Guibord responded non-verbally indicating that he had no idea and asked the interim chief administrative officer Pierre Tessier to address Félio's question. Tessier replied that he knew nothing about it and indicated he would folllow up.
What Félio seemed to have ignored in asking his question about the access to information monthly report is this: last year, at the same time that council cancelled the power and responsability of then chief administrative officer Daniel Gatien to act as the responsible official for matters dealing with access to information requests, council conferred that power (personnally) to mayor Guibord. It is at that time that council requested it be provided monthly reports of access to information requests.
In my view, Félio's comment and question about the monthly report on access to information requests created two embarassing results:
1. Félio publicly exposed the mayor for not having executed an element of his role as the City official responsible for access to information requests.
2. The mayor was placed in the position of having to publicly admit he had no idea what is the status of the monthly access to information reports. Consequently that seemed to imply that as the City official responsible for access to information requests, he seemed to have done nothing to follow up on the council's directive about those monthly reports.
I have a hunch that Félio perhaps simply may not have realized that his comment and question risked publicly showing mayor Guibord in a unflattering light, having forgotten or ignored the mayor's role applicable to access to information requests. In my opinion Félio seemed to have once more publicly put his mouth in motion before putting his brains in gear; this time it was in his approach to his comment and question dealing with the monthly report on access to information requests. He could have and should have dealt with this isssue privately in my view.
« Back to index