Peter Kelly just issued the following press release:
Mayor wants overhaul of in-camera
(November 29, 2011) Halifax – Mayor Peter Kelly today called on Council and HRM staff to change the way business is conducted so that in-camera meetings become the exception, rather than the rule.
“As elected officials, we are responsible to residents and they are, quite rightly, demanding more openness, transparency and accountability in government,” Mayor Kelly said. “We need to make changes to the way we oversee the public’s business and, as Mayor, it is my responsibility to bring this forward.”
The Mayor said he has made it clear to senior City Hall officials that he wants the process overhauled so that all items appear on the regular agenda, instead of some being routed automatically to in-camera.
“I want to avoid in-camera issues, except by motion of Council,” he said. “The onus is on us, as elected officials, to hold frank and open discussion as much as possible.”
He added that Council needs to deal with as much business as possible out in the open, unless there is hard evidence that to do so will cause harm to the municipality.
“Only under exceptional circumstances should we consider going in-camera,” he noted.Mayor Kelly said anything involving critical issues, for example union contract negotiations or security matters, could be dealt with by confidential staff reports which would be released, once the matter has been concluded.
“Public debate is the very air that democracy breaths,” said Mayor Kelly. “We must open our windows as wide as possible to achieve that kind of ventilation.”
/l*30*Contact: Mayor Peter Kelly 490-4010
This article appears in Nov 24-30, 2011.
No words.
What a friggin’ joke!!! Does that “openness” include information regarding the will of that old lady’s estate that he is executor of and that he still has not dealt with the beneficiaries i.e. the charitable organizations that have not been paid???
Chutzpah !
Makes other councillors look fools for not beating him to the issue. Any councillor could have issued a press release along with a letter to the Mayor and CAO.
How many people working for him and on the payroll to help his re-election ?
Tim, I thought you felt very strongly about this issue. Why aren’t you complementing and defending the mayor’s new position?
His track record on this issue is dismal.
In other reporting on his recent proclamation announcing more “openness, transparency and accountability” I noted that he transferred much of the blame for excessive secrecy to HRM legal staff, when in fact, as Chair of Council he bears direct responsibility for this himself.
Classic Kelly! Pay attention to his creative use of grammatical constructions. When he talks about his own misdeeds he either uses the passive third person voice, as if he had nothing to do with the screw up in question, or he uses the plural “we” in order to spread the responsibility around. After losing $359,000 of taxpayers’ money in an unorthodox and controversial financial arrangement with a certain concert promoter, Kelly’s feeble response to an audit which placed much of the blame at his own doorstep was “lessons were learned now it’s time to move on.” Rarely will you hear Peter Kelly using the word “I” when it comes to controversial issues. Does this make him the quintessential team player? His manipulation of HRM council and the public says otherwise.
He has realized that he might not be a shoo-in at the next mayoral election. His proclamation of more “openness, transparency and accountability” is nothing more than cynical damage control on his part.
We will have more “openness, transparency and accountability” from our mayor and council, but it won’t happen until after the next election and it won’t be this mayor and council.
Bon Voyage Peter!
This is like the asking the fox to recommend new security measures for the chicken coop. All the secrecy of the last several years is squarely on Kelly’s head. Currently, Kelly plus staff decide if something should be in camera. If the rest of council disagrees, they need a 2/3 majority to overturn that determination. The onus should be the other way and it should be a simple majority. Kelly is a smart politician though as despite being the guy in charge of all the secrecy, he’s the first to actually come out and propose a change, heading off potential challengers. Chutzpah is right!
Kelly is full of shit. Anyone who votes for him next election ought to be shot. He has screwed up (trying to use a nice word) so many times, I’ve lost count. From now on when someone asks me where I’m from, I’ll answer Oz. The Wizard has more intregity than this so-called Mayor and Council. They can throw out duly elected school boards, so how about throwing out Concert Pete et al.
What wonderful news. If only Mr. Kelly could be believed. His insincerity on this issue permeates every word of his press release. This announcement is a response to the spotlight thrown on the council’s secret “in camera” meeting practices by the Occupy protest debacle, but the practice has been a staple of Kelly’s approach to government all along. And what about the discussion and voting record details of years of these secret meetings in the past, will they become public? For example, I would be interested to know which HRM councillors voted in secret to not investigate the concert scandal, and why.
Open the windows to let the smell of shit and stale leadership escape more like it. Thanks for reminding me that the Ghostfucker is the guy who puts the shit in Kelly’s mouth, it shines a different light on the words after remembering that little detail.
Quick question, when kelly is booted out, does the ghostfucker go with him or his ghostfucker hrm staff?
Here you go again Great Value, being the guy everyone wishes wasn’t at the party. You’re voting Peter this time too?