Police board spat proves the case for reform
No doubt about it: Hamilton Mountain councillor Terry Whitehead can be his own worst enemy at times. He can be blunt and undiplomatic, appearing to speak before he thinks. But that doesn’t mean he’s wrong.
Last week Whitehead, a member of the Police Services Board, offended other members, specifically provincial appointees. His sin? During an earlier debate at city council about giving the municipality more control over police governance, Whitehead said: “I’m going to say this, that the whole time I’ve been on that board, not once have I had a provincial appointee say that the budget is too high. Not once. The people fighting the fight are elected officials on that board because we have an understanding of the affordability issues in our community.”
Mayor Fred Eisenberger said the comments were inappropriate. Ancaster councillor and board chair Lloyd Ferguson called them “disrespectful and disingenuous.” Provincial appointee Madeleine Levy said: “We’re talking about comments made about people’s character.” Although Whitehead apologized, provincial appointee Stanley Tick said he didn’t think “we can accept an apology.” That suggests Tick and perhaps other members of the board want to escalate the situation with provincial authorities on the basis that Whitehead may have violated the code of conduct governing board members.
The idea that Whitehead could be prosecuted for violating the conduct code is ridiculous. Ferguson made inappropriate physical contact with independent journalist Joey Coleman. That appears to be a clear violation, yet the board never censured or asked for provincial intervention. Whitehead says he has never seen a provincial appointee say the budget is too high, and the same board members want him to be punished for his words? Please.
Here’s the thing: What Whitehead said is probably true. Whether provincial appointees agree or not, they are perceived as largely rubber stamping whatever police management wants. A good example is when thenChief Glenn De Caire was seeking a budget increase of 5.25 per cent, just about everyone agreed it was too high but the budget sailed past provincial appointees and on to city council before the hue and cry was raised. That’s just one example. In case after case, provincial appointees were content to support pretty much whatever the chief wanted, while city council representatives — and sometimes the city’s local appointee — were left to represent local taxpayer interests. In short, Whitehead seems right.
It has been said here before: This police governance model is broken. This isn’t about the individual successes or failures of provincial appointees, it’s about a systemic problem that only the province can address. This is just one more textbook example of that.