As a member of the Discussion Group in question, I would like to speak to some points in the article on the front page in the December 6th Chronicle Herald.
In the article Barry implies that he speaks for the board and they are all in complete agreement with his point of view, thus tarring them all with the same brush. From the article: “When he got the email last week he told her that he was opposed, and he imagined much of the board would be, too.”
In fact, when Barry spoke with Sheila Barling, Barry mentioned that he brought it up with the board. From the article: “He said the board didn’t want to be associated with the controversy that has surrounded the Occupy movement.” This implies a unanimity that does not exist.
Sheila asked him how many members were opposed and Barry replied “5 or 6.” The Board consists of 12 members so at best, 50% support and 50% oppose. It sounds like it is good fodder for a discussion topic.
He has attempted to shift the narrative to make the topic the story and not the principle. It was always about the principle. This story was never meant to be political, or even about Occupy Nova Scotia, but Mr. Dalrymple signed his email as an HRM Councillor and gave his work email address. He knew this would add weight to his opinion and it was deliberate.
The Discussion Group has never been asked to vet their speakers list with the Board for political correctness or community suitability. Barry should know this; he is a member of the group and has spoken to us on two occasions. To state now that a topic is against community interests is fallacious at best. From the article: “He said it was meant to be a private email, but Barling forwarded it to others in the group.” As a member of the group he should have been aware that Sheila would poll the rest of the group for their opinion on the matter. He received a forwarded copy of the email.
Barry, or the Board for that matter (assuming unanimity), is in no position to determine, or be arbiter, of what is of benefit to the community and what is not. From the article: “He said his other board members have since emailed him saying they are opposed because having Occupy Nova Scotia speaking is not a community event or of benefit to the community.”
That has never been a criterion for the Discussion Group or a standard of use of the Community Hall in question. It would appear that he is making it up as he goes along.
Comments on: "More On Barry Dalrymple" (2)
Barry Dalrymple is a joke. This is his old and over-used response to everything. He must pretend that he has agreement from others, when in most cases, he just doesn’t. He will say something ridiculous like: “I have received at least 100 e-mails on this subject, and all are against it….” Sounds good to the gullible among us. It is no wonder that we are a “backwater” with ignorant and autocratic HRM Councillors like this.
Barry Dalrymple is an “old hand` at pretending he has support for his fancies. He usually says something along the lines of the numbers of e-mails he has received regarding…. which is supposed to give credence or support to whatever.
Here is a suggestion for all municipal and provincial representatives: Should they not have to prove they have at least some basic level of education before they are permitted to run in any election? Their woeful educational qualifications really hit us in the face when they open their mouths.