It's Just Not On

It used to be said that I am  a stickler  about roles of order in debate.

I've always thought  of them  as a commitment Councillors make to each other at the start of the term.

There's no point in anyone observing rules if everyone doesn't.

Civility is an essential aspect of public discourse.

It's the reason personal criticism is not permitted.

Last night Councillor Gaertner was successful in having two motions seconded .The questions  were therefore properly before  Council for debate.

One after the other Councillors,including the Mayor took shots at the Councillor for bringing the questions before Council.

I did not support either and inaccuracies in the whereases which are now part of the official record.

But Councillor Gaertner has the same authority as any Member to bring forward a seconded motion and have it debated and disposed of  according to the rules.Without being  lambasted from every side including the Mayor .

If the Councillor doesn't have the  authority, no-one does.

Councillor Thompson was recognized to speak a second time last night on Councilor Gaertner's
motion  requesting a detailed staff report on spending on the Sesquicentennial Celebration.

He repeated critical remarks. He was not called to order by the chair. I called a point of order.

The question on the table was not motive for tabling the question.Purpose might have been challenged  but that's not what happened.

No matter the day or age rules for civil discourse do not change.

Repeating a point for emphasis in a debate  is  always in order.

Personal criticism  is never  in order.

Doing it twice  is doubly unruly.