FEATURED COMMENT – Sounds like councillors are being told to toe the line

Re: SINGH – So the mayor and the premier walk into a bar…

“Once a decision is made, we have a collective responsibility to back the will of council. Our responsibility is not to represent our individual interests or political differences. It is to make decisions in the best interest of the city.”

Although on the surface, this sounds on behalf of voters who may have voted differently, and a rousing Kumbaya for group synergy … but I also hear it in a different way.

Is it not also a message to Councillors to toe the party line and talk the talk, once a decision is made in council?

Let’s say I was elected because my platform was strongly against the inappropriate use of AAP’s for a nice to have – but a very expensive set of hockey rinks, and I vote against to stand solidly behind protecting taxpayers and controlling property tax increases … via referendum.

The sentence: ” … we have a collective responsibility to back the will of council (and) not to represent our individual interests …” suggests that if the decision is made by vote for our hockey rinks … I’m gagged, or at the very least pressured, from publicly commenting against the decision?

In other words, don’t follow through continuing to speak for the voters, that put me there, with the job to speak for them.

My limited forays into reading Council minutes over the years have implanted in me the idea that Mayor O’Reilly isn’t a fan of others when they vote apposed to how he does, and also doesn’t care for any continued public conversation surrounding decisions … that happen either in or out of Council chambers.

The reason to remain vigilant in opposition, is not to be difficult and noisy, it’s for the next time the same kind of vote comes up.

Accountability.

Ya, not sure about the double meaning of that statement.

DAVID