Thumb-Sucking Councillors Get Petty On Lansdowne

I heard this from a very well-informed wag on the Lansdowne issue and I trust this is true.

A number of councillors are voting yes on Lansdowne because they don’t like Capital Councillor Shawn Menard, who has been critical of the Lansdowne 2.0 project.

That’s very concerning.

Has council become so petty that a few members are deciding on $419 million based on insignificant personal likes and dislikes? This is not public school. The Lansdowne issue is very important for the community whether the vote goes yes or no.

You can tell which councillors are voting on the basis of disliking Menard because during slow parts of council meetings, they can be seen sucking their thumbs.

So base your vote on what you believe the community wants and what is best for the city. Do the hard work required to make an intelligent vote.


And grow up.

Ken Gray

 —

RECOMMENDED FOR YOU

Council Doesn’t Represent OSEG, The Mayor, City Staff: THE VOTER

Show Taxpayers The Money From Lansdowne

OSEG Plays Ottawa Councillors For Fools

Lansdowne 2.0 Has Serious Heritage Impacts: REPORT

 

 

 

Don’t miss our regular features
Everything Ottawa      Full Local     Bulldog Canadian
Opinion    Comments    Breaking News    Auto
Ontario   World    Get Cheap Gas   Big Money
Pop Gossip   Your Home    Relax …   Tech
Bulldog Weather    Full Local Sports
TV/Movies   Travel
Page 2   Page 3   Page 4   Page 5   Page 6

 

Other features:    Full Bulldog Index    Return to Bulldog Home

6 Responses

  1. Bruce says:

    Simplify the vote councilors. Is Landsdowne 2 GOOD for the city? Is it GOOD for the residents as a whole? Can Ottawa AFFORD the cost? Will OTTAWA benefit from the investment? Financially and culturally?
    If any answers are no then you MUST vote NO, otherwise you are not a true rep of your ward!

  2. The Voter says:

    They’re upset why? Because Menard can clearly be seen to do the work to understand the files that come across his desk? Because that shows some of them up as slackers ready to be led by others to vote in a certain way? Because his dogged work is allowing him to show Lansdowne and other issues before council in an unfavourable light?

    Regardless of the cause, this kind of retaliation is childish and has no place in Council deliberations. So take your hurt feelings or whatever it is and get back to the job you were elected to do.

    It’s pretty clear that Sutcliffe read the room and knew 2.0 might not make it out of Committee intact and so unilaterally pushed any potentially harmful discussion, debate and motions to the Council meeting where he must believe he has the votes to push it through. If Committee were “too tired” to proceed, he could have taken a break and gotten back to work either later on Friday or Monday to get the job done so that was certainly not his motive in deferring the item to Council with no vote.

  3. Ken Gray says:

    The Voter:

    If you think you will win a vote, you vote. If you’re not sure, you delay.

    Were I a betting man, I’d say these guys have some sort of deal so they moved the meeting up because they are taking a beating from an active public that doesn’t like Lansdowne … at least the vocal ones don’t.

    cheers

    kgray

  4. Luke Chadwick says:

    It doesn’t surprise me. Councillor Menard is a fairly marmite character. You either love him or hate him. I could see that some Councillors would vote in favour of Lansdowne 2 just to spite the local Councillor

  5. Kosmo says:

    @Luke Chadwick, I have also heard he could get into a heated argument/debate even if he was the only one in the room.

  6. Bruce says:

    Pettiness has NO PLACE at the council table.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

Paid Content

Home   Full Bulldog Index