Comments on The Burd Report: Just what is going here?

While things are calmer, let me address Ben’s comm...

2010-07-24T11:43:27.875-04:00

While things are calmer, let me address Ben’s comments in his original post. Ben wrote “..the thrust of the rebuttal is simple - lay off the criticism of Council they are doing the best they can” and then concluded that to be “support” for council. I see things differently, which is unlikely to raise any eyebrows.

What lit my fuse was Rob’s level of alarm raised by words like “scary” and “repression”, “how long can our system survive”, “stomping on citizens”, “reckoning” and “subjugation”. While some of his points are valid and a cause for concern, they are not the indicators of impending chaos that he suggests them to be. I said “While he is right, to some degree… I am of the opinion that the ‘best politicians’ incorporate that input into their own positions … as much as possible” and “We would expect them to be making the best decision they can reach under the particular circumstances, wouldn’t we? Why then do we assume they’re doing so when we like their decisions and not doing so when we don’t?”

I don’t think these statements suggest that we should “lay off the criticism of Council, they are doing the best they can” nor that they specifically indicate support for this or any other council. They do suggest that councillors are not infallible and that we expect them to do the best they can. And here I repeat my question “what do we expect from our councillors?” Can we fairly criticize them for their performance if we don’t have a clear idea of what we expect of them?

It’s absolutely true that I have criticized council on numerous occasions about some of their positions and was never refused the opportunity nor intimidated (subjugated) by them, the key being “some”. My criticisms were sharp at times but they also presented facts and alternatives. To me, that’s “participatory democracy” as I see it. The fact that my “input” appeared to be falling on deaf ears at the time was not lost on me or others but that’s a behavioral matter. I also hold the view that my input may have been included in their private deliberations, judging by some of the things that came much later. To me that’s objectives realized, however it may have evolved. Pouring molasses also requires patience. I’m not satisfied with the status quo either but I don’t agree with Rob’s assessment of impending collapse of the system. That’s why I asked to be elected in 2006; I had some clear objectives in mind for making important changes to improve local governance. As it has turned out, the guy that won has failed to deliver on his “own” pledges and as a result, very little has changed, including the overall behaviour. The system, however, has functioned as intended and we’re here, ready to tackle the beast once again in a way that can actually result in improvements, something that can’t be accomplished with the mindset of the current powerbase.

"...elements of diversity..." Po...

2010-07-23T18:00:40.307-04:00

"...elements of diversity..."

Political jargon.

Bureaucrap.

Many racists use this to disguise their stereotyping that this or that grouping of people (skin colour, ethnicity, gender, etc. etc.) hold this or that particular political opinion. It is racist-think.

The ONLY diversity worth mentioning is diversity of ideas. Ideas come from individuals,

In this regard the true 'elements of diversity' is the Canadian electorate -- they and they alone contain every single strand of dna worthy to choose from the diversity of ideas presented into the public domain.

The divvying up of people into this or that grouping for political purposes, encourages discrimination. It is a pathology to be abandoned.

Rob wrote “And as a postscript, since we are answe...

2010-07-23T16:10:04.303-04:00

Rob wrote “And as a postscript, since we are answering questions left unanswered, could Mr. Schumann deal directly with the one originally posted by Mr. Burd: Are you running for council this fall?” I’m not convinced that Ben’s comment, “Manfred has not made a decision about filing nomination papers yet, or if he has he hasn't made them public.”, qualifies as a question looking for an answer. Nevertheless, that decision is not one that I will take lightly, nor address in an impromptu discussion such as the ones we have here.

Name-calling is not one of my tools so I’m not sure where that came from in Rob’s last remarks. However, I recall, with a wry smile, an instance when Rob used the term “gadfly” to describe my activities at council, something that surprised me but c’est la vie, to each his own.

You know, I’d love to see a number of responses here that describe what other viewers of this space take the term “elite politicians” to mean in the context of municipal politics, particularly here in Cobourg and Port Hope. If, as Rob says, that term is self-explanatory and holds virtually the same meaning for all of them, I am to be counted among the ignorant and will admit to it freely.

.. and lastly, for now anyway, I’ll come back to my first request which was “maybe Rob could define his understanding of a politician's purpose, at the municipal level..” and which still remains unanswered. We can talk about systems of government until we’re blue in the face but we can’t formulate an improvement in our local one until we are in some sort of common understanding of what we want to improve. Explaining what we think to be the problem specifically, and what we want to see in its place can only happen if we have a grasp of exactly what we want as opposed to only stating what we don’t want.

