The Coldstreamer:
The Community Charter provides a wide array of issues that could be discussed in-camera. Councillors who do not want to have their opinions revealed to the public on controversial issues prefer in-camera sessions where their opinion can remain private.
That said, there is no reason to keep the result of the voting secret. There is no damage to the public by revealing how an individual member voted. Regardless, Councils like to keep the electorate guessing especially on issues that are controversial and their vote might reduce their chances of re-election.
There is a legal option to force the hands of reluctant Councillors.
A member of Council who voted in the negative can make a motion in an open meeting to release the voting results of an in-camera decision. This motion will require action by the rest of Council.
If the motion is NOT seconded, then chances are that the council members in attendance all voted in support of the in-camera issue. If there is a seconder then one can safely assume that those voting against the release of the voting results have voted in favour of the issue and those supporting the release were voting in the negative. Thus, the voting results become public indirectly.
This is all legal! If Councillor Firman follows through with his promise to bring forth the issue he will be forcing Council to reveal their secret one way or another.
----------------------
Don Quixote Note: It is nice to see that our 'country living at its best' neighbours have discovered a Machiavellian method of ascertaining what went on during a DARKSIDE meeting. Unfortunately they will have to wait until the next regularly scheduled Council Meeting in September to test this theory.
No comments:
Post a Comment