Springwater councillor wants township to go after innuendo

By Kate Harries AWARE News Network August 27 2013
Councillor Rick Webster wants Springwater Township to retain lawyers to go after “slanderous unsubstantiated innuendo suggesting wrongdoing by elected and township officials.”
“Call me stupid, tell me you do not agree with me, tell me you wish you had not voted for me – say what you like in that regard, but do not call me dishonest unless you have proof to back it up and are prepared to do so,” Webster said Monday night.

Deputy Mayor Dan McLean seconded Webster’s lengthy motion, which, Mayor Linda Collins said, is to be debated and voted upon at the September council meeting.
Councillors Perry Ritchie, Jack Hanna and Sandy McConkey said they will not support the motion.
“I can’t imagine using taxpayers’ money to sue the taxpayers,” McConkey said. How much will it cost to go after taxpayers on behalf of people who were elected to or work on behalf of the township? she asked.
A sign held up by Midhurst resident Barbara Chittick, one of about 25 people in the public section, expressed her view. The sign said: “My Father Fought for Democracy and Freedom of Speech.”
Township clerk Richard Daly rushed down from his seat at the mayor’s right hand to order Chittick to take the sign down. Which she did.
Webster cited two examples of “innuendo,” both related to the Midhurst Secondary Plan. One, from an email, suggested officials may be being bought by developers, another, from a published letter, suggested the process has been corrupt and called for an investigation by the RCMP.
“These accusations are to my knowledge without foundation and have the potential to damage at many levels,” Webster said. “To have my name and my family exposed to such behavior in a civilized democratic society is not something I am prepared to accept.”
Webster said he did not think he or any other official should be subjected to financial hardship to defend their reputations.
Webster also took the opportunity to address an article by Grenfel resident Bill French (a defeated mayoral candidate in the last election) that was published in the Springwater News and on the AWARE News Network.
The article, headlined ‘Transparency no longer welcome at Springwater Township meetings,’ likened Webster’s motion to the SLAPP suits that the provincial government proposes to outlaw. (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation are viewed as intended to silence critics and stifle debate on public interest issues.)
“Will Councillor Webster withdraw his motion which is a draconian proposal that would find a better place in Iraq or Libya or some third world despot ruled nation?” French asked in his article. “Is this motion not contrary to the transparency that this council professes?”
“Absolutely not,” Webster said in the statement he read out Monday. “There’s no intention in my motion to stifle legitimate and thoughtful comment on any matters by any one… What is not acceptable is comments which are rude, disrespectful or unfounded, insinuations of dishonesty which could be construed as libellous or slanderous.”
“I think this is the price you pay for the job you choose to do,” said Ritchie. “I will not support this at all. If I take it on the chin, I take it on the chin. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”
“It’s not about the right to speak,” said Collins. “It’s about libel and slander, it’s about the words in print.”
“We have laws to cover libel and slander,” Hanna said, and council should not be using taxpayers’ money for something that’s not necessary. He added that the issue is one of “frustrated people voicing their opinions.”
McConkey asked for explanations, including definitions of the terms used in the motion – like ‘stakeholder’ and ‘innuendo.’
McLean said the motion will be vetted by a lawyer before council votes on it. Webster said he would rework the wording.

More information:
Webster answers French
Webster’s statement on motion
French’s letter
French comments