A debate London City Council On Tuesday afternoon, the debate intensified over the now-lifted curfew on gas-powered lawn mowers and gardening equipment.
The Municipal Engineering Committee proposed to hold a public meeting to discuss curfew The use of gas-powered lawn and garden equipment between 6 p.m. and 8 a.m. currently prohibits all Lawn mowerChain saws and leaf blowers are prohibited from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., except on Sundays, when the ban lasts until 9 a.m.
Shortly after the proposal was made, District 11 Councilman Skylar Franke Withdrawal of Motion After facing strong backlash from the community.
“I have received a lot of feedback, as I think everyone has, including all members of parliament and across departments,” Frank said at Tuesday's meeting. “Having listened to feedback from residents across London, it is clear to me that the proposed 8am to 6pm restrictions on gas appliances are too restrictive. Therefore, I wish to withdraw it now.”
While Frank did withdraw her support, the motion, along with the committee's recommendations, still needs to go to Parliament for discussion and a vote.
Emails needed on the day
Top news from Canada and around the world.
At the start of the debate, Ward 10 councillor Paul Van Meerbergen reminded councillors that Londoners of voting age are “intelligent adults” who should be treated as such.
“They are certainly capable of making their own decisions when it comes to lawn mowers and lawn equipment,” Van Meerberg said. “Frankly, we have to resist the dark temptation to turn this committee into a groupthink and indoctrination politburo.”
The statement drew immediate backlash from the council, with Mayor Josh Morgan asking Van Meerbergen to retract the “groupthink” portion of the statement.
Van Meerberg went on to say that the motion is “trying to instill a certain view in the people of London.” Ward 7 Councillor Colleen Rahman raised the issue of personal privilege.
“I guess my indoctrination didn’t work because what I said was the opposite of what you said, but I think the councillor should apologize for it,” Rahman said.
Morgan again asked Van Meerberg to retract his previous comments and asked him to “express his views respectfully and not make major assumptions about other MPs and the factors that influence their votes.”
Van Meerberg reiterated that statement, saying he had not used “any unparliamentary language” or targeted any individual in parliament, highlighting his specific use of the word “temptation”.
“There is a temptation to go to that area and that was made clear in my words. I will not take my words back because we do have freedom of expression but it has to be within our limits,” Van Meerbergen said.
Morgan backed down, saying that while he disagreed with the wording, the word “temptation” would change the context of Van Meerbergen's comments. First District Councilman Hadley McAllister challenged the ruling, saying he was “very tired of allowing this behavior.”
“I have a problem with being called the Politburo. I think it's inappropriate, the language is inappropriate,” McAllister said. “This is not the Cold War. This is not the Un-London Activities Committee, and I think using that language is demeaning to the entire committee.”
McAllister's challenge failed in an 8-6 vote, with Councilors McAllister, Anna Hopkins, David Ferreira, Elizabeth Peloza and Skylar Frank voting against Morgan. All others voted in favor, with Fourth District Councilor Susan Stevenson absent. If the vote had succeeded, it could have resulted in Van Meerbergen being removed from the meeting.
Councillors voted unanimously to reject the curfew proposal. Also rejected was a proposal for an educational campaign on environmentally friendly lawn care and a proposal to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities for multi-municipal funding on best practices and incentive programs.
© 2024 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.
