“The Mississippi Mills Town Council voted to rescind the Heritage moratorium yesterday evening. The vote was 7-4 with Councillors Jill McCubbin, Val Wilkinson, Bernard Cameron and Mayor Shaun McLaughlin voting against the motion to rescind. Councillors Duncan Abbott, John Edwards, Denzil Ferguson, Alex Gillis, Christa Lowry, Jane Torrance and Paul Watters voted for the motion.”

With what was predictable though somehow ingenuously unexpected regularity, business at the local Council has returned to its customary sharp-toothed behaviour in spite of all the pre-election protestations for unity, cooperation and civility.  Indeed the new Mayor who initially clamoured for what was supposed to be a forum of courtesy and consideration was the first out of the blocks to condemn other Councillors for having “changed their voting position from last fall“. Apart from being an absurdly preposterous suggestion that people’s opinions should remain intransigent, the gratuitous comment serves only to cement the divisiveness of Council.  Sadly it also represents a missed opportunity by the Mayor to show levelheaded leadership and to distance himself from the normal political kerfuffle.

The circumspect public is inevitably unsurprised by the speedy turn of events. It has likewise taken mere hours for the former bandwagon hacks of competing stripes to weigh in upon the jolt which has so disturbed the naively anticipated smooth transition of government to the newly elected Council. Opposing political camps, armed with a second wind following the election itself, are again engaged in mud slinging and aspersion all in the name of reasoned debate.  It does of course make for entertaining reading for the groundlings and casual observers but it is otherwise reminiscent of the typical political drama which persists regardless who is elected.  In characteristic parody of the political process both sides assert they represent the majority opinion though it is a small compliment (not to mention irrelevant) to the protestation when one position has so clearly trumped the other. Meanwhile even minor actors such as one associated with a Council-appointed advisory Committee has taken the unprecedented liberty of weighing in upon the subject in a public forum to the discredit of his principals.  The vehemence apparently knows no bounds!

It is only a matter of time before the initiates to Council begin to feel the weight and oppression of the mountain of information generated by Planning and other staff members of the Town.  Not to mention the thankless task of parrying every criticism and condemnation which it is the privilege of the masses to inflict upon its public officials. Then the metaphorical knees shall begin to buckle and only the strongest will be left standing.  Business as usual!