I see the term “participatory democracy” as too vague to be the basis for a major change in the fundamental workings of our municipal government. What we seem to have here now is what I would describe as “reactionary democracy”. There is plenty of negative reaction to seemingly unpopular decisions but little “participatory” activity by those critics at any other time, making the term “participatory democracy” rather benign, and maybe characterizing council's challenge as one of pursuit of best-guesses. I’ve also expressed my agreement with many of the comments about our local council’s behaviour, having witnessed it firsthand over an extended period. I do not agree that it spells the end of anything , as Rob expressed it in his column. I do think it calls for a well thought out review and probably overhaul, though. There is so much more to discuss but I’ll stop here, likely having lost the interest or curiosity of most by now.

"...old white guys..." I really ...

2010-07-23T11:44:59.899-04:00

"...old white guys..."

I really don't understand what skin colour has to do with anything. Such labelling of groups in such a manner does not advance any arguement.

"Participatory democracy ... represents the only way we can bring the elements of diversity into our discussions"

Code for racism.

Affirmative action - code for racism.

After reading the submissions of Mr. Washburn and ...

2010-07-22T22:02:21.885-04:00

After reading the submissions of Mr. Washburn and Mr. Schumann on this vital topic of local democracy, I find my position unchanged.

Participatory democracy is the only kind that counts for me. It represents the only way we can bring the elements of diversity into our discussions, then into solid action to make the community a pleasure for all of us to live in.

For too long decisions have been made behind closed doors by the same old white guys, and while I have nothing against them as individuals (my dad was one of the best old white guys around), they don't have a monopoly on wisdom and experience.

I fret that if we can't even let women in, how will we ever accommodate new citizens from other parts of the world, or young people, or disabled or low income people?

All of us must have the chance to participate in our community, a chance freely encouraged and offered rather than grudgingly extended in artifical venues that are designed to go nowhere.

Rob, my vote goes to you on this one.

Two masters of turgid prose slugging it out. Unfor...

2010-07-22T18:16:33.741-04:00

Two masters of turgid prose slugging it out. Unfortunately not as entertaining as we might have hoped.

Mr. Schumann needs to stop and read more carefully...

2010-07-22T16:51:40.999-04:00

Mr. Schumann needs to stop and read more carefully, as well. And, he should stop the insults. Of course, I know what is meant by elite politicians. I regret your ignorance of this basic political terminology, but do not project that upon me. Sadly, I fear this is some kind of rhetorical trick. Can we please not devolve this discussion into petty name calling and insults.

As for your overall point, if I have not addressed it, then I will try again.

You description of municipal politics is valid. However, I do not share your opinion that these committees and consultations are credible or valuable. These are the veneer of democracy, not a real one. I believe, as stated in letters and posts that these are political theatre. In other words, they are done to make it look like democracy is taking place, when it is not. Giving someone five or 10 minutes to speak on complex issues or to seek important answers or to provide input or suggestions is not realistic and does not represent good democracy. The number of times people are treated with disrespect both behind closed doors and in public is terrible. And, the lack of action as a means of follow up to these public consultations is abysmal.

Obviously, you favour a representative form of democracy. Fine. I support a participatory one. Good for me. And, the one I advocate is not one that includes what I perceive to be false forms of public involvement. There are many good models. I believe this is true based on political economic theory, which I have studied in depth at university. (I hope that is credible enough for you Mr. Schumann)

As for the term "elite politician", it is a reference to both class and power. While Canadians do not like to use class distinctions in its analysis of politics, I think it is relevant. There is an elite class in our town. As for power, there are those in Cobourg who exercise all the time.

I do believe journalism in the 21st century is meant to be a conversation. And, I hope we are engaging in a productive one.

Finally, I believe this to be a serious discussion. I believe you are a serious person. And, I am engaging you as such. Hopefully, this helps clarify my position.

I believe we fundamentally see things from a different perspective and I happily agree to disagree.

And as a postscript, since we are answering questions left unanswered, could Mr. Schumann deal directly with the one originally posted by Mr. Burd: Are you running for council this fall?

Mr Washburn needs to read the question more carefu...

2010-07-22T10:31:58.019-04:00

Mr Washburn needs to read the question more carefully before rambling off on some broader theory. My question "maybe Rob could define his understanding of a politician's purpose, at the municipal level", is still unanswered and I suspect will remain so. One gets the sense that he is more focused on the "system" as opposed to the specifics of what politicians are expected to do, whether by him or by others.

Input to this municipality's administration is provided through several methods which include Citizens' Advisory Committees, delegations at council and committees, personal contact with Councillors (the mayor has rarely responded to my communications) and correspondence sent to the corporation. That is a far cry from what Rob has intimated in his recent articles. While my own experience in this has been frustrating, I understand the limitations of reacting with affirmative action based solely on the 'request' of a single or small group of petitioners. Where I find the greatest deficiency is in the lack of direct and meaningful response (as opposed to action) from the Council, leaving no opportunity to develop the matter into an actionable one.

As for Rob's response about 'elite politician' it suggests that he himself has no idea of what that means, so he pretends to be indignant about even being asked. How can you establish credibility by using terms that are so ridiculously vague that even the writer doesn't know its meaning?

