Scanned, recopied or Internet copy, if there are errors, please e-mail me with corrections: Opening comments: More at the end. Mississauga News - Aug 25, 2009 - Letter by Peter Nazwaski Nando lost me Dear Editor:That was some good work done by reporter Joseph Chin about Ward 7 councillor Nando Iannicca. Nando Iannicca has lost me in his line of defence. I like to think I have a reasonable awareness of how our various governments operate. But, Nando bewilders me when he takes the position there is some kind of “unwritten rule that states that you never go before a separate level of government’s sacred chamber (sic) and tell them how to run the place.” This is a topic for further discussion and debate, during which I, as a member of the great unwashed, look forward to being informed. After all, Mayor Hazel McCallion (and, implicitly, Nando and the other Mississauga councillors) represents the City of Mississauga to provincial and federal levels of government. I grant Nando his point to the extent that Hazel does not usually meet the other levels of government in their sacred chambers. But, this is a distinction without merit. Nando is not your run-of-the-mill, ordinary citizen. He is a professional politician who has been feeding off the teat of the public purse for quite some time. This naturally lends itself to a much-needed discussion about term limits for municipal politicians. Such terms would allow the institutional memory to be retained, but would prevent individuals from steeping themselves so deeply in the lore of the political black arts that they think this allows them to scorn those who really should know their place and shut up until they know the “rules of engagement.” When Nando attacked Hamilton-Smith for not knowing those supposed rules, he pulled out the professional politician’s bag of acquired tricks — resorting to bureaucratic rules of order, rather than entering into the spirit of democracy. To professional politicians, democracy is whatever their legal-minded advisors can fabricate to produce the desired outcomes, from arcane rules of order to blatant and unashamed manipulation, often accompanied by not a little smattering of deceit. They are little interested in democracy, for their goal is to put themselves and their interests forward, to intimidate and to silence dissent, and to win at all costs, while democracy lies ravaged, torn and exhausted on the battleground. The public becomes collateral damage, dazed as they ask, “What happened?” Has democracy evolved only for the use of long time, well-versed and professional politicians like Nando Iannicca? Where does the ordinary citizen — the interested guy or gal who is not fully aware of the rules of engagement — fit into this? Comments by others, 4, to this web-page; Think About It Aug 27, 2009 9:34 AM Nandos rules for disorder By-law 421-2003 Part III Section 22(2), which explicitly forbids his use of insulting language. The Mayor, as Chair of the meeting, was complicit in that she did not enforce the By-law" The Mississauga Muse Aug 27, 2009 1:43 AM "answer the question" is new. For 30 years we've only had "responses" “We’ve dealt with this as a Mayor all these years–I look at it as an improvement in the administration of the business of the City. It really is. I think today we need to look at efficiency and improvement of the administration of the business. This is one item that I think is going to do that. You know what? In my opinion citizens that are really sincere and dedicated, are going to benefit from this system in a major way. They’re going to see it’s dealing with their questions more professionally in more depth and with more facts and data to answer the question. And I believe we have to do that, and this is the way, in my opinion, it can be done much better than it has in the past.” Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion TRANSCRIPT, Mississauga Council Meeting August 5, 2009. See that “answer the question”… Uatu Aug 26, 2009 11:22 PM Well said, Mr. Nazwaski. While I agree with the substance of your letter, I must point out that Councillor Iannicca displayed blatant disregard for the Rules of Order when he violated Council's own Procedural By-law 421-2003 Part III Section 22(2), which explicitly forbids his use of insulting language. The Mayor, as Chair of the meeting, was complicit in that she did not enforce the By-law. In other words, the Rules of Order are enforced selectively, i.e. only when it benefits Council. Those of us who watch Council meetings know that this is far from being an exception. Tune in to Rogers Cable 10 every second Wednesday to see hypocrisy in action! * Agree 1 The Mississauga Muse Aug 26, 2009 2:34 AM Him writing, "smattering of deceit" and that professional politicians "are little interested in democracy, for their goal is to put themselves and their interests forward, to intimidate and to silence dissent, and to win at all costs, while democracy lies ravaged, torn and exhausted on the battleground." NAZWASKI "KNOWS"! * Agree 2 Home Page - Main Table of Contents - Back up a page - Back to Top [COMMENTS BY DON B. - ] |
Your Financial Donations are Greatly Appreciated The • |