Amalgamation a flop, Fraser study suggests
Amalgamation a flop, Fraser Institute study suggests As debates in Peel and Toronto illustrate, cultural differences weren’t considered in the rush to cut costs - while savings turned out to be an illusion.

thestar.com
July 7, 2015
By San Grewal

It’s no secret that when it comes to municipal politics, many members of Ford Nation in the outer wards don’t see eye-to-eye with their downtown Toronto counterparts. And in Caledon a battle is escalating with the rest of Peel Region, as rural values are confronted by urban growth.

It’s all part of the problem of amalgamating municipalities under one government, argues a new study by the conservative-leaning Fraser Institute, released Tuesday, titled De-amalgamation in Canada: Breaking Up Is Hard to Do.

The report’s co-author Lydia Miljan, a political science professor at the University of Windsor, says many of today’s post-amalgamation problems had never been seriously contemplated.

“I think that when a lot of this initial discussion about amalgamation came forward by the previous government, it was all about cost savings, it was all about reducing duplication, and not enough thought was brought into just basic issues of governance and cultural differences between areas, in terms of sensibilities about what people want in certain communities,” says Miljan.

Mississauga Mayor Bonnie Crombie had not seen the Fraser Institute study, but responded to questions Monday about the possibility of her city “breaking up” with Peel Region.

“Mississauga is Canada’s sixth largest city, and it may be time to re-evaluate our position in the Region of Peel,” Crombie stated in an email.

“The issue of whether or not Mississauga should remain as part of Peel Region is not new. Members of Council and former Mayor McCallion repeatedly raised the possibility of Mississauga becoming a single-tier city, just like Toronto. We are currently undertaking a governance review on the future of Peel Region, so now is the perfect time to have this conversation.

“Now is the opportunity to answer the question: should Mississauga remain in Peel? I look forward to reviewing the findings of the Fraser Institute report once it is released.”

Brampton Mayor Linda Jeffrey also expressed her concerns with the region’s amalgamated government.

“Based on recent developments, it is clear that the current governance model requires attention and that the residents of Peel are not represented properly,” Jeffrey stated.

Last month, Caledon’s five representatives staged a walkout at Peel Region council, after Crombie, Jeffrey and other council members from Brampton and Mississauga tried to call in the province to address questionable land use decisions by Caledon. (The vote succeeded at a subsequent meeting.)

Caledon Mayor Allan Thompson, who has said the other two cities don’t understand Caledon’s rural sensibilities, said publicly that the move could bring an end to Peel Region.

The Fraser report also details the divisions in Toronto illustrated by last year’s municipal election, when the suburban viewpoint embodied by the Ford brothers carried places such as Etobicoke and Scarborough, while those in the central part of the city largely supported Mayor John Tory’s more urban mandate.

Beyond the cultural divisions, Miljan says amalgamation has not necessarily achieved the cost savings it was supposed to.

“Unfortunately, we found that it sounds good on paper; certainly you saved a little bit of money by having fewer mayors and municipal councillors, but what people quickly realized was, that is not the biggest ticket item.”

She says, for example, staffing costs often go up when municipalities amalgamate because jobs are not eliminated and salaries are brought up to the levels of those in the largest cities.

Miljan said her findings about differing political values being forced together under amalgamation are highlighted by the situation in Peel. “That controversy in Peel I think underscores these bigger debates that need to be had.”