"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Sunday 13 December 2009

A Couple of Precedents

Every now and then, I have to tidy up the mountain of paper. I have to scan it to make sure I didn't miss anything and decide what to chuck and what to file.

It sounds like organisation, right.

Not right.

My daughters bought me a two drawer file cabinet for my birthday. All I need to do now is set up a system.

I spent about four hours yesterday reading stuff. I found something to share. I got it from research when Tim Jones bet it would be easier to get me to apologise than to get Damir Vrancic to back down.

I'm quoting now.

Several judges have eloquently described the basis of the application of this defence to municipal councillors.

Riddell, J.A. in Ward v. McBride (1911), 24 O.L.R. 555 at 568(C.A.) speaking with reference to the office of aldermen:

"Aldermen are legislators in as true and in mane instances as important a sense as members of Parliament or of the Legislature-it is their right and their duty to speak their mind fully and clearly without evasion or equivocation - they should show no fear, favour or affection; and it is their duty,as well as their right,to use all legitimate means,oratorical or otherwise to impress their fellow- legislators with the righteousness of their views-they have no need to be mealy-mouthed and should call a spade a spade"

Lord Diplock in Horrocks v Lowe (1974) 1 All E.R.662 at p.671 uttered similar sentiments:

My Lords, what is said by members of a local council at meetings of council or of any occasion, The reason for the privilege is that those who represent the local government electors should be able to speak freely and frankly, boldly and bluntly, on any matter which they believe affects the interest or welfare of the inhabitants. They may be swayed by strong political prejudice. they may be obstinate and pig-headed, stupid and obtuse, but they were chosen by the electors to speak their minds on matters of local concern and as long as they do so honestly they run no risk of liability for defamation of those who are the subject of their criticism."

Don't you just love the way those judges talk.

Some people carry a Bible for comfort . I keep that page handy at all times. I think I will have it plasticised. I used some of that stuff in my last campaign literature and on my web site.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Brim over I assent to but I contemplate the collection should acquire more info then it has.