Article content continued

Likewise, one day very soon, we will puzzle over the fuss in 2016 about whether or not to allow people to use a smartphone app to engage a car and driver. We’ll have to spell out the supposed pros and cons for future generations, particularly since, in as little as a decade from now, cars will stop having drivers altogether. What purpose will a taxi bylaw serve when you will have your own car come and collect you from the office or the airport?

The city chose to allow new transportation services, but the process wasn’t without its hyperbole and hiccups. Some questions from city councillors suggested a misunderstanding of the role of government or the power and inevitability of technological change. But it’s certainly reassuring that council chose to accept reality rather than continue to enforce an outmoded and unnecessary monopoly.

It’s a challenge elected officials will face regularly in the near future. Much of the change will fall outside the jurisdiction of government, but as longstanding service-delivery models are revolutionized by technology, political leaders will be forced to confront big questions. What rules will govern the driverless car? Will we allow drones to deliver packages? What practical and ethical considerations will arise from an increase in robotics and genomics?

The very role of government will be rethought and redefined. It may not be as easy to tax, monitor or regulate the companies of the future. Will government innovate and find new ways to protect consumers that align with the new economy? In some cases, will it let the new mechanisms of the modern marketplace supplant the traditional role of the regulator?