Louis: Before diving into the personal and organizational challenges the City of Toronto presents, I want to talk a little bit about your time in the City of Hamilton, in duration and significance, a remarkable tenure. After hearing the list, I talked about it in the intro, was there an initiative or moment during your time with the City of Hamilton that stood out to you and, if so, why?
Chris: Actually, the thing that stands out the most for me is the work that we did on our corporate culture. To have the privilege of overseeing over 7,000 employees and to be able to work with them to develop a culture that helps people come to work on Monday mornings and gives them some expectation that they're going to work for an employer that cares about them. That to me is probably the thing that matters the most. Sure, we're involved in lots of projects and involved in lots of programs that benefit the community, but I think the principle job of a City Manager is to make sure that everyone that works for the organization has a common focus and feels that their employer cares about them.
Louis: We'll return to that subject in the context of your current role of the City of Toronto, but on the subject of a cultural focus, let me first ask you, turning back to the City of Hamilton, was it an initiative or idea that you brought to the table or was it something that was brought to you to attempt to implement?
Chris: I would say there was a few of us, that working with Helen Tomasik in HR, we've seen how other organizations have succeeded and failed and the common dominator is culture. I think it was a few of us that felt it would be important to engage our organization, asking the basic question, "What kind of organization do they want to work for?" I would say there's a few of us that thought it was a good idea and we just implemented it.
Louis: One of the challenges that we have, any leader has, in delving into and dealing with the issue of culture is that it typically presents as something that's internal to an organization. But in reality, it is a very decisive consideration, how the organization interacts with those around it, outside of it and in your case with the city administration, the public at large. Would you agree with that proposition?
Chris: It's absolutely true. I mean the success of your organization really hinges on, not just your leadership and management, but also how your front line sees their role and the importance of it.
Louis: We'll return to that as we talk about the City of Toronto. You spent the bulk of your career in Hamilton before going to the City of Toronto. You still reside here. You'll appreciate the refrain spoken of in the past, from time to time, that the City of Hamilton has never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Many feel that that's changed. Do you feel that that sentiment is no longer the case? That it's changing? Are you optimistic about the future of the City of Hamilton and, if so, why?
Chris: Hamilton is a great community. It just fundamentally is and despite what may have happened in the past, Hamilton has enjoyed tremendous success. Think of Hamilton in the Canadian context. Don't think of it just in the last 50 years. Think about what it's contributed to the building of the country. Whether it be steel or innovations in terms of technology and other things. It has a very deep DNA that has been successful for a long time. All communities ebb and flow and certainly Hamilton experienced typical problems that steel belt cities experience all across the globe, but it was really a matter of, I think, time that the market would shine its light on Hamilton again. Optimistic for the future I would say very clearly, not just because of just what Hamilton is, but the context of Hamilton and the Southern Ontario economy. I know we're going to talk about regional thinking, but Hamilton is part of a very large economic ecosystem that has to be cared for. If it's done right and properly, the future of people living in Hamilton, or Toronto, or Durham or wherever you want to talk about, will be very positive but it will require us to stop thinking in terms of municipal silos and thinking in terms of the regional economy that we are all contributing to.
Louis: When we look ahead at the future, certainly in this region, and leaving aside for a second how it is that this regional economy is impacted by the Provincial and national economy, are there any specific risks that you think in this region might derail the success that Hamilton is experiencing?
Chris: Really, some of the real basics here, and they're threefold, it is about transit, it is about housing and it is about healthcare. Those are three things that if you choose to do as independent agents you run the risk of, not just creating really inefficient outcomes, I mean, you've run the risk of really failing and negatively affecting the quality of life of people in this region. Those are three massive things. The other thing, I gotta tell you, if there's one thing that keeps me up at night it is the future of this economy will hinge on critical investments but most importantly, skilled trades to deliver on those investments. The infrastructure investment that City of Toronto is making alone, our 10-year capital program is worth 41 billion dollars. I'd say that number's probably low. The kind of money that we have to spend in order to kind of keep, not just state of good repair, moving in the right direction, but critical infrastructure investments is significant. We'll get into that in a few minutes but having the people to do the work, and be thankful you have great immigration laws and everything else, but it's fast becoming, as people are aging and moving out of the workforce, I don't know if we have enough people coming in to fill in the jobs, because those jobs are growing.
