Gananoque pushes back on strong mayor powers
In a town where each council voice still matters, Gananoque has sent a clear message to Queen's Park: keep your Strong Mayor Powers.
At its April 15 meeting, Gananoque council passed a motion asking the provincial government to exempt the town from the expansion of legislation that grants additional authority to mayors – powers that could allow them to veto council decisions, craft budgets independently, and fast-track provincial priorities.
The motion passed 5-1, with one councillor, Patrick Kirkby, abstaining. Only Mayor John Beddows stood in opposition.
These strong mayor powers, introduced under the Ontario Municipal Act and expanded by Premier Doug Ford's government, are part of a broader effort to streamline decision-making and accelerate housing development in Ontario's growing communities. But in Gananoque – a town of just over 5,000 – councillors say the move chips away at the essence of small-town governance: collaboration, conversation, and consensus.
'Knowing you run, you represent the public, we have conversations, make points, then the mayor turns around and vetoes it,' said Coun. Anne-Marie Koiner. 'I fear for the staff, with the anxiety that will be brought on by this.'
Deputy Mayor Vicki Leakey, who seconded the motion, was blunt: 'It's a mark against democracy when the province starts messing with the power of elected councils. I don't understand how this is going to help us.'
The motion, introduced by Coun. David Osmond, reflects a rising discomfort among smaller municipalities that fear being swept up in one-size-fits-all provincial policy. In Gananoque, where community decisions are made around a modest table in Town Hall, councillors are wary of a future where a single elected official could wield outsized authority.
But not everyone on council sees it that way.
'We all knew this was coming,' said Mayor John Beddows, the lone dissenting vote. 'The intent of the Conservative Party to extend strong mayor powers was clear and available to anyone.'
Beddows supports the powers, noting they reinforce the mayor's role under the Act as the CEO of the municipality and head of council.
'This is not something I oppose,' he said. 'But it's not something that should be taken lightly.'
Keith Dempsey is a Local Journalism Initiative reporter who works out of the Brockville Recorder and Times. The Local Journalism Initiative is funded by the Government of Canada.(Catch up on what is happening throughout Eastern Ontario with our Midday Roundup.
Click here to sign up for the free newsletter
, which will be delivered to your inbox every weekday.)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Scrapping of Vagrancy Act next year landmark moment, say homelessness charities
A 200-year-old law criminalising rough sleepers is to be scrapped in what homeless charities have hailed a 'landmark moment'. The Vagrancy Act, introduced in 1824 for punishment of 'idle and disorderly persons, and rogues and vagabonds, in England', is to be repealed by spring next year, the Government has confirmed. Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, who is also Housing Secretary, said Labour is 'drawing a line under nearly two centuries of injustice towards some of the most vulnerable in society'. The law was brought in to deal with rising homelessness after the Napoleonic Wars and the Industrial Revolution and modern-day homeless charities have long called for it to be scrapped. Campaigners said criminalising the most vulnerable has never been the answer and instead homelessness needs to be properly addressed through support for people who end up sleeping rough. Figures published in April showed the number of people classed as living on the streets in London had risen by more than a third (38%) year-on-year to 706 from 511. According to the latest Combined Homelessness and Information Network (Chain) statistics, the total number recorded as sleeping rough in the capital was 4,427 for the three months to March 2025, which was a near-8% increase from 4,118 for the same quarter last year. Ms Rayner said: 'No one should ever be criminalised simply for sleeping rough and by scrapping this cruel and outdated law, we are making sure that can never happen again.' Homelessness minister Rushanara Ali described the 'archaic' Act as 'neither just nor fit for purpose'. She added: 'Scrapping the Vagrancy Act for good is another step forward in our mission to tackle homelessness in all its forms, by focusing our efforts on its root causes.' The Government said new 'targeted measures will ensure police have the powers they need to keep communities safe – filling the gap left over by removing previous powers', and will be brought in throughamendments to the Crime and Policing Bill. These will be new offences of facilitating begging for gain and trespassing with the intention of committing a crime. The Government said this will ensure organised begging – often facilitated by criminal gangs – remains an offence, meaning it is unlawful for anyone to organise others to beg by, for example, driving them places to do so. Crisis chief executive Matt Downie said: 'This is a landmark moment that will change lives and prevent thousands of people from being pushed into the shadows, away from safety.' He praised the Government for having 'shown such principled leadership in scrapping this pernicious Act'. He said: 'We hope this signals a completely different approach to helping people forced onto the streets and clears the way for a positive agenda that is about supporting people who desperately want to move on in life and fulfil their potential. We look forward to assisting the UK Government with their forthcoming homelessness strategy to do exactly that.' St Mungo's chief executive Emma Haddad said the Act's repeal 'cannot come soon enough' and called for a 'focus on tackling the health, housing and wider societal issues that are causing homelessness in the first place'. Youth homelessness charity Centrepoint warned that a challenge will be 'ensuring that proposed amendments don't have the unintended consequences of punishing people instead of supporting them'. Balbir Kaur Chatrik, the charity's director of policy and prevention, said: 'Criminalising the most vulnerable was never an effective solution and we look forward to working with the Government on its ending homelessness strategy to ensure people in this position are supported, not punished going forward.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Riley supporting loan forgiveness for volunteer first responders
