Margot Giblin … further to: HCC: Anti-social behaviour …
Several vacant seats at the last open Council meeting (10.9.07) made it easier than usual to see the interplay between individual aldermen and the effect of debate on individuals. It seemed, starting with the Sandown communication tower/public meeting debate, that Freeman, in wanting to stress Council’s inability to revoke its decision, was being moved away from by the comparatively younger Turks, leaving him with the dozing, amiable Archer, and the frequently like-minded Hayes.
Zucco may not regard himself as being a permanent member of any group on Council but in this debate there was clear unspoken communication between Christie, (who presented the petition) Zucco and Briscoe. How do I know? – because when things weren’t going smoothly or when a suggestion was made by another councilor Briscoe might give Zucco or Christie a querying look, and a nod or a shake would be given in return before the next argument was put.
Is there anything wrong with this? I can’t see that there is. It’s happening out in the open for anyone to see and comment on. Who connects with whom on any issue, as well as generally, is of interest. It is also clear that these sorts of communication happen more between some councilors than others and that none of them show up in Council minutes.
In later debate, (on gating an ownerless right of way), Freeman had closed his eyes in what appeared to be tired exasperation at his colleague’s extremely loud and rambling effort. He finally stirred himself – For God’s Sake! he said. Zucco’s defense for his longwinded insistence on the General Manager clarifying the obvious was because, he said, ‘I could be considered illiterate. The GM having read his piece Zucco exclaimed, ‘ SoI’m not dumb after all’.
‘No’, said Freeman, ‘just talkative’.
When Cocker stood to speak next he promised brevity, for which Freeman, a master of it himself, thanked God.
Again, such exchanges and what they reveal aren’t in the minutes.
Zucco’s tedious and continuous references to himself as not being in a faction, nor a group, nor colluding – all of which he felt had been inferred on ‘a certain internet-site’ that day did nothing to shorten a lengthy meeting and seemed to have little to do with the business at hand. Briscoe, for instance, seemed at first mildly amused but in the end shook his head as Zucco kept on throwing down shadows at which he then jumped, alone.
Hamlet’s mum, Gertrude, when watching the poisoning-entrapment play, suggested ‘the lady doth protest too much, methinks’. There was no such stopper on Zucco, who, to the last Aye/Nay, felt it necessary to announce his non-aligned status.
The difference in councilor responses to this site provides another great insight into councilor behaviour. TT’s lack of baggage is appealing to some but people being able to say what they think without interruption, especially anonymously, is maddening to others. It brings forth challenges to say the same thing somewhere else or in their own name.
Why not use this forum to answer what is said on it? Perhaps the ‘I dare you to come inside and say that’ brigade fear the loss of control TT promises and resent the fact that customary Council debating tactics are of no use here.