Louis: That is a vexing problem, in part so many complicated social problems, the solution to it usually involves a wide array of different actors acting collaboratively and that's a challenge.
Chris: Yup.
Louis: Here, also we're both parents of young people, the challenge of dealing with young high school students who have to try to figure out what it is that they want to do, if they're not interested in pursuing a typical university background, and understanding and exploring where it is and why it might be that you would pursue a skill trade, where the money is good and there is significant need, remains a challenge. Not only for you as a municipal leader but private companies, parents, high schools. If there's a path forward in terms of solving for that issue do you see it? What advice would you give us all in terms of working towards that goal?
Chris: I completely agree. There is an outcome that needs to be achieved but the only way you're going to achieve it is through major institutions working together. It's not kumbaya. It's really the critical factor's success. The first time I actually was in front of the, the Munk School every year invites the City Manager of Toronto to come and speak, and I spoke about intergenerational equity. When you talk about our kids, they're in the their late teens early 20's, and I think about being part of the baby boomer generation and some of the decision making that we've made, we haven't really left a fantastic legacy for those that are coming. I really hope that we take responsibility for the future we've created as baby boomers. You're probably not the same age as me, but maybe close, but the bottom line is that we are handing on significant debt to that next generation. Their jobs aren't like ours. A lot of them are on contracts. They don't have the kinds of pensions that some of us and the benefits that some of us have. The middleclass is shrinking. I know that to be true in Toronto. All the vectors that you'd want pointing in a particular direction aren't pointing in the right direction. I think we've created a legacy for the next generations that is going to be incredibly trying for them. If ever there's a moment in time that people need to work together, I would say it's probably now.
Louis: Would you agree with me, and it's something that I've wrestled with and believe, that the concept of mentorship, although typically discussed as it relates to young people, students, young professionals, frankly is an influence and something that no matter what age you are, no matter what role you have, CEO or otherwise, is always something to have in your life. Do you believe in mentorship, not only in you mentoring young people, but in you looking to others to continue to mentor you in your path?
Chris: Absolutely. The term lifelong learner, that's us, that's what we do. I'm sure, Lou, you with your boys, and I know with Hannah and Ben, if you see something you're interested in and someone happens to be a leader in that, call them. We're much more approachable then people think. We will go out for coffee. We will give you whatever, 15, 30 minutes, whatever it is. It's almost like people are afraid to do that and I'd say we're probably more taken by the people that have the courage to do that. Not everything requires a formal program. It's like street hockey. Don't put any rules on that, people, let us go play. That's what we do. We go play. I would say to those people that have a passion for whatever it happens it is, go find out who's doing it, and go talk to them.
Louis: You'll, I’m sure, agree with me that on those occasions on which we've been asked about that, folks generally, including ourselves, like to talk about what we do and what we've done as well.
Chris: Yeah. We love to see success in others.
Louis: Yes.
Chris: Honestly, I think that's why people, I don't know what it is, but as you look at where society is and where it's going, it's complications, and all that's going on right now with government and everything else, there's still a fundamental optimism and there's a curiosity amongst us and that's why we probably talk to each other. That's probably why we enjoy problem solving. You get the right group of people together and there's possibility and usually good things happen.
Louis: It does also raise an interesting organizational and corporate issue in question and what you just said leads me there. That is that we tend to talk about innovation being something that involves technology or tools. When in reality, the most vexing problems that we have, the solutions for them, innovation, usually centers on people. Their passions, their relationships with each other, their networks, how they communicate and listen. But it seems to be in an era of social media that it's precisely that constellation of aptitudes that we're now less and less able to do. Would you agree? And how has that impacted your leadership of the organization that we'll touch on in a second, the City of Toronto, the distance that technology can create in an environment that is so large and disaggregated where personal relationships are decisive. How do you approach that?
Chris: It's interesting, certainly, social media. It's almost I need a disclaimer on any of the job applications for anyone that wants to be a senior leader in the municipality. Be careful what you're asking for. I think democracy is an incredibly important thing and the ability for people to say what they need to say is incredibly important. I look at the Jason Thorne's of the world here that has a Twitter account and is communicating the things about the City of Hamilton and what's happening around the world. I'm sure he gets a fair bit of criticism whenever. You really have to have tough skin. But at the end of the day you're right. The answer moving forward is the ability for us to talk, to work together and to put in perspective the criticism that is going to come, regardless. But if that causes you to stop because you're going to be criticized then you're in the wrong business. I have an eye and ear for what people are saying and at the end of the day the complex problems are still there. We still have to solve them.
