Editorial — Poor choice of words caused council tiff
THURSDAY MORNING EDITORIAL — The unfortunate disagreement in Kamloops City council chambers over the issue of a new public comment period on the Ajax environmental permit application illustrates the importance of how we use language.
(Armchair Mayor News file photo – screen grab)
Coun. Donovan Cavers, reacting to a letter from a senior civil servant with the B.C. Environment Ministry, remarked that the individual was as “incompetent” as the whole department.
Mayor Peter Milobar objected to what he called “character assassination.”
If we isolate these two references, we can see how the whole thing could have been avoided. To do that, we have to set aside any opinions for or against the Ajax project so as to remove the influence of emotion on our thinking.
The word “incompetent” means “lack of skills.” The civil servant, Scott Bailey of the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office, expressed the opinion that he doesn’t see a need for another public comment period but said his staff will monitor input and make a decision in due course.
Bailey makes his judgment based on the somewhat narrow parameters within which he and his office work — public comment periods at this stage of the process deal with the factors that KGHM must cover off in its application. In Bailey’s opinion, the rather dramatic changes in KGHM’s site plan for the mine don’t impact that.
This is not a matter of competence but, rather, a matter of interpreting guidelines. One can feel free to disagree with that interpretation, or believe that more creative thinking would be desirable, but it’s not a matter of possessing skills.
As for “character assassination,” this wasn’t about anyone’s character. That word refers to a person’s moral and mental qualities. Those qualities are quite distinct from “competence.” They describe two very different attributes.
Thus, the argument that so divided council for a few minutes was unnecessary and misdirected. With the correct employment of words by all parties, it would never have happened.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
I watched the segment in question on the city hall webcast. I think that both Arjun Singh and Peter Milobar over-reacted to Councillor Caver’s comments. I disagree with what Cavers said, but, it did not appear to be malicious.
It looked to me like the Mayor and Mr Singh used the situation as an opportunity to undermine and embarrass Mr Cavers. I wonder if they have some personal issues that they need to work on. The only character assassination that took place was directed at Mr Cavers.
LikeLike
The Mayor still has a little of my respect. Singh has got none. Cavers 100%.
LikeLike
I don’t disagree with criticizing the EAO. Certainly the process we are witnessing is not robust, transparent and inclusive as promised. It is just that they are actually following the rules of the government and the poor process – so the civil servant is not incompetent. In fact, he is very competent. The problems appear to be with the assessment rules and process and with the Environment Ministry.
LikeLike
However, Councillor Cavers is still young and relatively new at the political game. The political game being the skill of mastering the use of language by which many words are used but with no tangible outcome. He is excused.
On the other hand we have a multi-seasons veteran, our Mayor, from which we expect better much better and not only in the use of the language. He is not excused.
LikeLike
The elections are coming up, something that all of us should remember.
LikeLike