Spin doctoring: it's truly an artform

by Elwood Varty

Aug 29, 2007

There are three times when convention dictates gentlemen must wear a suit. When one says, “I do,” then “yes, your Honor,” and finally when one is laid out in a box while small cakes and sandwiches are being eaten. When you say, “yes, your Honor” you have taken an oath that you will tell the ‘whole’ truth. This means disclosing all the information when asked a question.

Unfortunately, the last 30 years have produced a gradual change in the dispensing of information and the absolute truth. The direct response to a question is now history. This is the evolution of the ‘spin’ so that information can be ‘doctored.’

A direct question to a politician or a government spokesperson will be answered with a crafted, usually evasive, and packaged approach.

Great theatre is about to be watched by the people of Ontario with the fall election looming. Questions will be answered with questions. Answers will only reflect the spokesperson’s point of view.

A direct factual answer will be rare, and probably will be considered an error. Ask a politician what the weather is outside, and he will spout forth about his economic policy (which never becomes a reality).

The Canadian government has basically disbanded the Ottawa Press Corps, and replaced it with a steady drivel of non-factual based ‘positions.’ The mailbox has a steady stream of political newsletters, which carefully present a few reassurances, with carefully selected positions. They can only be described as ‘meatless’ wonders. Remember the day when a politician actually told you what his principles were and what he stood for?

Factual information is hard to handle, as it is a ‘report card’ on the person speaking. Infuriately long gone are the days when a politician could admit a mistake, solve it, and carry on with the forgiveness of the constituents. Now to admit a mistake is a sign of weakness. Now if a tanker is spilling oil on the high seas, lawyers, and a public relations firm are first on scene, not the cleanup crew.

Municipal newsletters are no more than swarmy compositions of testimonials completely void of facts and relevant issues. The public would appreciate a factual comment on subjects that might include economic development, road projects, pending bylaws, official plans, zoning, pending user fee increases and financial health.

The municipal web sites are a great tool, but unfortunately the posting of Committee and Council minutes usually is some months in arrears. A ratepayer cannot follow an issue with this lack of current information. Councils have developed so many ‘Committee of the Whole’ and ‘closed’ sessions that just maybe the minutes are mostly irrelevant.

The local Fire Prevention Officers have demonstrated the value of public education and have spread factual information in a manner that has reduced the loss of life and property caused by fire. This outstanding approach to disseminating public information should be used for many municipal topics.

The Ontario Building Code, Chief Building Officials and Building Inspectors have created a unique information spin complete with territorial maximum overload. The building permit process is in a catastrophic state where the tail is wagging the dog. There is no oversight or accountability or appeal avenue for this difficult process. It is part of the ‘Bundle of Rights’ that run with property ownership to use your property to build a structure. These rights are taken away with the practice of ‘dog’ law. A dog is house-trained by giving it a slap and throwing it outside when it goes in the house.

Building Inspectors use the Building Code with its exaggerated and onerous rules and penalties to create an ‘I’m the boss’ relationship that is far from productive. Long gone is the attitude that the system is in place to help a builder or homeowner construct a lasting structure. The inherent myths have placed the process out of reach of the average person. Building Inspectors should take a lesson from the Fire Prevention Officers and develop an educational, helpful attitude and approach. Presently the successful issuance of a building permit should be acknowledged with a day of celebration if any money is left after this costly, cumbersome, and frustrating process.

Municipal officials should re-introduce the Town Hall meeting. This is the most basic forum to exchange information. This is the grass root of democracy. It is a most valuable communication and education platform with cottagers. In this forum it is difficult to spin information and avoid repercussions. I recall a town hall meeting where a former reeve said to the incumbent ‘I could have run the township on 10 mills.’ The incumbent replied ‘but you would have had to dip into the dog tax.’

A new council attends training sessions where they are schooled in dealing with the media. Perhaps a session should be introduced to school on how to present factual, relevant information.

Apathy of the taxpayer is the greatest tool used by all levels of government to facilitate the doctoring of information. Information campaigns become issues that are created to deflect from the more questionable issues. Question your councillors. Become an informed ratepayer and be part of a dialogue that helps the councillor reflect the will of you, the constituent. Remind your council that their priority is the delivery of your services in an efficient, cost effective, and safe manner.