Louis: With courage.
Chris: Yeah and the right attitude. Innovation, I think we're going to get to this, I just find innovation isn't something that is just over there and in a box and we can go get it then apply it and we're done. It's a mindset, I think. People who like to problem solve, and like to build relationships with people, innovation is just a normal part of what they do. When we put it in a title and say, "Tag. You're the innovation person." it's like handing breathing off to someone. I'm tired of breathing. You breathe for me. I'm going, "No." I kind of have to breathe.
Louis: Let's talk about that, and many other things within the context of the City of Toronto, your current role. Let's set the stage a little bit about the magnitude of that challenge and run through some biographical information about the city. First of all, in a very rough way, what would be the GDP of the City of Toronto, broadly.
Chris: Metropolitan Toronto, which is slightly bigger than Toronto when they measure GDP, the GDP is just about equivalent to Alberta and just about equivalent to Quebec. Over 20% of the economy of Ontario is coming from the Toronto Metropolitan census area. It's the fifth largest government, to give you an idea. It's economic importance has been significant for a long time.
Louis: In terms of the size of the city you work for, … , how big is that?
Chris: 37,000.
Louis: How many departments would … those 37,000 employees?
Chris: 44.
Louis: Do I take it then that you would have a manager for each of those 37 departments?
Chris: Well, yeah, for the 44 departments I have, certainly, a leader so the titles will vary. The way that Toronto is set up is we have what we call service areas. I have a Deputy City Manager that oversees the service areas. The model's a little different than what you have typically in most municipalities. The DCM's that I have are overseeing service areas. So, a service area may have a dozen divisions if you will. Their job is really to make sure we have the right people leading those divisions. Their job is also to keep an eye on the performance of those divisions. Also, to make sure that where integration ought to be occurring within the service area, or across service areas, is occurring. Then fourthly, to make sure when we're transforming the organization in a particular direction, that they together with myself, have a strategy for transformation and that the players in these divisions are on board and that we're able to make the changes that we have to. As I said to the Mayor when I started, if someone at committee asks me what colour is the park bench at the corner of Bloor and Yonge, I said, "If I answer that question correctly, please fire me, because I am clearly not doing my job." There are certain things that I should not know because others must know them. It's really important to me that each layer in the organization, their job description and their performances, is clear. I work on the organization as opposed to in it.
Louis: It occurs to me that being a transplant into the City of Toronto, and given its size and magnitude, that assimilating the institutional knowledge that would be required, even to be able to identify the changes that you want to make let alone to lead effectively, would be daunting. How did you approach that problem?
Chris: I'm so grateful I had 10 years in this role in Hamilton. I have to understand that even though Toronto workforce may be bigger, its budgets may be bigger, the services it delivers are pretty much the same as Hamilton. I had 10 years of learning the role here in Hamilton. My level of anxiety is a little bit different. I look for things. Toronto and Hamilton are similar, certainly, because they both amalgamated around the same time. I look to see how amalgamation has resulted. I look for, administratively, are the structures, are they amalgamated the way in which like a financial system. Am I dealing with one financial system or multiple financial systems. Strangely enough I think Toronto has made a lot of progress on the amalgamation front but there still seems to be a bit of a legacy of it there. Whereas I would say Hamilton, you'll get people coming to the podium talking about the pre-amalgamation days, but as an administration and really as a council, they are very, very much one city. Toronto's one city but I would say administratively it's still kind of dealing with amalgamation.
Louis: Your City Manager's office bio says that you are quote by profession a registered city planner; by previous experience, a transportation and housing director; by necessity a relationship builder; and by passion a public sector employee end quote. And it's a particularly personal and engaging bio. Which one of the labels would you say is most important to you in your current role?
Chris: I go nowhere without relationships so the complexities of society can never be solved by institutions acting independently. I don't mean just public institutions. The private sector and not profits. It's just the reality of what we're facing, whether it be crime, or a shrinking middle class, or the effects of global warming, all these things will never be solved by individuals going alone. Relationships, and when I say relationships, I had the good fortune of working on some complicated stuff here in Hamilton. The Red Hill was no small matter. It was where you and I met each other. Working with Haudenosaunee taught me a million things, I gotta tell you, and there's one thing though in particular that
Louis: Sorry, for the benefit of those who are watching, this is an indigenous community.
