It’s a common refrain in reporting – a common answer.
No comment.
When you go to journalism school you learn not to be too frustrated by it, because it can be a powerful tool for a narrative. To have a subject leave you with no thoughts allows the reader to create and imagine their own. To have a subject leave you with no answer to a controversy, can be quite revealing.
But the honest answer is, while many believe journalists simply love to court controversy, the point and purpose of a newspaper is to report on any issue or subject relevant to the reader. If we believe you deserve to know about it, it is newsworthy. And so, the amount of no comment we get in Caledon can be quite frustrating.
The newsroom at the Caledon Enterprise is concerned with getting you all of the information and comment you want from the subject matter and people involved in the stories we cover.
After years of screaming it from the rooftops myself, I decided to approach an expert about this common refrain I hear in politics.
“That issue is before the courts, I can’t comment.”
It was the ‘can’t’ that always bothered me. As if there existed a great legal force stating on stone tablets carried from Mount Sinai – Do not speak. That is before our courts.
I always kind of knew that was c—p.
“In the political world, you are often coming up against people wanting an excuse not to say something,” said Lorne Sossin, Dean of law at the Osgoode Hall Law School at York University.
Recently it’s become an issue I think you deserve to know the truth about. And let’s be clear, the purpose here is to figure out when they can, and when they can’t talk – because there are many instances where no comment is warranted.
I don’t particularly care when the people I cover the most, our local politicians and bureaucratic staff, decide to use the out. Whatever, I always think. It will simply reveal the amount of work they want to do, the amount of openness and transparency they truly care about.
Recently however, and perhaps it is because of the amount of calls I have had to field filled with ignorance on how things work, I decided to explore it so that you, the reader, at least know the truth.
According to Sossin, based on his research of the actual legal foundations for "no comment" responses, not only can your elected officials speak on many of these issues, in most cases, they have a responsibility to do so.
Asked about the Peel-wide refrain from councillors and the Mayors, approached for what they think on the present conflict of interest cases in Caledon, and how that may affect their thinking about Caledon and the Region’s planning, if it will cause them to examine anything with their staff, he believes we absolutely could have received some words of guidance and reassurance for you, the reader and taxpayer.
“In the context you’re working in (the media) a criminal case, a trial of a young offender, the rules are stricter and clear,” Sossin said. “You’re not allowed to comment on the merits of a case or say anything where you are trying to unduly influence the outcome. But councillors can express their opinions on what was done or not done, as long as they make clear that do not intend to influence the case, or undermine an independent legal process (whether a Court, Tribunal, Board, etc). The whole doctrine is tied to observing the fairness and appearance of fairness of a proceeding, not to shielding public officials from accountability.”
If they’re not trying to interfere, but just give you their own thoughts, it’s fine.
“For example, asking councillors about what they do in their office to be alert to any potential conflicts or deal with conflicts once they arise? I can’t imagine they can make no comment on this sort of question. Similarly, asking councillors about the policies they follow, the training and education they receive about conflicts, or how they personally approach their responsibilities would all be appropriate notwithstanding the existence of a dispute around a potential conflict on council that might be in the courts. A journalist should pursue legitimate questions about councillors' conduct themselves. All of that seems entirely fair game to me.”
But the truth is, I can get better at my job as well.
I will have to watch the semantics of my questions obviously. As I do with the planning department, as I do with practically everyone I pose questions to, the words get deciphered and dissected in order to be answered in a certain way.
So I just have to get better at probing further.
“If you get that no comment, you should feel free to say, I’ve talked to an expert on the boundaries of "no comment." Ask them why they think this question is something they cannot answer? Ask them who has advised them they can’t answer, and on what legal or ethical basis? Anything that probes into the case of why they are not commenting is part of the story as well,” Sossin added.
So, I will endeavour to get better at my job.
Here’s hoping, for your sake, others will as well.