In-Camera Meetings & Transparency

Do Council & City Staff 

Abuse This Tool?

The 'Three-L's" as they are called, Land, Labour and Litigation are the three topics which 'may' require city council and city staff to discuss some matters out of view of the public. While there is absolutely no doubt that certain matters need private deliberation, once a decision has been made is the need for secrecy still present?

One reason for an in-camera meeting covers the dealing with land, according to the community charter:

"the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the council considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the municipality;"

Do 'all' discussions regarding land have the reasonable expectation that the interests of the city would be harmed if made public?


Why Do Councillors Want To Hide Their Vote? 

Regardless of the reason council chooses to make their deliberations and decisions in secret, once the reason for secrecy has passed why do they not release the meeting minutes?  It is reasonable to assume reasons for maintaining secrecy could include not wanting to be held accountable for their decisions, and a concern that public scrutiny might reveal a poor decision making process.

An Affront To Democracy!

What some councilors seem to fail to realize is the utter affront to democracy this policy of secrecy is to the whole democratic process. For example if a councilor is not prepared to tell you if they voted for the new city annex, how can you make an informed decision if you want to vote for them?

The abuse of the in-camera process is a far too convenient tool to avoid being accountable to the taxpayer they are supposedly representing.

They Say 'Transparency' But Practice 'Secrecy'! Then Still Ask For Your Vote!

If this is actually true, or just more political-speak, then there is no reason to not release the minutes of in-camera meetings once the legitimate reason for secrecy has passed if there is a true desire to be open, transparent and accountable.

This lack of true accountability may very well be the reason nearly 85% of Nanaimo voters said 'No Thanks' to any member of council during the last civic election. After all , how can you honestly give your support to a member of council if they are not willing to make their policies known to those they purport to represent?

Taking Responsibility - Adopted By Strategic Plan

One of the guiding principles included in the $120,000 Strategic Plan (used to support spending on everything) was to accept responsibility.

Question? How in hell, is city hall accepting responsibility, when they hide their decisions behind the over-worked, misused tool of the in-camera process?

Do you think there will ever be elected officials who actually put into practice the good-sounding buzz words or is it just so much hot air and horse feathers? Clearly, this city council has no intention of honoring their claim of desiring to be open and transparent.

Of course, there is no need to honor the principle of being responsible on the part of city managers, there is simply no incentive as there would seem to be little consequence even for demonstrated poor management.