MUNICIPALITIES

Haste in decision making is always foolish

Submitted by Mark Hunter,  in-house counsel for Hunter Steel and Stratford City Councillor. Mark has a background in corporate law and over two decades of leadership in the steel industry. He is also an avid cyclist and has dedicated years to supporting local cycling communities. He and his family reside in Stratford.

I have been asked to comment on Bill 5 from a municipal perspective. Bill 5 paved the way for the Special Economic Zones Act (the “Act”) which allows many current rules to be set aside so that certain “Designated” projects can be completed faster. In the municipal context, the Act allows Cabinet to over-ride municipal by-laws (including official plans) which impede the Designated Project. There is little guidance as to which projects may be Designated but it seems to be anything the province thinks is important enough to justify setting the normal rules aside.

The Act is a response to the economic needs of our province which have shifted significantly in response to increased U.S. protectionism. It is also a response to public pressure to act quickly. To evaluate whether it is a good response, I will give some background information.

Government moves at a very slow pace. We have public consultations, three readings of bills (or by-laws), and, at the federal level, senate review. Even when you rush decisions, this process just takes time. It’s good to remember that government processes are slow by design. Think of the epithet for the Senate, the institution of “sober second thought.” We need this process to be deliberate because we elect our leaders from within our communities – they are our neighbours. Some bring skills to the role while others may just be good representatives of their community. Even if some are subject matter experts, none can be expert in every area of government concern. We don’t need them to be experts. We hire subject matter experts who provide their professional recommendations to the elected body. That body then reviews the recommendations and makes community-based policy by complete or partial acceptance or by an outright rejection of the recommendations. This is a simplification of what can be a complex process, but good decisions just take time. We need the debate between leaders who collectively possess more experience than any one of them alone. We also need to let our experts inform our decisions.

This slow, deliberate process conflicts with our current culture of expecting immediate gratification. Politicians face real pressure to act quickly. Our Premier has business skills built in a private company. Decisions can be made very quickly in private business. A private business might take one day to fully execute a decision whereas the same decision in government might take weeks.

There are three reasons for this. First, the private business owner’s opinion is the only relevant consideration. Second, that owner is the only one who suffers the loss for wrong decisions. Last, and most important, successful business owners are experts in their business.  They typically have many years of experience shaping their decisions. Even when they aren’t conscious of its impact, that experience usually results in better outcomes. People with this background are used to having full control and are good at making quick decisions. It’s an easy transition to take that approach to government decisions. In my opinion, that can be a mistake. It’s not the politician’s money at stake, there is a breadth of opinion to consider, and no single politician can be expert at everything. We need to rely on others.

Another factor worth consideration is the party system in Ontario. All parties restrict free votes to some extent. In other words, members must vote with the leader of the party or risk being removed from the party. This has an insulating effect from full debate and gives the party leader complete control.

I believe that Bill 5 is the result of the above. We have a Premier who is used to having full control and making quick decisions. He is responding to a real need in our province and to public pressure to act quickly. In my opinion, legislation designed to improve the speed of decisions is a laudable goal, but we need some well-thought guardrails to be in place. The Special Economic Zones Act mentions the need for such guardrails but is short on details. It seems that the motivation from the legislature was to get something done quickly and sort the details later.

If we make only good decisions, speed is good. If we make poor decisions, speed is irrelevant at best. I argue that slow, good decisions are better than fast wrong ones. I support the desire to improve efficiency, but we needed to take more time deliberating the path to that efficiency. If the decisions made are wrong, it is all of us who will pay the bill.