A forum is not your soapbox.
Candidates showed the courage to run. Voters deserved to hear their answers.
First, thank you to every person who put their name forward to run for council.
It takes guts to put your name on a ballot. You invite scrutiny of your ideas, your decisions and your character. You accept criticism, sometimes praise, and the possibility that voters will choose someone else.
You are willing to put your money where your mouth is. Whatever our political differences, I respect that.
Now, about the Chamber of Commerce forum.
I could not attend in person because I was heading to New York for a conference, but I watched it on Facebook. I also heard plenty of comments from people who attended and were every bit as disgusted as I was.
Watching on Facebook, I found the tone of several exchanges deeply disappointing. Some comments struck me as personal criticism rather than questions that would help voters assess the candidates.
Approximately 120 people attended. People came to hear the candidates’ platforms and their plans for this community. In my view, too much of the discussion distracted from that purpose.
Having access to a microphone does not excuse insulting the people who put their names on the ballot.
I wish those making personal remarks had put their own names on the ballot. Then voters could have weighed their ideas as carefully as they weighed everyone else’s shortcomings.
They had every right to question the candidates. But their own conduct was open to criticism, too.
Candidates should face tough questions. Ask about taxes, spending, infrastructure and priorities. Challenge vague answers. Demand explanations. Disagree firmly.
But make an argument. Ask an actual question. Give voters something useful.
A forum should help us understand how candidates think, what they would prioritize and how they would respond to difficult decisions. The audience has a role in making that discussion worthwhile.
I found several exchanges embarrassing to watch. People who attended told me they were horrible to sit through. That should give the speakers something to think about.
I believe some of those exchanges earned the candidates more sympathy than criticism. What stayed with me was the tone of the comments rather than the substance of the questions.
That is a missed opportunity for everyone trying to make an informed choice.
I hope every councillor representing this community watches those exchanges and takes a hard look at the behaviour on display.
I hope they were as disgusted as I was. And I hope none of them wants to be painted with the same brush.
I have no interest in polite silence when a difficult question needs asking. Public office demands accountability. Candidates should expect their positions to be tested.
But voters deserve answers. The opportunity to question candidates belongs to the whole community, and everyone in that room deserved to hear a discussion that would help them decide.
To the candidates, thank you. Agreeing to face the electorate is a contribution worth recognizing, regardless of the result. You have offered yourselves for a job that comes with public expectations and public scrutiny.
To those whose remarks I found personal: I was disgusted by the tone, and I was far from alone.
This community deserves a serious discussion about its future. Every candidate deserves the chance to answer. Every voter deserves the chance to listen.
Ask the hard question. Challenge the answer. Make your case.
But respect the candidates, respect the audience and remember that the microphone belongs to the whole community. It is a sad day when I find myself worrying about whoever is elected and the personal attacks they may have to face simply for stepping forward to serve.