An indictable offense in Canada is one that is punishable by more than two years in prison.
There is no indictable offense here, hence no barrier to serving on council.
This is not an opinion, it is a legal reality.
Right here…
Dude–whatever. Find me the evidence he’s been indicted. If you don’t have the information, my assumption that he hasn’t been indicted stands up way more than your assumption than he has.
One of the main rules in the election, as you posted, is that you must not be in jail or charged with an indictable offense to run. Are you seriously arguing with me that you think he HAS been indicted and the chief elections officer in Rupert didn’t notice?!
It was in the local News paper and yes thats what happened!! the deal was good all around but He should have passed on it, and not voted. but he did so instead of passing it 5 council votes and Herbs he made it 6 with no objections, it was 7 and its in the city public record…There was no wrong doings at all in the deal itself as it works for both parties they have more room and the City get a little more taxes…!! accept on principle him voting on the approved changes…thats it! and thats why I’m not voting for him…Oh…lol…and the beer gardens…other than that?
I’m not sure this qualifies for conflict of interest. If what Jabber says is correct, anyone could have bought the land once the rezone was passed. On top of that, Briglio doesn’t benefit form his sibling’s business. Finally–and I’m if there’s actually something in the community charter about voting where conflict of interest might be present–it’s up to Councilors to remove themselves from a vote if there is real or perceived conflict… so I think trying to put nails in his political coffin over this one vote is a stretch.
No, you are right! One nail, …as in itself,shouldn’t close the coffin,for it’s just one of many…is why I’m not voting for him…
Are you kidding? You asked for the evidence and he showed it. Now you are trying to deflect to something else?
You’re going to kill your mother’s campaign. She should take you over her knee and give you a spanking.
OK this week in HTMF has turned absolutly bizarre!!!
For eccentric to be found out as the child of a councilor is crazy considering the things he has posted!!!
I mean how much of his/her information and opinions is from the dinner table and overheard conversations!!!
Very scary from a political perspective…sure as hell makes me go hmmmm…
Again, show me a document–a piece of paper scanned onto the computer or taken from an reliable internet source–that shows that Mr. Briglio has been indicted on charges of assault.
Since there was no weapon involved, and since Mr. Briglio was drunk, it’s extremely unlikely that the Crown would seek to indict Mr. Briglio. As such, I assume if convicted it will be treated as a summary offense.
Mcsash, I don’t live at home–and I’ll give you the same challenge I gave Council Watch (which he has failed to meet thus far)—show me posts where I know any more than I should know. I guarantee you everything I’ve said is common knowledge to anyone who reads City Council minutes.
Edit: PaperPusher–I hope that the people of Prince Rupert are mature enough to separate the adult son of a Councilor from the Councilor herself–and I think you’ll find that they are.
Edit 2: With all this indictment stuff, I think I’ve missed making my real point. Point being, Mr. Briglio, based on all the facts that I know, has every right to run for municipal office.
One of the reasons that I become so disenchanted with politics nowadays, is that the focus is on character rather than policy.
Politics is, by definition, the process of policy making. However, politics has evolved into a game where you evangelize the people that you like, and demonize those that you dislike, with little regard for the policy decisions that they make.
Personally, I cannot follow the logic that says Mr. Briglio would be under a moral or ethical obligation to not run for a council position because of the much publicized incident at the Seafest beer gardens. I don’t believe that getting drunk and getting into a fight during your leisure hours, however grievous this may be to your sensibilities, has any relevance to one’s ability to make fair and effective policy decisions in a leadership position.
I should disclaim that I do not support Mr. Briglio in any capacity other than this conversation. I don’t think that I’ve ever met him, nor have I ever voted for him.
It distresses me, however, that there is almost no mention in political discourse about actual policy, but it becomes a popularity contests wherein all of the contestants are peacocks, made to preen about and have only their charisma dissected, rather than their platforms.
Should you not vote for Gordon Cambell’s BC Liberal party because has a DUI on his record?
Should you not vote for Barack Obama because he’s black?
Should you not vote for Tony Briglio for getting into a bar fight?
There are very good reasons for voting against all three of them, but I have not mentioned any.
