Thread by @bkives

Here’s how modern-era Winnipeg mayors have fared in their efforts to convince the province to cut the city a better financial deal:

Juba ❌
Steen ❌
Norrie ❌
Thompson ❌
Murray ❌
Katz ❌
Bowman, so far ❌

Each one (savs perhaps Steen, who only served for two years) tried to argue the province must accommodate Winnipeg because the majority of Manitoba’s population lives in the city.

The logic behind the strategy: Since Manitoban voters are by and large Winnipeggers, Broadway ought to tremble at the prospect of upsetting these voters.

What every mayor failed to realize is many voters tune out when two levels of government argue. This sort of conflict doesn’t engage them to the point of stirring up municipal pride.

But that’s just one reason this gambit always fails. The other is the province doesn’t have to do anything. The city exists at its mercy.

There’s also no compelling political reason for a premier to placate a mayor, once their personal relationship has deteriorated. Assuming it was ever strong, of course.

Being a mayor of a Canadian city is a terrible job. You have all sorts of responsibilities and few sources of revenue to tap to balance those responsibilities.

Every mayor comes to understand this, once in power. This makes it inevitable they must complain about the province and/or Ottawa, both of which have broader powers of taxation.

All a premier has to do is ride out the storm. This isn’t about doing the right or the wrong thing. No premier wants to be pushed around by a mayor.

You don’t need to study the Art of War or read The 48 Laws of Power to discern the provincial counter-strategy.

Popularity at the municipal level simply does not equal provincial power.

-30-