Given the connection between freedom of expression and the Internet, the Supreme Court has signaled that it will look with great skepticism at laws that could have a chilling effect on the ability for Canadians to fully participate online.
*************
Clause 3. Communications and Media Relations.
Members of Council will accurately and adequately communicate the attitudes and decisions of Council even if they disagree with the majority decision of Council.
Members shall allow respect for the decision making process of Council
Official information related to decisions and resolutions made by Council will normally be communicated to the community and the media by council in an official capacity by the Mayor or designated staff member or through a press release issued by the Corporation.
Information concerning adopted policies,procedures and decisions of Council shall be conveyed openly and accurately.
Confidential information will be communicated only when and after determined by Council.
Communications with the media and Members of Council shall be conducted through proper interviews or media releases. Members shall refrain from writing letters to the editor or writing a regular column in the newspaper or hosting or co-hosting a regular televised program .
*****************
The above is copied, once more, from the Town of Aurora Code of Conduct. Wonder what the Supreme Court might say about that?
A municipality cant pass bylaws contravening the law of the land.
The Town of Aurora Code of Conduct ,according to the former Mayor, was written by an "expert" in municipal law and recommended by staff
Several lawyers were asked and advised on requirement of a councillor signing two copies of the Code on pain of esoteric catastrophic effect of scrutiny of public opinion.
All of this crap, the word it is apt, was provided as legal advice.The perfect cover for political posteriors.
Do we yet understand the importance of electing people capable of exercising and articulating independent judgment ?
Do current council members understand the significance of examining advice, from the critical perspective of legislators, to fulfill the purpose of being elected?
I hope so.
This council is almost a year into the term. Time for learning is past. A second budget looms.
My challenges are repeatedly followed by Councillor Nice Guy providing 100% assurance of confidence in staff , or Councillor Not-So-Nice introducing weasel words like "smearing" into the debate , or continuous interruptions with illusory points of order from resident dingbat and final insult, a gag order of a ten minute time limit for elected representatives to present reasoned arguments, capable of persuasion, to other elected representatives, on behalf of the people who pay the freight.
Time is not running out but the glow has diminished by 25%. Full first of four semesters.
Is it too soon for another report card ?
ReplyDeleteI think Morris' legal team have learned a lesson;
ReplyDeletewhy can't the rest of the dwindling group admit they
miscalculated ? Everyone is wrong except for us ?
I don't think so.
Indeed the latter, expecting councilors not to engage in dialogue with the public, would and should be disdained.
ReplyDeleteThe former, having to adequately communicate the decisions of council, is part of the job of being a member of council. There is nothing here preventing you from expressing your disagreement with the decision, but you demonstrate significant disrespect for the institution if you are unable to at least explain earnestly why council came to the decision it did.
Stay the course , eventually the dimness of incompetence will cloud out the tiny flicker of MorMac light they so desperately cling to.
ReplyDeleteThe entire group are going to have to testify in the
ReplyDeletecase about breaking the Municipal Act, and the town
will not have to pay their lawyers.