Chris: Yes. Sometimes referred to as Six Nations. They talked about relationships and what was made very clear to me was relationships are really built on three things and in this particular order. Respect, trust and friendship. The respect is typically not that difficult to kind of earn amongst people who are at tables trying to solve problems. Trust is a longer-term commitment. As we all know you can earn it and lose it in seconds. Then friendship. This is the thing you often hear people, "Oh, we're good friends." and it's like no, friendship has a certain patina, has a certain depth that comes in time. I think oftentimes we just kind of use that word but I would say, in the Haudenosaunee, taught me differently. That thing about relationships, when you're at the table, respect is there but trust that we're going to do what we say we're going to do. The other thing I'll just say, quickly, is that my mindset is that I'm an interest based negotiator. I'm not a positional bargainer. I find positional bargaining typically takes longer, is a lot more adversarial and I think at the end of the day destroys your relationships. Interest based bargaining is where obviously you know that I'm clear on what is of value and importance to you and that I understand that, and that you understand the same thing from where I'm coming from and that we kind of work on each other's problems, then we find those answers that so often lies in the middle. So, you're not always hitting home runs. As much as I know people love the Babe Ruth's of the world, I was more of a Joe DiMaggio guy. Let me get to the plate and hit singles and doubles. That's all I ever wanted. That to me, that mindset in relationship building, and I tell you when we we’re dealing with civil disobedience with the people that we were negotiating with, it was evident day one. We talked about it that we were interest based people. That is why we got eight agreements done in less than 6 months, which I think have stood the test of times. It's good stuff.
Louis: There's an enormous amount to impact in that answer that would itself occupy a number of podcasts but let me pull a couple of strands out of that, Chris. First of all, the subject of relationship and trust, when you make a comment about the world's or innovation region's most retractable problems requiring collaboration, not only institutionally but inter-institutionally, you've magnified the complexity of the problem from a trust perspective. Dealing with the dynamic of many different people across organizations. In terms of how it is that you facilitate the creation of trust in dealing with your colleagues, internally and externally, how do you approach that? Is it something that you do mindfully or is just because of the way you are it comes easily? How do you view and then incent, propagate trust as an organizational parity?
Chris: It probably helps that I'm the youngest of five guys. Just to survive in that kind of family environment. I say to people all the time the nature of my job is like I play in 2-way traffic all day long and I'm not crossing at the crosswalks. I'm in the mid-blocks so I'm having to kind of look both ways all the time.
Louis: It reminds me of that video game Frogger. Do you remember that?
Chris: Yeah! It totally is! Understand that's the world you're in. Like I say, I think very early on with four older brothers and you had to kind of figure out how it is that you're going to navigate that. We actually, in Hamilton, have a lot of experience of working together. We created the Hamilton Anchor Institute Leadership Table, which was all the major institutions. We met four times a year. Only the CEO's, the heads of the organizations, this was the LHIN's, the universities, the college, the hospitals, the community foundation, the Chamber, ourselves, the … We would meet four times a year. We all agreed we would not have any letterhead because that's just more bureaucracy. Didn't want that. But we had a common focus. There was a very particular outcome that we were trying to achieve. Relationships for the sake of relationships are nice but having a common focus, in our case, it was housing and hubs. We said that if in the term of council, if we didn't do something material, break ground or get something really going as a result of all of us pulling in the same direction, then we'd stop meeting. Because we're all nice people. We're all busy but we just can't seem to get our respective bureaucracies aligned in getting some things done. That, I think, that kind of ups the game a bit when it becomes a pass or fail. It's like you either got it done or you didn't. I think that really helps when you're trying to create these tables, these relationships, and knowing what win looks like and what loss looks like and you own it collectively. You don't want to let each other down. That was a learning I certainly had here in Hamilton and now we're applying that in Toronto. We're doing it within the organization, you say inter and intra, and so we're striking those relationships with major institutions. It's not that we didn't talk. Of course before I came to Toronto there was always conversations going on and some pretty phenomenal work being done. But I think now we realize even more, with certainly some of the pressures that are being put on us, and rightfully. I'm not disagreeing with the Province wanting to kind of look at its fiscal situation. How it is that maybe we can deliver our services more effectively. I think in some respects it's kind of maybe forcing us to kind of get in a room and start talking, maybe a bit differently, and achieving some common outcome. That's kind of what's happening right now.
