By Justin Frappe
THUNDER BAY – Analysis – The economy that once supported this city faded away a generation ago. The bigger question is whether our drive has vanished along with it.
Municipal elections usually spark practical discussions. Roads. Taxes. Policing. Housing. Potholes. Development approvals. All these issues are important, and anyone looking to take a seat at City Hall should have sensible views on them.
But sometimes, a city must confront deeper questions than how well it will run itself for the next four years.
Thunder Bay might be in such a position now.
Nominations are closed for the municipal election on October 26, and in the coming weeks candidates will present their visions for governing this city. Before diving into platforms and promises, though, there’s a more basic question we should ask of them – and maybe ourselves.
Does Thunder Bay still believe in itself?
This might seem overly philosophical for local politics, but I don’t think it is.
Throughout most of the twentieth century, Thunder Bay’s role in the Canadian economy was quite clear. Fort William and Port Arthur thrived because of their location, and generations worked hard to create an industrial hub around that foundation. Grain moved east through elevators, railroads linked continents, forests supplied large pulp and paper mills, and railway equipment was produced here. The harbor wasn’t just scenic; it served as vital machinery.
This was a place that created products, transported goods, and employed thousands.
Then much of that reality faded away. The grain elevators became much more efficient yet only required a small number of employees compared to before. Mills shut down. Machinery stopped working. Corporate offices vanished. Railway jobs decreased dramatically. Young people moved south to Ontario or west to Canada’s other provinces. Each closure was seen as an isolated economic event but collectively they represented something larger: the breakdown of much of the economic framework upon which modern Thunder Bay had been established. The population reflects this story clearly: The Thunder Bay metropolitan area had 123,838 residents in 1991; thirty years later in the 2021 census it recorded just 123,258. For three decades while many urban centers across Canada saw significant growth, Thunder Bay basically stayed stagnant. And yet it didn’t collapse. That’s noteworthy. The city adjusted instead: Healthcare expanded its reach; Lakehead University and Confederation College grew significantly; government roles and educational services became increasingly integral parts of the economy. Thunder Bay established itself as an essential service hub for a vast region of Northwestern Ontario today where healthcare, retailing and education make up almost half of all jobs available locally. This story includes considerable achievements since many similar North American industrial towns faced severe challenges during comparable economic shifts without faring as well. However, survival brings its own risks too. A community can become so used to dealing with decline that it loses sight of what ambition truly means compared to mere resilience. I often ponder if that’s what’s happened here over time. For three decades now Thunder Bay has gotten skilled at absorbing bad news – another mill closing down here or layoffs there; another company restructuring followed by families leaving town; yet another grand announcement about potential Northern development always five or ten years away from actually happening! Eventually pessimism disguises itself as wisdom.
If you suggest something ambitious someone will point out why it’ll fail instead! If you bring up growth prospects someone else reminds you why past efforts didn’t succeed either! Start discussing building industries? The talk quickly shifts toward which government grant may back it! This isn’t irrational thinking-these lessons came from experience after all-but caution when turned institutional can turn perilous too! A critical difference exists between asking what can we get? versus asking what can we build? I’m not sure Thunder Bay frequently asks enough about building towards future possibilities anymore.. (p)Ironically enough though-there seems stronger economic reasons backing confidence within Thunder Bay lately than perhaps civic morale itself does right now.
(content continues)</
Source link
Then much of that reality faded away. The grain elevators became much more efficient yet only required a small number of employees compared to before. Mills shut down. Machinery stopped working. Corporate offices vanished. Railway jobs decreased dramatically. Young people moved south to Ontario or west to Canada’s other provinces. Each closure was seen as an isolated economic event but collectively they represented something larger: the breakdown of much of the economic framework upon which modern Thunder Bay had been established. The population reflects this story clearly: The Thunder Bay metropolitan area had 123,838 residents in 1991; thirty years later in the 2021 census it recorded just 123,258. For three decades while many urban centers across Canada saw significant growth, Thunder Bay basically stayed stagnant. And yet it didn’t collapse. That’s noteworthy. The city adjusted instead: Healthcare expanded its reach; Lakehead University and Confederation College grew significantly; government roles and educational services became increasingly integral parts of the economy. Thunder Bay established itself as an essential service hub for a vast region of Northwestern Ontario today where healthcare, retailing and education make up almost half of all jobs available locally. This story includes considerable achievements since many similar North American industrial towns faced severe challenges during comparable economic shifts without faring as well. However, survival brings its own risks too. A community can become so used to dealing with decline that it loses sight of what ambition truly means compared to mere resilience. I often ponder if that’s what’s happened here over time. For three decades now Thunder Bay has gotten skilled at absorbing bad news – another mill closing down here or layoffs there; another company restructuring followed by families leaving town; yet another grand announcement about potential Northern development always five or ten years away from actually happening! Eventually pessimism disguises itself as wisdom.
If you suggest something ambitious someone will point out why it’ll fail instead! If you bring up growth prospects someone else reminds you why past efforts didn’t succeed either! Start discussing building industries? The talk quickly shifts toward which government grant may back it! This isn’t irrational thinking-these lessons came from experience after all-but caution when turned institutional can turn perilous too! A critical difference exists between asking what can we get? versus asking what can we build? I’m not sure Thunder Bay frequently asks enough about building towards future possibilities anymore.. (p)Ironically enough though-there seems stronger economic reasons backing confidence within Thunder Bay lately than perhaps civic morale itself does right now.
(content continues)</
Source link