And then there is my charge of "alarmist" to which he says "I, like others, are just raising points that I think are valid. The language is strong, but nobody is freaking out, yet." Making a point and suggesting that the system is in a terminal phase with statements like "how long can our system survive under this kind of subjugation?" and "politicians and bureaucrats ramrod their agendas forward, stomping on citizens" is indeed alarmist rather than a straight forward statement of opinion. How does he expect that to motivate anyone to take him seriously and seek changes in the system? It simply reminds me of a very old story about a little boy and his cry of 'wolf'.

On a lighter note, if indeed we could have a contest as suggested by anonymous ("Let's have a contest to see who's the most pompous and puffed up puppy in town. Either one of these two contestents could be the lucky winner.") the good people of Cobourg would have to become engaged in such debates and that would be a great and important accomplishment. Call me what you wish, but please take the time to think about what I'm trying to put forward. For me, that effort is way more important than what you think of me personally, but thanks for noticing and taking part in your own way.

I think I have been very clear regarding represent...

2010-07-21T16:41:32.447-04:00

I think I have been very clear regarding representative and participatory forms of democracy. Mr. Schumann argues for representative forms where those in power are left to make decisions leaving the rest of us to wait until elections roll around.

I am advocating for a more participatory system where there is ample input from citizens and it is acted on. The last bit is particularly important, since far too often public input is given and nothing happens.

As for elite politicians, I think it is pretty self-explanatory. It means what it says.

As for being alarmist, I think not. I, like others, are just raising points that I think are valid. The language is strong, but nobody is freaking out, yet.

And, for Anonymous, contribute to the discussion. And don't hide. Let's have a real name. It is easy to snipe from the bushes.

Before we get too serious here, maybe Rob could de...

2010-07-21T13:59:06.653-04:00

Before we get too serious here, maybe Rob could define his understanding of a politician's purpose, at the municipal level, for now. If I've misunderstood his terms, including "elite politician", my arguments may be headed in an unrelated direction. As with any discussion, it only has significance if the subject matter is consistent for all who wish to contribute.

hey - there is such a thing as a male cat, so it c...

2010-07-21T13:38:14.819-04:00

hey - there is such a thing as a male cat, so it can still be a cat fight.

Oh no, the boys are at it again. What is the male ...

2010-07-21T12:17:56.314-04:00

Oh no, the boys are at it again. What is the male equivalent of a cat fight anyway?

Ho Hum. Let's have a contest to see who's the most pompous and puffed up puppy in town. Either one of these two contestents could be the lucky winner.

Just a 'brief' (as is practical) initial c...

2010-07-21T11:07:58.040-04:00

Just a 'brief' (as is practical) initial comment if I may. I absolutely believe that fair criticism is a 'critical' component of the decision making process. On that basis, My interaction at council was always during that part of the process because I felt that I had important things to add to the deliberations. My criticisms of the handling of that input were subjective, I agree. Only later did the factual information I had presented come to play a part in the decisions but usually too late to impact the issues at hand, which was certainly disappointing. Small advances and successes are better than none, some say. Further, my subsequent criticisms were intended to highlight this tendency and perhaps be the catalyst to initiate a review of those methods with the hope that a wider audience might come to better understand the pros and cons, and the possible options. That has not happened yet, even though the Deputy Mayor promised, during his last election campaign, to improve the public input process. I think that promise was in response to my own objectives that I presented during my candidacy.

Mr. Washburn's pieces, in my opinion, both strike an alarmist tone and set out unreasonable expectations that simply cannot be met under his conditions. That's not me "defending" council, that's simply being fair. Mr. Washburn only criticizes from afar and with seemingly unachievable demands as his fodder. That does not foster fairness nor invite reasonable reactions.

By the way, it strikes me that he has more to gain personally from being alarmist than being reasonable, seeing how "One (he) gets paid to do it and one just , well does it." It's far more interesting to read controversial and angry stuff than hum-drum reasoned arguments, so someone who gets paid to write is likely to make the most of it, especially if there is no intention to ever follow through on their own demands.

Dear me, I am confused. How is the support for a s...

2010-07-21T11:04:42.828-04:00

Dear me, I am confused. How is the support for a system of elite politicians and bureaucrats supportable. The only way democracy flourishes is if we all have access to the same information and resources. We need transparency in order to maintain accountability.

Also, we should expect more from our municipal candidates than the standard drivel and vagueness. There is a level of specifics that is attainable and reasonable where we know what we are getting. Without it, the municipal election is nothing more than a popularity contest.

It is a bit disconcerting to see how low we are allowing the bar to be set for our local politicians, both incumbents and novices.

Yes, I am also confused about the intentions. Bu...

2010-07-21T09:51:49.722-04:00

Yes, I am also confused about the intentions. But I think Manfred is ahead of Rob in this public/private debate.