Louis: When you look at this from the perspective or problems that require solutions, at a higher level this question of problem solving, you would have to appreciate as a leader in the organization that failure is inevitable.
Chris: Yup.
Louis: And arguably, perhaps, the most instructive process if approached in the appropriate way. How do you approach the certainty of failure organizationally, as a leader? How do you look to extract lessons and to benefit from failure from the perspective of growing and developing organizationally?
Chris: Boy, you would love a great answer for this. I'm just telling you, I think too often, and almost all the time, the debrief never happens. I think the mistakes get repeated. Just to be honest. You're absolutely right. I think failure is inevitable but we tend to be very incremental for a bunch of reasons.
Louis: I'm sorry, when you say we you mean?
Chris: We as in whether it's a group within City Hall or it's City Hall working with others.
Louis: Actually, I thought you were talking about lawyers and law firms for a second.
Chris: Okay. We like to have our early wins and sometimes those early wins don't quite materialize the way that you would hope. There's many good ways to avoid catastrophic failures, you know, and that is by setting out a course of action that begins with small steps. Honestly, when you're working with people from across an organization or organizations working together, you kind of want to just build the rapport with each other, have a few early wins. But as I say, I find that we don't spend enough time learning the way we should together, especially when we're working together. It often feels, and I don't know what the law firm world is like, but too often we find ourselves kind of living another day. It's like, okay, today's Thursday. Okay, I think I can make it to Friday and maybe to next Monday. Oftentimes people don't have that long-term view. They don't even know how to celebrate their little wins. They just kind of move on to the next thing and they don't really see the progress that they might be achieving. They don't see the value of failure. This is what kills organizations is they become so risk adverse that even small failures cause them all to kind of run for the woods. For us, we're rolling out some stuff right now. We've got people helping us on change management and our communications people are quite good. We're still making some mistakes along the way in terms of some of the simple things that we're implementing. But I think my approach with people is like, "Hey. I'm from New Brunswick. I'm far from perfect." Give me the benefit of the doubt here and if we didn't get it right, we'll get it right. I think sometimes maybe just how much of your ego gets in the way is part of the problem.
Louis: When you say that it occurs to me, and I'm not sure if anybody's written this book, but the East Coast temperament as a business philosophy, you'd look at East Coasters like yourself, as people who are resilient, humble, we're pretty much aware of the reality of the difficulty of life and the setbacks it can deliver to you and then just getting on with it.
Chris: Yeah.
Louis: I think you probably bring that as a necessary ingredient or a group of aptitudes to your current role.
Chris: You think of all the great music in the world and the great literature and look back on the great writers and look at they're environment, their upbringing. Think of the number of great musicians from Ireland and some of the great writers from Ireland.
Louis: Not generally a cheery crowd, my friend.
Chris: Yeah, but you know, they drink so that probably helps. That may be part of the common denominator. You're right. I mean, life is not always that easy in these places. Be careful with too much success. Maybe you just get lazy and you just take for granted that momentum is always going to be there. I think, coming back to Hamilton, to your point about how Hamilton has maybe in the past has done things that didn't result in the success it wanted. It's like, learn from it.
Louis: Well, at least that's the aspiration but I mean I think there's a great analog in nature. You don't create muscle unless you are ripping and tearing down muscle. Growth comes from that destruction. Creation is an act of destruction. I guess you're speaking to that.
Chris: Yeah. I think that's the perfect way to say it. You're right. No one runs a marathon without sweating. It's going to happen.
Louis: Let's talk a little bit about innovation and the fostering of it, the creation of a culture of innovation. You touched on it earlier today and you've identified the fact that it's really almost, today, a cliché in a box checking exercise. And certainly, also something that's increasingly challenging the legal profession. But you have an approach to it that speaks to issues, I think, like culture and relationship. How have you and the City approached the fostering of innovation institutionally and culturally? What has worked or is working?
