Politicians Gone Wild

You know what they say about stories with two sides that are polar-opposites, right?  The truth is always somewhere in the middle.

The latest debacle out of the city hall centers around councillors getting "blotto".  Yup.  Totally drunk.

What seemed like an innocent-enough idea by one councillor to clarify rules around expensing alcohol on the taxpayer's dime turned into an all-out gong-show at a city committee.  Councillors shooting allegations at one another, reports of "illicit substance" use, and a mayor telling them they're "not in junior high" among other things.  It's led to Calgary (and in particular this council) to be the butt of more than a few light-hearted jokes.

But that's the problem.  We have two polar-opposite accounts of what's going on.  City hall is either a frat house (or at least a place where alcohol and drug use is more common than we've all been led to believe) or else city hall is a church.  Or maybe it's somewhere in the middle.

If it's option #1, then we have a serious problem.  We have a council that's been hiding some pretty big demons and could lead to Calgary becoming the new Toronto, only instead of one mayor in hot water, we're going to be seeing hidden video and stripper confessions popping up in no time flat in Cowtown.  I'm not trying to make light of this.  Think about it for a second.

If it's option #2, then we have a completely opposite problem.  We have some pretty serious allegations being made by certain members of council that turned out to be baseless.  Does that show a contempt for their colleagues?  And what would that say about trivializing a societal problem of alcohol and substance abuse?

Perhaps there is a third option: this wasn't the "majority" of councillors, but a select few.  Maybe it's only one or two.  But then we have to ask ourselves: should that have been something aired in public, or should that have been a private conversation?  You know.  One of those talks where you say "I think you have a problem and I can get you the help you need."  Or if it's illegal drug use, maybe you call the police and tell them about the situation as it IS illegal.  But to air your grievances on the public record, without naming names, so that everyone's left wondering what the truth is?  Seems a little dangerous and possibly damaging.  It feels like we're getting into "defamation of character" country.

But that's where we're left now as taxpayers: wondering what in the heck is going on here.  The truth is somewhere in the middle, but it's a pretty large middle right now.  And because everything was aired in the public realm, you know reporters are going to be digging in their heels trying to get their hands on any story of a council member or high-ranking official letting loose.  Some councillors have created quite the PR pickle for themselves.  You either get to deal with the fact that councillors really like to party that much, or you get to apologize for misleading people into believing it was as dysfunctional as you made it out to be.

While some are making fun of this whole boondoggle, some very serious questions need to be answered in the coming days if councillors want to fully move forward from this.