The issue was an item on the agenda of a closed door meeting. I declared it had been contrived to allow continued harassment of Aurora Cable over their plan to erect a couple of wind turbines. An emergency meeting was subsequently called to deal with the problem of a councillor not observing the secrecy of in-camera discussion... The Director of Corporate Services reported rules of order for debate applied also to conduct of councillors in general.. That didn't hold water. The Town Solicitor said issues of liability belong behind closed doors. They do. But there was no issue of liability.
It is not beyond the realm of possibility that staff will report as directed by particular political masters. Politics is an art not a science. Whoever appears to have the clout. ,,, has the clout.. For municipal staff, it is a practical reality. People do what they must to protect their jobs so long as they are not breaking any laws. .
But I suspect the outrage that triggered the original "emergency" meeting was about something else I said.
The spokesman for opposition to Aurora Cable plans, had repeatedly and publicly disputed professional advice to council from statutory officers of the corporation. He was subsequently appointed to the Committee of Adjustment, a quasi-judicial body which must make decisions based on hard evidence. . The committee must give weight to comments from Statutary Officers of the Corporation.
The appointment was not supported by four members of council. Notwithstanding, the Mayor notified all , she would inform the appointee of her 100% support. To keep the record straight,I took it upon myself , to inform him he did not have unanimous support . I respectfully provided my reasons. My e-mail was deemed by some to be insulting and outrageous .They were also frustrated to be told by the town solicitor I had contravened no law
.
That's when a Code of Conduct was proposed.We wold pass our own law to control recalcitrant councillors. The Director of Corporate Services was directed to prepare a report. Eventually it was submitted but not accepted. Council determined after all, it was not appropriate for staff to recommend Conduct for Councillors. A Citizens' Advisory Committeeshould be appointed for the purpose.
So the Code is not yet in place. It is still just a report. But it has some interesting ideas. For example; a member of council should not host or co-host a television show. Nor write a newspaper column. Or Letters to the Editor. It suggests there should only be one spokesperson for council .. Councillors should not make comments to the press.Or harrass staff.
Though there is authority in the Municipal Act to adopt a Code of Conduct,there is no requirement
to do so. Evidence from elsewhere suggests such a code is likely to morph into a complaint forum for councillors to score political points against each other. Toronto . has it's own Act and Integrity Commissioner. He lnvestigates complaints, makes recommendations to Council and they decide whether to follow his advice.. They often don't. They have no method of enforcement.The Commissioner is paid $104,000 a year. Not bad for casual employment. He has an administrative assistant who probably does all the legwork and certainly will be paid accordingly.
Toronto's Code came as the result of The Bellamy Inquiry into a computer boondogle of millions of
dollars in budget over-run that involved a staff person , at least one councillor the brother of a hockey player. and sex.The inquiry went on for months It cost more than 13 million dollars.
Aurora recently retained the services of George Rust D'Eye ,a solicitor .We do not have a Code of Conduct... No complaint was documented . No terms of reference were established. No section of the Municipal or any other Act was cited to provide authority to conduct an investigation..No purpose was ever stated. No advice was sought from the town solicitor.As yet. no report has been made public though the matter is concluded.The cost of the exercise is not yet known.
.It appears an "investigator" has the authority of Advisor, Judge, Jury, Prosecuting Attorney . All of it in secret.
Penalties suggested for non-adherence to the non-existent Code of Conduct are suspension of remuneration for ninety days , being billed the expense of the investigation. And to ensure future secrecy ,Council could create an executive committee or an" inner circle" .
.
Any councillor inclined to be forthright has to be prepared to run the gauntlet of disapproval, even personal dislike..It is not considered to be conventional political wisdom. Generally speaking, that's mostly about covering one's posterior.
Being targeted as the subject of a secret investigation with the possibility of being punished like a felon has elements of an Inquisition with touches of comedic farce.. It is not, I submit , a price anyone should expect to pay to participate in the democratic process.
Thursday, 17 January 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment