Mel Yuan for Brunswick

Cr. Iwasaki was kind enough to reach out to me personally in response to my criticism of the censure of Cr. Yildiz. It is not my place to publish his opinion, but I will supply mine.

Thanks Jay,

I appreciate you reaching out personally, and in particular the clarification about a majority of Councillors not being able to exclude another Councillor and the inevitable escalation in exclusions this has the potential to bring. 

I also do not mean to insinuate that you or any other member of Council supports Trump. 

However, I am opposed to this method of enforcing a Code of Conduct. Free speech is not free and without consequence. There are absolute limits to what any person can say without consequence. However, comments that Councillors make about each other including their personal integrity and voting intentions should have far greater protection that those that this affair displays.

Sustained criticism of individuals, including their ideas, opinions, values, must be strongly protected in political discourse above the standard of “bullying” or hurt feelings.

Local government has been the poster child for poor behaviour in government. In Victoria entire councils have been sacked for repeated disfunction. I recognise and acknowledge this. However the response in enforcing Codes of Conduct to control behaviour is past the tipping point on acceptable control of political discourse.

Moira Deeming won her defamation case. There is an explosion of this kind of action being taken by elected officials i.e. politicians of various hues. Deeming’s actions in pursuing defamation is an “own goal” for the Liberal Party and brings the entire political class into disrepute. 

You and any other elected official may use the mechanisms, guardrails and legal protections available to you. However using these mechanisms I believe sends the political system down the same rabbit hole as the offending behaviour.  

Elected officials are subject to scrutiny and criticism much greater than an average person who does not hold themself up. The electors will ultimately judge all elected officials’ behavior via the ballot box – Code of Conduct or not. 

There is no such thing as Independent arbitration insofar as a person is given a brief, a terms of reference, and powers for enforcement – this process itself is values driven and I do not believe that is healthy for promoting the robust political discourse that is needed. I realise the intention behind it, but it is flawed. 

The very discussion we are having is one which should be freely held in open forums and that would signify robust political discourse. Closed door grievance processes, redacted posts, threats of legal action, removing an elected office bearer from their role – these are all warning signs of weakened, not strengthened democracy. 

You, and all Councillors, should be prepared to be relentlessly criticised for your policies, views, beliefs, voting record, personal values, honesty, integrity and motivations. This may be repeated, sustained and ongoing. You may be mocked for your looks or dress, satirised and pilloried. If we are lucky, there will be independent media scrutinising and analysing decisions and their consequences. Your opponents’ supporters may vilify you and be angry and ugly when they do so. These freedoms are important to a robust democracy and we must protect them zealously. We are witnessing real-time how fragile the rule of law and media freedom are. All political actors must be cognizant of the greater good over the minor sting of personal attacks. 

I have no affiliation to Cr Yildiz and in no way endorse his comments. As an example of his offending behaviour he called a private individual “a vile human being”. While this is objectively rude, this does not meet a standard which warrants his exclusion as a member of Council. Councillors have been duly elected to perform a role. The fact that their behaviour does not meet a subjective polite standard of behaviour is insufficient to exclude them from it. The standard of behaviour expected between councillors should be, by definition, lower, than how Councillors treat the general public. If Councillors themselves cannot see the fundamental importance of this, then perhaps they are truly “unrepresentative swill”.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-22/how-defamation-became-australias-new-fight-club/104366932