2
The honeymoon is over...
07 June 2011
It seems Council's honeymoon ended last night with the defeat of Councillor Hull's motion. Four members of council* opposed what should have been an easy motion to accept. But - because we had only eight members at the table - it was defeated by being tied. And I think the defeat will have much greater implications for council in the future.
It was, as I see it, a double blow against the unity of council and against the community at large.
First, the motion was to ask the province to give the town the authority to declare some downtown areas on municipal property non-smoking. It really put the onus on the province to make a decision, and didn't require the town to actually do anything right now. In fact, with the province gearing up for a fall election - and the real chance of another party getting elected into government - any response from the province could have taken years. In the meantime, everyone at the table could have shone as defenders of the greater public good and supporters of council unity.
It would have been politically astute to support it, and to retain the public's belief that council was collectively moving forward for our greater good. Six months after we took office, the cracks in that unity have shown.
Collingwood has been a leader in making intelligent, health- and lifestyle-positive legislation in the past. Previous councils passed anti-smoking, anti-pesticide and anti-idling bylaws which have been landmarks in our commitments to a healthy community. Our reputation slipped several notches in that area, last night. For the majority of the population - more than 80% of Canadians don't smoke - it was a telling blow.
I was baffled that only Councillor Edwards defended his decision. The other three were mute. Surely as a courtesy to their fellow councillor they might have at least explained their opposition so that it might be discussed.
For me, the message we could have sent out last night was that we care about the public's health and wellbeing and want to make our downtown a better place. Instead, we sent a message that smoking - with its diseases and addiction, its litter and odours - is more important than the greater good. That strikes me as a sad statement about this town.
~~~~~
* Councillors Edwards, West, Cunningham and Gardhouse voted against the motion. Although I'm not privy to the details of everyone's private life, I was informed that all four are also smokers. That will, I believe, be noted by the public as this decision continues to have fallout.
It was, as I see it, a double blow against the unity of council and against the community at large.
First, the motion was to ask the province to give the town the authority to declare some downtown areas on municipal property non-smoking. It really put the onus on the province to make a decision, and didn't require the town to actually do anything right now. In fact, with the province gearing up for a fall election - and the real chance of another party getting elected into government - any response from the province could have taken years. In the meantime, everyone at the table could have shone as defenders of the greater public good and supporters of council unity.
It would have been politically astute to support it, and to retain the public's belief that council was collectively moving forward for our greater good. Six months after we took office, the cracks in that unity have shown.
Collingwood has been a leader in making intelligent, health- and lifestyle-positive legislation in the past. Previous councils passed anti-smoking, anti-pesticide and anti-idling bylaws which have been landmarks in our commitments to a healthy community. Our reputation slipped several notches in that area, last night. For the majority of the population - more than 80% of Canadians don't smoke - it was a telling blow.
I was baffled that only Councillor Edwards defended his decision. The other three were mute. Surely as a courtesy to their fellow councillor they might have at least explained their opposition so that it might be discussed.
For me, the message we could have sent out last night was that we care about the public's health and wellbeing and want to make our downtown a better place. Instead, we sent a message that smoking - with its diseases and addiction, its litter and odours - is more important than the greater good. That strikes me as a sad statement about this town.
~~~~~
* Councillors Edwards, West, Cunningham and Gardhouse voted against the motion. Although I'm not privy to the details of everyone's private life, I was informed that all four are also smokers. That will, I believe, be noted by the public as this decision continues to have fallout.
