Command and Control At Ottawa City Hall

It's both dismaying and disappointing to watch Mayor O'Brien totally fail to provide effective leadership at City Hall. I voted for him, hoping to see improved spending discipline from Council. While he continues to sleepwalk through the remainder of his term it is perhaps worthwhile to look at what I believe are the principle factors for his failure.

Larry O'Brien is a CEO. He is accustomed to having everyone around him do as he says and to anticipate his desires. A CEO is final arbiter in any company, provided he has the support of the board. He can hire and fire at will as one tool for delivering on the company's business objectives. This is a necessary power since the CEO is fully accountable for those results.

Every CEO exercises a mix of command and control, and leadership, though not always in equal proportion. From those who have known him in the corporate world, O'Brien is known more as a command and control kind of guy. This doesn't necessarily make him likable, but that doesn't matter if he produces results. A good leader is one that, when he shouts, "follow me," others willing and enthusiastically follow. A command and control CEO simply removes those who don't follow orders.

Command and control works in many political situations. Think of a Prime Minister in a majority government. Even when in a minority, as Harper is today, command and control can work if used with due care. It doesn't work at all in Ottawa's government since the mayor is in a minority of one; the councillors are all independent. This is where leadership needs to be applied by a mayor who would hope to have success with his agenda.

The trouble with O'Brien isn't his background in command and control. His failure is that he can't adapt his style to one of principally leadership. He knows what needs to happen but he can't figure out how or, more worrisome, he refuses to learn. There is some parallel here with Harper's recent performance as a command and control minority PM where it blew up in his face. Except that when O'Brien fails he's still the mayor; there is no government to fall. So we're stuck with a lame duck whom the more politically-savvy councillors walk all over. We become the biggest losers.

Which brings me to my second point: the councillors. No mayor can successfully lead the councillors when he cannot bring political pressure to bear on them. This is a very difficult task for a good politician, let alone the incumbent. To build political capital the mayor must generate support for his vision among the population, that the mayor can then use as leverage with Council. The premise being that if Council doesn't align itself with the mayor, and therefore citizens, they risk losing their seats in the next election. Another way of looking at it is that the mayor needs to get voters to support him rather than councillors with opposing views.

Regrettably this isn't happening. Voters keep reelecting the same councillors every election while preferring instead to change mayors. The councillors know this and use it to their advantage. This is how they pushed through a 4.9% tax hike while O'Brien stupidly looked on with his jaw hanging open. He has no political currency with Council or with voters, while Council can confidently rely on getting a bye in the next election by only focussing on oiling the squeaky wheels - the special interests generating all the news coverage.

Most voters, even while getting cranky about taxes, will continue to support the freely-spending councillors. It only becomes a problem for them when we start to vote according to the weight of our wallets. Will we ever do that? This is not a problem O'Brien will solve - he has neither the will nor the competence.