WASHINGTON, FC (WIVT/WBGH) — Congressman Josh Riley is making sure volunteer heroes receive the respect and support that they deserve. Riley announced his co-sponsorship of the Helping Emergency Responders Overcome Emergency Situations, or HEROES, Act. The initiative is a bipartisan bill that would extend eligibility for the federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness program to include volunteer firefighters and emergency medical responders. 'If you've put on the gear and answered the call, you shouldn't be buried in debt,' said Riley. 'The HEROES Act gives volunteer firefighters the respect they've earned by making their service count toward student loan forgiveness. They don't do it for the money—they do it because they love their communities and want to keep their neighbors safe.' According to Riley, the HEROES Act would amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to recognize the service of unpaid emergency responders as qualifying public service under the PSLF program, making them eligible for federal student loan forgiveness after ten years of service and qualifying payments. Riley supporting loan forgiveness for volunteer first responders P. East Trading Corp recalls Salted Smoked Split Herring 'It Ain't Necessarily So' discusses American Black history A mix of sun and showers today News 34 Pizza Week returns Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision
Plans for a Chinese super-embassy in central London have become a 'walk of shame' for the Government, a former leader of the Conservative Party has said. Sir Iain Duncan Smith said response by the Government to the proposed embassy near the the capital's financial district had become 'Project Kowtow', as he criticised the Government for 'one denial after another (and) one betrayal after another'. Sir Iain referred to the warnings reportedly issued by the White House and Dutch government to Downing Street over the plans, which is set to be scrutinised by ministers. The worries stem from the close proximity of the proposed embassy's Royal Mint Court site to data centres and communication cables. The Sunday Times said the US was 'deeply concerned' about the plans, quoting a senior US official. In response, planning minister Matthew Pennycook said he could not give a full response as the matter was still to come before the department for a decision, and any verdict could be challenged by the courts. Sir Iain said: 'Beijing has a recent history of cutting cables and confirmed infrastructure hacks, including embedding malware capable of disabling all that infrastructure. 'Minister Peter Kyle yesterday on television said surprisingly that this was in the planning process and could be managed. Will the minister correct this record? The planning inquiry has concluded, no changes can be made to the Chinese planning application at all. 'I'll remind him the application contains nothing about cabling. Indeed to the inquiry, the Chinese have rejected only two requests, which he referred to actually, made by the Government in the letter from the foreign and home secretaries, despite ministers regularly saying that this letter, and I quote, should give those concerned, 'comfort'.' The Conservative MP said rerouting the cables would cost millions of pounds, and asked Mr Pennycook why the Government had denied the existence of cables until the White House confirmed it. He asked Mr Pennycook to deny reports by Chinese state media, saying the UK had given the Chinese assurances that it would allow a development 'no matter what'. He added: 'I see this as Project Kowtow, one denial after another, one betrayal after another. No wonder our allies believe that this Chinese mega embassy is now becoming a walk of shame for the Government.' Mr Pennycook replied because of the 'quasi-judicial nature' of his role, he could not comment on details of the application. He also said it would not be 'appropriate' for him to comment on the cabling or national security issues. He said he did not 'recognise the characterisation' by the Sunday Times of the embassy being raised in talks between the UK and China on trade. 'It is important to also emphasise that only material planning considerations can be taken into account in determining this case,' he said. 'But, as I say, I cannot comment in any detail on a case and it is not yet before the department.' Tory shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said Parliament had been treated with disdain by the Government. Mr Hollinrake said: 'Question after question, letter after letter, the Government has consistently treated Parliament with complete disregard on this matter. Stonewalling legitimate inquiries about national security, about ministerial discussions, and warnings about security bodies.' He added: 'Why won't the Government follow the examples of the US, Australian, and Irish governments which veto similar embassies that threaten their national security? 'The Government is on the verge of making a decision that will lead to huge risk, that will persist for decades. Will they change course before it is too late?' Mr Pennycook replied: 'No decision has been made on this case. No application is yet before the department.' Marie Rimmer, Labour MP for St Helens South and Whiston, said: 'China has a track record of aggressive state-backed espionage, and surely this country cannot afford to make a massive underestimation of what risk if this would go ahead?' She added: 'We cannot not say anything in this House. We must comment on what we see, and please understand that we must do so.' Meanwhile, former security minister, Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat, asked whether the Government believed the Chinese would treat a similar application in the same way. He said: 'Do you honestly believe that thr minister thinks that the Chinese would look at this proposal in the same way? 'Do we actually in this House believe that our economic security being threatened, as highlighted by the Americans and the Dutch, would go through a bureaucratic planning process with no ability to vary it because, frankly, them's the orders? 'I don't think that's the way China would do it, and it's certainly not the way we should.' Mr Pennycook replied: 'I'm very glad that we have a different and more robust planning system than the People's Republic of China.' Later in the session, Conservative MP Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) asked if the officer considering the case is 'cleared to receive top secret information'. Mr Pennycook replied: 'A planning inspector is assessing the case as part of a public inquiry. 'And I'm afraid, while I recognise why (Mr Jopp) has asked the question, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on national security matters.'
