public good.

Whoever is elected to City Council will need to stop talking about issues and start fixing them. More importantly, those elected must not get complacent and forget why they are there in the first place – for Torontonians. Term limits will ensure that happens.

About Gorick Ng

Comments

[Roman Haluszka]

Term limits at all levels of elected office would enhance democracy by reducing the need for backing by lobbyists and bringing fresh ideas. These offices should not be careers in and of themselves.

[Nick Ross]

Either that or you'll have self-serving politicians that run riot, knowing they won't be re-elected for another term, who use the position of public office to serve their own needs (George Bush). You claim that a term limit will ensure that fresh ideas come into office, but look how long the U.S. went (or continues to go?) without such a leader or fresh ideas. Regardless of the term limit, it is up to voters to decide who stays in office, and how long they stay there - plenty of damage can be done in 2 terms, look no further than George Bush, Mike Harris or Mel Lastman. I would even argue that a two term limit forces politicians to be short-sighted because their focus is on doing only what will get them re-elected once. No limit on terms at least encourages leaders to think in the long term. I truly believe that the only thing that will weed out self-serving politics are leaders that actually care about their city, province or country, and a more informed public that is capable of recognizing that drive in a particular individual, and is capable of recognizing the deceit and purely tactical behaviour in the others.

[Tyler Kidd]

Term limits are not the answer. Bad politicians keep getting elected because of voter apathy and while term limits put a patch over that problem, they do not solve the underlying issue. People need to be motivated to care for their city. Furthermore, an experienced politician who actually cares and does a good job is gold, and should not be tossed aside because of artificial limitations.

[James]

Sorry - who is Lowell Kwan? Obviously this person has never paid attention to politics, because politicians are everywhere. They are at every ribbon cutting, every community consultation and every open house. Next time pay attention to the junk mail you throw out. I bet there's always some flyer/newsletter from a local politician.

[talentscout]

terms are not the issue. Ability to hold politicians accountable to laws, taxes and public accountability and fiscal responsibility.....We have councillors in Toronto who do not believe in paying for taxable benefits...while demanding the rest of us to pay more than their fair share...I will say no more..

[Carlo A]

FULLY AGREE !! There are term limits on our Prime Minister, there are term limits on U.S. Presidency, even the same for Costa Rican presidency; this ensures one only tries for this office with CLEAR GOALS in mind, no lethargy from comfort.. One only has to watch and hear the likes of Howard Moscoe, and you see (just like some councilors) he's a part of the furniture at City Hall, more so than Adam Giambrone's couch.. Good politicians will have good succession plans, because their goals AND VISION is bigger than themselves !!

[George Tang]

With term limits, yes, politicians tend to work short-sighted projects and aiming at quick patch to the problem. On the other hand, without limits, they tend to take voters / constituents for granted once voted in. They also take their firsst term as a four year honey moon. Of course, some posters will say voters could vote in for another politician next time. It is very hard to vote down an incumbent. At the end, the sitting politician will keep on sitting, like Howard Moscoe and even David Miller and the like. I would prefer a 2-term limit. If the politicians have the public service in their mind, they can always come back after one term lapse.

[badabing]

Finally one good idea that would make democracy work and put career politicians and their paymaster the lobbyist out of business. Great idea.

[Dr J]

As a Candidate in the Municipal Election in Mississauga, I am promoting the same idea of fixed term limits for Municipal Elected Officials. This would remove the aire of entitlement that seems to be present in this type of politics. It would also ensure that issues actually gets addressed and fixed. It will open the door for young people to get involved and fresh ideas to be brought to the table. This is what is lacking in Canadian Pilitics today.

[Sonny Yeung]

Yes, the city politicians could move up to mayor, MPP or MP should they wish to pursue a political career after their term is up...
For Toronto; 35 incumbents will be running for re-election. Lastman & Miller were around for 2 terms and left the year following a garbage strike in the Mega City.
On a side note: I prophesy that one day Hazel McCallion will die.

[Edward S]

Response Mr. Tyler Kidd: I don't think Mr. Ng is suggesting that term limits will be the answer to voter apathy. He's simply suggesting that imposing a term limit would ensure that politicians perform their jobs of public service rather than focus on being re-elected. I think it's a very reasonable point and certainly a great way to encourage fresh ideas and campaigns from younger politicians.

[SPEX]

Reading between the lines on what each candidate has said so far, it seems to me that only Sarah Thomson has given us a clear vision for transit and business policies. The rest seem to be engaging in the flotsam and jetsam.

Though I do agree, City Council is desperately in need of reform.

[Thomas Graff]

Well, term might be too short - but someone who has been on council 25 years really should move on to something else.

The other thing to remember here is that terms used to be only 2 years - so if 80% of incumbents get elected, then at least there were more chances to get rid of some of them. with 3 year terms, and now 4 year terms, incumbents are even more entrenched.

we need a citizens's assembly or something to come up with new rules to make the ystem more democratic - including ideas like term limits.