Something has stuck with me about the Era reporting of Councillor Di Muccio calling Mayor Van Bynen a misogynist.
Councillor Di Muccio called the Mayor as misogynist as she was leaving the meeting.
This detail was repeated three times in three different news pieces.
And the distinction is critical.
Two years ago, when Councillor Emanuel admitted to drinking and driving, the Mayor argued that the Council Code of Conduct wouldn't apply to his binge drinking during the time he represented the town.at a VIP party held at the Pickle Barrel Restaurant. And many people, including myself, were dumbfounded that even though Councillor Emanuel gave a video greeting to Snap magazine that clearly showed he attended the party in an official capacity, the Mayor stuck to his guns saying the Code doesn't apply to "private matters."
If Councillor Di Muccio had left the meeting and then called the Mayor a name, then just like Emanuel's DUI (although its laughable to compare the two - a criminal offense is far more serious than a name calling), it is a "private matter", and protected as free speech.
I think this is why the Era is repeating over and over again that the name calling didn't occur while Di Muccio was participating in the meeting but subsequently while she was leaving.
A few months ago, Councillor Jaye Robinson gave a press conference urging Toronto Mayor Rob Ford to "take time off to deal with his “personal issues,” to “clearly and definitively and without question,” address ongoing questions about his alleged substance abuse.
While Jaye Robinson got into hot water with the Toronto Mayor when he fired her from the city's executive committee, her words were not subject to an integrity commissioner investigation. Although she could have been had she said these same words during a Toronto Council meeting. In the world of integrity commission investigations, it is location, location, location.
No comments:
Post a Comment