Making a decision based on “that guy doesn’t seem trustworthy” or “now that’s a guy I’d like to sit down and have a beer with” disgusts me. Are we, as the voting public, so lazy that we will make our democratic decisions based purely on face value?
So someone who is payed by the taxpayers to make laws is under no obligation to obey them?
Garbage. And yes, if you don’t think the leader of B.C. should by driving around impaired then yes indeed don’t vote for him.
People in the public eye are always held to a higher standard than the ordinary person. But Eso is right when he questions the character assassinations that seem to dominate politics today. Clinton almost got impeached for having sex, but nothing happened to Bush after he lied his way into an illegal invasion of Iraq. (Vincent Bugliosi the prosecutor of Charles Manson recently wrote a book called the Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, but I doubt it will get that far.)
I have a hard time condemning people on past indiscretions. We all make mistakes - most aren’t splashed on the front pages or over the internet thank goodness. But at the same time some mistakes are hard to ignore as they go to the core of a person’s character. And character does play a part in who we want to represent us.
I think your right. And as bubbasteve pointed out ( on another topic, I think ) people learn from their mistakes ( usualy ). If we disqualify every one who has had " a moment of weak character " then we disqualify those that have risen above.
Alll that being said , I doubt ill be casting my vote for Tony.
Tony was not DUI he was passed out at a table, remember the adage let sleeping dogs lay or lie, there is no dispute he bite the bouncer or took a swing at the cops, what is in dispute is how it happened there are 2 versions of it now, Wee’s version and the version of the ppl at the table with Tony, it is up to the courts to figure out which version is true, But here is the question WHAT excatly did Tony get charged with? that should clear up whether it was a felony or a Misdemeanor, and no personally I don’t like Tony never have never will, but he is doing his best to get our health care system back to where it should be in this town, and being we live in a small town and you use the charges to vote against him so be it it is your right not to vote for him no matter what your reasons
Did anyone say that he has no right to run for office? Maybe I missed something but I thought the debate was whether he was a suitable candidate or not because of his conduct. Of course he has the right to run.
Who do you think has the access or right to post court documents relating to his charge? The point was not about what the court documents said, its about what you said.
Regarding character assasinations in politics I believe that this is due to the mistrust that peope have towards politicians. They are deceiving and will say anything to get elected. This certainly doesnt help them in the eyes of the public.
A friendly reminder people. If you delve a bit too far into running down a candidate there may be consequences. Here’s a quote from the HTMF FAQ.
Please keep in mind that you are responsible for what you write here.
I don’t have a huge problem with Briglio at all. In fact, the last few times I’ve seen him speak publicly, I’ve been impressed with him. I’m pretty close to voting for him.
It’s a small town, and you tend to form opinions of people based on what you hear about them, how they behave, what you see them do, etc. Yes, if he broke the law, he will face the court. Just like any of us would.
Let’s keep this clean, and not have me deal with yet another request from a lawyer for identifying information. Just because you’re anonymous to most people on HTMF doesn’t mean you’re anonymous to me, or to a court.
Dude have you read anything…he was wide awake when he got tossed out of the beer gardens…he told me many time where I should go…lol… before I tossed him out and The only thing said when he was told the cops were coming…“they can’t arrest me again, I’m walking…” Direct quote…from Mr. briglio and My version has 6-7 statments that say the same story, as for the table people…only one person has said neg. as for I was a little rough on the boy and pretty much, thanks from the rest. But that was face to face unlike some people on here.But for me once again I don’t believe he’s is the right choice just on the fact he’s on so many different boards… how can you do a good job? if your so spread thin…as we, Rupert need a great job…from our elected officials…or do expect the worst or sub-par from them…?
What about your position regarding the pet bylaw? Have you changed your opinion?
Of course he’s obligated to obey the law, and he may very well see jail time.
My issue is people judging someone based on the worst day(s) of their life, rather than all the good ones.
And PaperPusher, all this indictment nonsense was based on post that Expat made which says anyone under indictment or in jail cannot run for municipal office–I assumed he meant that therefore Mr. Briglio wasn’t allowed to run–I guess you and I were arguing over a misunderstanding.