WHITBY FREE PRESS, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1985, PAGE 5 "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson THE CROW'S NEST by Michael Knell Local council is no place for Ontario party politics In their Sunday editions, both the Toronto Star and Sun carried stories on the P.C. Metro's campaign stragedy for the upcoming municipal election. While, for me anyway, the actual policy decisions are relatively unimportant in most aspects, I think that the fact that they held the meeting to discuss their stragedy is more significant. P.C. Metro - the Progressive Conservative Party's umbrella group for Metro Toronto - held the meeting as a reaction to the New Democratic Party's policy of running party supported and endorsed candidates for all municipal offices. What frightens me more than anything else is that we are on the verge of seeing party politics invading municipal government. And that is the last thing that any municipality needs. As far as I'm concerned, party politics has absolutely nothing to contribute to good municipal government. For example, what is so party political about whether or not a municipality should reconstruct a road or build a new water and sewer line? To me, if we need them, we build them - if we don't need them, we don't build them. I am also convinced that party politics would do nothing for good municipal government. In fact, the only thing party politics would do is present a threat. For example, there was an interesting article in the Toronto Star recently on the N.D.P. caucus that from time to time literally paralysizes the Toronto Board of Education. If the N.D.P.ers on that board are unhappy with anything that comes before the board, they have been known to simply walk out, thereby effectively halting the day-to-day operations of the board. These people even have caucus meetings to discuss stragedy and pre- determine how they will vote on the issues that come before the board. Party politics also brings before municipal government issues that properly belong before the senior levels of government. For example, in its newly announced municipal campaign platform, P.C. Metro has taken positions on such things as capital punishment. Both Metro Council, Toronto City Council and the Toronto Board of Education have been known to hold debates on such issues as U.S. involvement in Central America, abortion and other lively topics. My question is what do these types of issues have to do with ensuring that the roads, utilities, schools and other local government services are well maintained and are operating according to coun- cil or board pohicy? I must admit that I have a certain amount of sympathy for the position taken by P.C. Metro. Both the Progressive Conservatives and the Liberals have never shown any real interest in getting into party politics on the municipal level. It is something that the N.D.P. bas forced them into. (Perhaps because the N.D.P. is frustrated at being unable to govern either Ontario or Canada they have decided to try to take over city government.) In fact, a spokesman for P.C. Metro told both the Star and the Sun that his group was even willing to support known Liberals for municipal office. He also admitted that P.C. Metro was undertaking a municipal election campaign stragedy because of the N.D.P. 's open interference in local government. That indicates to me that both the Tories and the Grits still don't really want to get partisan at the local level. Andrightly so. Can you imagine Whitby Town Council having to operate under the guise of party politis? Our seven man council is more or so evenly divided when it cores to party affliation. We have two well known N.D.P.ers, two committed Tories, one silent Tory, one known Liberal and another who is comfortable with eitherthe Grits or the Tories. Our council could be severely fractured if debate was to be held along party unes. And since no party holds a rajority on Whitby Town Council, the business of running this municipality could literally grind to a halt. When an issue cones before Whitby Town Council, for example, the absence of party politics allows each councillor to make up his own mind about the issues and vote according to the dictates of his conscious. If one councillor believes that a new road, for instance, should be built in his ward then it is up to him to convince his collegues on the merits of his proposal. There is no party politics involved, we don't have to deal with a "them or us" attitude. Party politics has a place when debating the affairs of the province of the nation. When dealing with the larger issues, capital punishment, abortion, the deficit, interest rates, unemployment, defense, foreign policy, etc., then dif- ferent political philosophies have a place. Different viewpoints are valuable here. But these viewpoints and philosophies don't have a place when it comes to roads, sewers, schools, and other local issues. In the Legislature and the House of Commons, party politics works very well. The party with the majority of seats is consistently confronted by an opposition that questions everything they do and say. That keeps a government on its toes. But how would we apply that system to Whitby Town Council? I don't see a way to do it without a complete failure to provide good local government. The N.D.P. were wrong to get into municipal politics in a partisan way. While I imagine they must have had the best of intentions (and rerember that Robbie Burns once remarked: "The road to bell is paved witb good intentions.") but they have actually done the local taxpayer a disservice. SOL WAY Use iot or lose it!, "Use it or lose it." The expression once got me in- to trouble. For those over 30, remember when I scandalized the airwaves by talking about S-E-X? Perhaps most scandalous was my suggestion (since then commonplace) that people who were getting older should not "abstain," and that dis-use led to waning interest and capacity to enjoy or even to function. It's true. If you want to keep something working, it is best to keep using it. Maybe l'Il get into trouble again. Local boosterism no withstanding, this area suf- fers from a certain lack of use, and with that dis-use a loss of facilities. I will not belabour the old saw" about the big-city being so close that we lose business to it. Enough said. People are entitled to choice. But local enterprise is also entitled to something: consideration. Like sex, if local enterprise is left to wither, it will be lost. If local people say "the area needs...etc..." and then stay away, the enterprise will fail. It is not enough for local boosters to proclairn that this town - be it Whitby, or Ajax, or Oshawa or Port Perry, has what you need. If you stay away it will go away. Alright. This colunn may be self-serving. I never prorised thats Iwould avoid talking about my own (and Nuala's) enterprise: the Marigold Dinner Playhouse. But I will talk about it in a wider context because we share many of the problems of other en- terprises. Last week, I visited one of Oshawa's best-known and most popular restaurants. I will spare the owner the embarrassment of naming it. If he reads this he' tknow. Idropped in to talk because I was puzzled by what I thought was erratic, unpredic- table buying habits. When we at the Marigold an- nounced our "no frills" seat sale a"few weeks ago, we were literally deluged with calls. For two weeks we could hardly handIe the phones. True, it was a bargain and no part of this country has a monopoly on bargain bunting; Then, just as suddenly as business boomed-it sagged. The offer remained, but the interest seemed to cool down. My friend at the popular restaurant said: "It's no consolation, but we've been slow too." This is not supposed to be a business column. It is also not a complaint column. Business comes, business goes. You learn to live with it. Only the bank does not live with it. But that is another story. Another illustration. Last week, we went to the of- fices of a well-known utility to buy a kitchen ap- pliance to handle the "rush". In the course of our conversation with the woman who handled the sale, we discovered that she lived here and obviously worked here, but had never ever been to our place. Fair enough. Everyone is entitled to choice. It didn't even occur to here that she said anything wrong when she told the two of us how she had been .to a restaurant in Scarborough and how few people were there. Not for a moment did she realize that every dollar she spent outside her home town was lost to the very local merchants who helped pay her salary. It's sort of liking driving a Datsun into the G.M. parking lot. There is a chicken-egg paradox here. People who want to entertain themselves, go to the big town because they can't find the variety here they want. But they can't find the variety here because when it is here they don't use it. You decide which comes first. My friend's restaurant is certainly as good as that Scarborough restaurant, and a lot closer. I feel the same way about what we do at our establishment. Commercial, professional theatre and a pretty good family dinner. We are delighted at the number of people who congratulate us; the number of people who think it's wonderful to have a big-city facility right around the corner. Cheering for enterprise is not enough. Like sex--if you don't use it, you tend to lose it. That goes for theatre, for restaurants, for flower shops and fur- niture stores. You really do have a stake in your neighbour's success.