While some may call her a political opportunist (she came within a handfull of votes of a seat on council), I believe that Pierrette Ouellette has some valid points in her recent letter to the editor. As there is currently no person to determine the penalty in the case of a conflict of interest, a person guilty of such a charge could easily get off without so much as a slap on the wrist. This type of inaction does not discourage the person from continuing the pattern of behaviour. A type of ombudsman would help in establishing clear consequences for such infractions. Then, nobody will have an excuse to act this way ever again.
Furthermore, is this the type of conduct we expect from our elected officials? Maybe this is why the public is so disengaged with our electoral system. As to the reason why Lisi seconded Rose's motion to appoint her own husband to a paid position, I have no idea why that happened. While the law indicates that other councillors are not obligated to do anything in the case of such a conflict, it appears that Lisi was nearly an equal participant in the act in question. Perhaps she was unaware of the legislation, as it is her first term as councillor? I have no idea. I sense a case of the Obama syndrome hitting Chapleau. Our hopes were so high and we placed so much trust in these people that we forgot one simple fact: they are exactly that...just people. No single person (or even five for that matter) can solve all of our problems with the wave of a magic wand. It takes effort from all those concerned, from the ground up, to get things moving and really make a difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment