Ottawa City Hall Weaponizes Secrecy: BENN
Secrecy. A word that is the very antithesis of a transparent, open and accountable government.
There’s much speculation that a city council meeting is scheduled for later this month that will have an in camera session to hear a report on Lansdowne 2.0. A meeting with councillors but not their office staff. A meeting where no written materials will be distributed. No mobile devices will be permitted. Maybe this is true, maybe it isn’t. When it ran in The Bulldog, no city-hall type denied it. But it does raise the question of why.
Get Some Ethics City Council: BENN
Sometimes in camera sessions are necessary to hear the details of a legal case involving the municipality. Think of the LRT lawsuits regarding the Rideau Street sinkhole. If the strategy were to become known to the plaintiffs, it could be devastating to the defendant’s case. Or to hear matters involving an employee. Statutory constraints regarding privacy must be obeyed.
Then there is the City of Ottawa where the default clause in many contracts involves confidentiality. Can’t answer that question says staff, citing contractual confidentiality. Can’t respond to that probing inquiry. Contractual confidentiality don’t you know. Confidentiality due to competitive reasons? Perhaps. Except that the refusal to respond to legitimate questions posed by council is contrary to their statutory role of oversight.
Let’s not forget the contempt that former mayor Jim Watson plus senior staffers John Manconi and Steve Kanellakos showed council when they willfully withheld critical information from council. Egregious malfeasance said the provincial inquiry.
How about the refusal to acknowledge, under questioning from then councillors Diane Deans and Rick Chiarelli regarding the since-acknowledged failure of the SNC-Lavalin led consortium to meet the technical standard on the Trillium Line extension twice. Keep in mind that then Somerset councillor Catharine McKenney stated that she would not have voted to approve the award of that contract had she known prior to voting what she found out after. Put aside her inattentiveness during the session where Deans and Chiarelli were asking probing questions. How many other councillors would have voted against it, had they known about the failure to meet the requirements?
Consider then Watson’s Christmas Miracle announcement of finding $10 million to fill a hole in an otherwise not-balanced budget. That was the $10-million solution that he boasted about withholding from about half of council until the last minute.
See a common theme here? Secrecy is a weapon to use to avoid answering questions. To confound the very concept of oversight. It is a close cousin to the release under the door in a brown envelope information that should be kept under wraps, the objective of which is to undermine your political opponents. Back to secrecy. It is a weapon that is used to neutralize those who oppose an agenda. What kind of agenda you ask? A hidden agenda.
Traffic Mishaps: Rules Painfully Politically Correct
Which takes me back to the problem at hand. Those who believe in transparent, open and accountable government should not participate in secrecy for political reasons. When faced with the use of secrecy as a weapon, they should be heard. State clearly and unequivocally that they will not participate in an opaque, closed and unaccountable farce that is posing as a democratically elected government.
Of course, that would require a change in culture. A faulty culture that is endemic on Laurier Avenue.
Ron Benn, a finance executive, has been a member of the Centrepointe Community Association for the better part of three decades.
—
Don’t miss our regular features
Everything Ottawa Full Local Bulldog Canadian
Opinion Comments Breaking News
Ontario World Get Cheap Gas Big Money
Pop Gossip Your Home Relax …
Bulldog Weather Full Local Sports
Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
– The Bulldog – News Feed Enter 
I have to wonder if one of the criteria for bonuses being paid to people in management positions at City Hall is how obscure you can be about what you’re doing and how far from “open, transparent and accountable” you can stay. Perhaps it even forms part of their regular performance appraisals, not just for upper level staff but for junior staff as well. After all, you want to train them in the way they’re meant to go on.
Council members need to start taking control and demanding the information they require and are entitled to. It’s a bit difficult to exercise oversight of something you can’t see. Again, I would remind them that staff works for them, not the other way around. In addition, councillors, like the directors of any corporation, are legally liable for the decisions they take. If you don’t have the information, send the file back without a vote until you do know what you need to know.
Thank you for putting to words my unorganized thoughts about In Camera meetings and “non-Disclosure agreements” (NDA). The provincial legislation is clear when In camera can be used, and various boards do not follow the regulatory requirements. As well the NDA is a weapon against transparent and accountable governance. It is often used as a tool to absolve the accountable council from transparency and accountability as you state. I am hoping for the NDA concept to be challenged in the supreme court as its rise since the 1960’s seems to be in about the same time frame that small record-able devices were developed, and it seems to be getting out of control. To me the NDA (and in camera meetings) have a small valid place in society, but not to the extent it is today, especially when $500 million dollars (tax dollars) is on the table with Lansdowne.
Regarding NDAs, after reading the integrity commissioner’s report into the Jan Harder/Jack Stirling & daughter conflict of interest investigation, I’ve always wondered if Jack Stirling’s daughter wasn’t the only city employee who might not have signed an NDA.
If the former mayor and 2 allies had been charged with even the slightest offences , the culture of secrecy would have been exposed.
Robert:
The culture of secrecy was exposed in its glory at the provincial inquiry.
cheers
kgray
Robert, as Ken says, the culture of secrecy was exposed by the LRT Commissioner. The problem was that no one on council had the courage to condemn the well documented bad behaviour of Watson, Kanellakos and Manconi.
Professional courtesy? There but for the grace of God go I, perhaps? Who knows? What is clear is that they lacked the will power to step on what was under that large rock. And that speaks volumes about the people who populated council chambers during the last term, keeping mind that about half of the current council are reprising their roles.