Brampton council delays vote on ‘anti-media’ motion
BramptonGuardian.com
June 14, 2017
Peter Criscione
A vote on a contentious Brampton city council motion that could have the affect of quieting press scrutiny of elected officials, which has received widespread condemnation from politicians, residents and media organizations across Canada, has been delayed at least another week.
“It is one of the most bizarre motions I have ever seen,” said Coun. Gurpreet Dhillon Wednesday. He explained possible legal issues are also being addressed ahead of the council vote expected next week.
On Wednesday, Committee of Council postponed a motion some argue is intended to chill media's questioning of elected officials because its mover, Regional Coun. Gael Miles, did not attend the meeting. Councillors will deal with the issue again on June 21.
Drawing comparisons to an anti-media sentiment south of the border, as President Donald Trump and his supporters lash out against routine reporting on a string of controversies that have bogged the presidency, Miles wants all questions from the media and their corresponding answers from council posted on the city's website.
Her motion, seconded by Regional Coun. Elaine Moore, also calls for time to be set aside at committee and council meetings to “give elected officials a chance to speak publicly on recent media stories which relate to council decisions or issues that may impact the City of Brampton.”
Miles, who has been on council three decades, has called recent Guardian articles, including those critical of the work councillors have done on hugely important files facing Canada’s ninth largest city, “biased” and “inaccurate.”
The motion before council has ignited fierce discussion among residents, politicians and media industry professionals. Some have described the move from a specific faction on council as a blatant attempt to intimidate the local media.
Speaking to CBC's Metro Morning, Dhillon listed privacy concerns and a host of legal considerations among the barriers councillors have to consider before adopting such a policy.
The Guardian has published numerous articles in recent years bringing into sharper focus how elected city officials, bogged down by petty squabbles and a host of legal battles and investigations, have handled important files such as transit expansion.
That coverage includes Brampton’s mishandling of a historic downtown development deal that has landed the city in legal troubles as well as a massive restructuring of the civil service and a highly divisive debate on light rail transit. A number of other critical articles have detailed this term of council including a Guardian exclusive on a secretive program authorized by senior staffers that paid non-union employees $1.25 million without council’s knowledge or approval going back to 2009.
Miles, who has attacked the media’s coverage of council dealings, including her own, has been heavily scrutinized over the years for her support of a now defunct community agency she used to head before it was taken over by her husband. It had received hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars while failing to provide key financial details. Council was asked two years ago to excuse more than $90,000 owed to the city by the organization.
In recent weeks, The Guardian has also questioned Miles about her push for a taxpayer buyout of a money-losing golf club owned by a development group that has donated substantially to her political campaigns and $600,000 to a charity she founded, as well as $30,000 to the now defunct agency her husband ran. She declined to answer a number of questions the Guardian sent her about the golf club deal.
Under her own motion, which was referred to staff for a report before a possible council vote later in June, all of the questions she has declined to answer, seeking key details of how the golf club deal is being handled outside of the public's eye, would be published on the city's website.