Chris: I would say, when I mentioned earlier about HAIL, creating an Anchor institute table where very specific outcomes were agreed to and allowing the parties to bring their skills to the table and achieve those outcomes. That's an environment that you create. You're deliberate about it. We're doing the exact same thing with CityLab. We have that wonderful space right beside City Hall but we brought the universities, the college and the problems and opportunities of the City together. The alchemy there basically requires the administrations, and the students, to problem solve. So we're deliberate about that. You've got to want to innovate. I think, in essence, that's probably why I love planning and that's why I love what I get to do. The challenges of society as much as, think about technology, think about the disrupters that have been happening. Think about the Ubers and the Lyfts. Think about artificial intelligence. Think about the driverless vehicles. Think about all these things that are presenting dynamics and it's not going to stop. Government's ability to kind of deal with it. It's almost like in the fight game, you've got certain boxers that are defensive boxers, and some of them have been incredibly successful. In the fight game you have to react to the punches thrown, but if you don't throw a punch yourself, you're not going to win. You will not be successful. We have to be able to deal with the day to day challenges of the disrupters but also why aren't we innovating? If government that you see today is exactly the same with only minor nuance changes in the next 20 years, I think we will have failed. I think just like the banking industry, just like the airline industry, look what I can do with a device right now. I can move all my money in strange ways if I want to in a nanosecond. And government? Look at how adaptive we are. We have to fundamentally change and it's not just about building relationships and achieving outcomes in the community. Just the way that people perceive us and that generation that I talked about, the Millennials, our kids, how irrelevant are we going to be if we continue to stay the way we are? Just the way in which they gather information from us. Change for the sake of change? No. It's relevance. You look at the heft of a government. Again, we're the fifth largest government in the country. Our operating budget is 13.1 billion dollars. Our capital is $41 billion. That's a significant amount of money. How effective we are in delivering those services and spending that money? This why people, I think, have such disdain for government in that they don't see us as being driven by value for money. I'm not a right wing/left wing guy. I'm not that at all but my parents, who are 97 and 96, brought us up a certain way. They were poor. Everyone was poor. The idea of getting the most for your resources, that was drilled into all of us as kids. When I look at government, I kind of go, "I get what people say sometimes about the way in which we act and operate." But I will say this as well, "People have no idea how good we are." I'm not saying that as a rah rah cheerleading anything. I work with incredibly talented, skillful people and sometimes I feel my job is just to kind of release them. To give them permission to innovate. To be, not just the best, but just to kind of see the future 5, 10, 20 years out, and be able to start why aren't we taking advantage of a AI. Now, in Toronto we are all over Blockchain and a couple of different areas right now, we are going to mimic what you see happening and the private sector and then apply to it to us. But that's a culture. That's an environment that you have to be deliberate about and that's the future of government, I think.
Louis: Well, it does speak to the enormity of the challenge ahead. We've got new opine in terms of the development of our economies and civilizations in which the problems that remain are very intractable. Most of the easy problems have already been solved. Those intractable problems that remain, by definition involve, will require people across institutions working together in trust, but with a view to innovating or making positive change, with a tolerance for failure with resilience in an environment in which we have never had access to more knowledge with less wisdom. How do you account or solve or deploy or make all of that work? What you're saying is that you, as a leader of the City of Toronto, you've identified all of those issues? The reality of the situation and some of the things that you described are your way of attempting to solve for them.
Chris: Yup.
Louis: It's organic. It will take time. May not succeed, but I'm hearing you to say, very much dependant on the good faith and good will of a variety of institutions and leaders and people to work together to do that, or it won't get done.
Chris: It won't get done. As I said, I mentioned in terms of what we did in Hamilton with the anchor institutes, we had an outcome we were trying to achieve. How you frame the problem or opportunity is important. When I think about the days of municipalities acting as independent agents has got to come to a close at some point. What part of we're in a regional economy don't we realize?
Louis: But it's not just with, Chris, I would interrupt you to say that the reality of the point that you're making is, I think, it can be scaled even more. It's not just a regional economy. We are incredibly interconnected to North American economy, to a global economy, and there's no getting around the fact that this isn't a silo.
