During the term of Juhana Vartainen, the mayorship of Helsinki has remained quite invisible. Urban democracy seems to suffer from a leadership deficit.
Mayor Juhana Vartiainen The (kok) season is more than halfway through in Helsinki. As the election season turns to the second half of Helsinki, it is worth starting a discussion about what a good job as a mayor means. The mayorship has remained quite invisible during Vartiainen's term.
Urban democracy seems to suffer from a leadership deficit. Active participation of residents and an open public exchange of ideas about the future are now missing from the management of the townspeople. When there is no such leadership from the front, the citizens end up arguing with each other about what a good Helsinki would be like.
Espoo and Vantaa seem to have located their own priorities at the same time. Espoo wants to be the choice of families and educated immigrants, Vantaa is a city that offers affordable housing and does all kinds of work. Of course, both cities also have their difficulties – which are not eased by the state share model that favors the provinces – but they are both known to them.
Helsinki, on the other hand, doesn't really know what to do at the moment. Or Helsinki wants to be absolutely everything, which is impossible. At least the mayor does not openly discuss his visions with the townspeople.
From the point of view of local democracy, this is unfortunate. Living in Helsinki is a very active choice for many. Living is expensive and everyday life is sometimes difficult. The future of your own city is not a small matter.
Mayor Vartiainen has wanted to be profiled above all as a background figure and a quiet coordinator of various political interests. In Vartiainen's Helsinki, matters are preferably dealt with behind the scenes and disputes are not discussed publicly. It certainly seems natural for a mayor who is a researcher by background and not a professional politician or change leader.
However, this type of management gives disproportionate power to the city's various administrative branches and to the deputy mayors of various branches – and above all to Helsinki's civil service apparatus. For Vartiainen, public debate seems to be more of a troll than a way to quickly reach and discuss residents who think differently. In this leadership model, the townspeople become unnecessarily passive and, at worst, targets of a power game. It does not develop local democracy.
Of course, Helsinki is not easy for a coalition mayor to lead. When united, the red-green bloc, i.e. the greens, the Left Alliance and the Sdp are a force that simply cannot be ignored. Mediation is therefore needed, as well as patient work behind the scenes.
The city of Helsinki with its employees and departments is also a force in itself, a machine that employs tens of thousands. The practices of many agencies formed over a long period of time are rigid. Helsinki represents, for better or for worse, a tradition in which the continuity of structures is a value, even when the city management changes. This kind of thinking should not be scrapped, but administrative structures must change along with the rest of society. That too requires active management.
In the field of politics there is a place for slow background work and mediation, but you can't lead city dwellers just like that. When city dwellers are not spoken to or led from the front, different ways of thinking eventually erupt in the most banal ways. One wants to walk on the track and the other wants to ski in peace. One wants to drive to the store, the other prevents driving completely.
Helsinki's strengths are openness and a liberal spirit. The people of Helsinki tolerate and accept the most diverse ways of being and living, if they themselves feel that their own way of being is also accepted, things are developed and problems are tackled.
“
Helsinki doesn't really know what to do at the moment.
A lot of sense of community, pride in one's city and ambition for the future could be obtained from the people of Helsinki. It can't be
done behind the scenes, but by leading people – directly and without ignoring the difficult issues.
There must be more to local democracy and discussion in Helsinki than elections once every four years. That is why you can also hope for a view from Vartiainen himself on how he wants to lead the city for the rest of his term as mayor.
The author is the editor-in-chief of Helsingin Sanomat.
#Column #mayor #Helsinki #lead #open #discussion
