Keeping behind the scenes, behind the scenes
By Joel Wittnebel/The Oshawa Express
If you blinked, you may have missed it.
It was a short item slapped into the corporate services’s agenda on Jan. 18, and if it hadn’t drawn a short discussion, it’s possible residents could have glazed over the notice of motion all together.
This item is important though, and not just because it got some discussion, but it’s important because it failed and what that means for this council.
Now, the title could probably put an insomniac to sleep, and it’s a safe assumption to make that any time the words “change to council procedural bylaw” appear in the same sentence, many brains switch off, or flip the channel to something more interesting.
When looking at this proposed change though, you need to know that this has some big impacts for you as a resident.
Initially brought forward by Councillor Amy McQuaid-England, if approved, the change would allow for councillors to ask questions of commissioners following the approval of the consent agenda. Simply put, it would allow councillors to raise particular topics (perhaps not on the agenda) with a commissioner after the night’s business has mostly been dealt with. Seems simple right?
Well, some councillors don’t seem to think so.
“There’s no reason to do this at council,” said Councillor Nancy Diamond, claiming all the information can be gained by councillors prior to the meeting, and that by allowing councillors to ask questions of commissioners on any topic isn’t a “reasonable expectation.”
Yet, councillors do just that behind the scenes.
It’s understood that part of their job is gathering information from staff in order to make educated decisions on the items that come across their desk in the council chambers. Perhaps they learn something interesting in those discussions behind the scenes – nothing controversial or earth-shattering, just something they think perhaps the public should know. Being able to repeat that question to a commissioner at a later meeting would be a perfect medium to get that information out to the public simply and without the rigamarole of getting the item approved on an agenda.
During discussions on the item, McQuaid-England stated there was a “disconnect” between what happens behind the scenes and what happens in the council chambers. She’s exactly right.
All those discussions between council and staff are in the background. It’s unreasonable to assume complete, unabashed transparency when a councillor gathers information. If you really want to know how they’re gathering it, you’re always able to ask for their emails through a Freedom of Information request.
Like McQuaid England and Councillor John Neal who supported the motion, other councillors should have realized that this was an opportunity to provide another layer of openness to their procedures. Instead, it was shot down by Diamond, Rick Kerr and Mayor John Henry.
Diamond also said during the meeting that she had never been refused information from a commissioner.
Well, by not moving forward with this simple motion, that’s exactly what you’ve done to the public.