Chris: Yeah. You're absolutely right. The success of the Southern Ontario economy, when you think about transfer payments of the Federal and Provincial government makes to keep this country moving in the right direction, it has to rely on those urban regions, in terms of being successful. Making critical investments in those urban regions, making sure that they work. Take transit. We have about ten transit authorities in Southern Ontario. I attended a meeting last week where we were talking about service and fare integration. To me it's almost like if you took ten people and said look, "You've got 5 minutes. We're going to order pizza. You've gotta agree on all the toppings." Get ten of us to agree on, it won't happen. It's like depends on who's at the table. You know what I'm saying? Getting ten people to agree on service and fare integration, at some point you have to kind of look at, and it's nothing. I'm not saying anything new. Anne Golden talked about this decades ago and parties have talked about regional economies for a long time. But ours is maturing. We're about 6 and a half million people in the GTHA and we're going to grow to over 9 million in 20 years. 20 years is tomorrow. Some people, 20 years, I won't be here, I won't be here. No. 20 years in terms of how cities and economies and governments, how they function, 20 years is nothing. Where we are today and where we need to be in 20 years from now, it's like the Gretzky thing. Where the puck is going. It's not where the puck is. It's where the play is going that you have to be thinking about. Over 9 million people. Are we going to be building a lot more roads? Hmmm, doubt it. Making use better of the capacity of the existing transportation system means transit’s going to play a heavy role. People phrase it as the war against the car. There is no war. It's not about a war. It's about how you allocate that capacity. And how you do that with ten players is a real question. You need to kind of get the players to kind of, not just work together, but have maybe a bit more of a singular focus in that service integration, fare integration, you've got to make travel easy for people. Then they gotta be able to live within this region. Toronto's already experiencing some significant problems in terms of affordable housing. I see housing as a regional thing. I see healthcare as a regional thing. Again, I think it's how you frame it that really matters, and then if you frame it properly, bring the parties together to kind of see how it is the present system is operating and how it is it needs to operate in that kind of broader regional context.
Louis: When you say parties, and you talked about ten people, and here we're talking about municipalities or governments, it would seem to me, given our prior conversation, that these problems aren't getting solved unless a significant constituency of influential private actors are also part of that conversation. Insofar as those employers are the ones that need knowledge workers, and they have to live some place, and it's their tax dollars that go to fund so much of this. Have you had a challenge in incenting or involving private actors into these discussions? Does it not happen? If it hasn't happened, why? If you agree that it's necessary how would you lead that kind of consultation?
Chris: The Toronto Regional Board of Trade has talked about this. They represent the Chambers of Commerce across the Southern Ontario. It's not that there isn't a private sector/public sector, a group of people that don't see this problem as significant. And maybe I'll be a little bit critical of people in my profession. All the white papers in the world and all the reports in the world and all the pilots in the world, all these things that we do to generate evidence to say that we need to do X, we do that. It's the interface between those reports and that evidence and making political decisions. I don't know if we think through that last yard before you hit the end zone. You know what I'm saying? The easy job is really, I think, the technical and administrative, pulling all the evidence together and saying, "Well, there you go." There's the answer. Then we just kind of hand the report to the politicians and say, "Have at it." They're dealing with a whole variety of challenges. Include the economy and transportation, in this case, but they're dealing with a whole set of circumstances and weighing it all the time. I don't know if we spend enough time working with the decision makers. Not just standing up at committee and firing off our comments to them at the podium but working more closely with them on these very specific issues. Helping and having maybe a little bit of patience because not everything is going to be done tomorrow and maybe they become election issues. Maybe we frame them in such way that the next round of decisions we have to make about who leads these governments. These topics are not just well researched but they're made as critical elements of platforms. How do we do that?
Louis: When you look ahead to the end of your tenure, in however many years that is, what will seem a success to you in terms of your accomplishments? As you see them now and when you look back on them upon being done.
Chris: It's the same thing in Hamilton. It's the effort that was put into the culture, the organization. Is it well led? I was told when I was offered this job, what Mayor Tory mentioned to me was, you have to inspire the organization. You have to ensure there's succession planning. You have to make some tough decisions and you have to work with people to make sure that Toronto has long term financial sustainability. Those were the four things. But what's the common denominator to all of that is a great civil service. Leadership that is truly skilled and leadership to me is not just about commitment competence, it's about character. The type of leaders that lead an organization, innovation, risk tolerant.
Louis: Selflessness.
Chris: Yeah! And in a general enjoyment of working on interesting work. Every organization has a culture. Has actually many cultures. But if you collectively move that a couple of degrees in the right direction, it's faith in human nature. As much as we're so critical of ourselves, I just work with too many good people. But that will be, I think, the thing that will matter the most. It's not about a road that got built or a building that went up or whatever. But those, as corny as it sounds, and I know when I say it, "I go oh my God."
Louis: It doesn't sound corny at all.
Chris: But to some it probably does but I'm just, I don't know, my own little experience will tell you that that matters. It just does.
Louis: Chris, thank you for your time today.
Chris: No problem. I enjoyed it, Lou.