During the Special Council Meeting of May 20, 2026, while City of Pickering Council was debating the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan — a file the City itself has identified as one of Pickering’s most significant long-term planning matters — Regional Councillor Linda Cook directed the following remark at another elected member of Council:
“Spoken like a true white settler.”
This comment can be heard at approximately 4 hours and 51 minutes in the official public meeting video:
This was not a private conversation. It was said during a recorded public meeting, in the middle of debate on one of the most consequential planning matters currently before the City of Pickering.
What makes this situation even more troubling is the sequence of events. Earlier in the same meeting, Councillor Cook, stating:
“Also in my role as a regional delegate for Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation…”
That context matters. Councillor Cook invoked a role connected to Indigenous consultation, representation, and respectful public dialogue. Later in the same meeting, she used race and identity as part of a dismissive remark directed at another elected member of Council during debate.
Watching one elected official speak to another elected official in that way — openly, dismissively, and in a public forum — was deeply upsetting to me. I have personally experienced situations where debate, disagreement, or advocacy was met not with a response to the substance of the issue, but with racially charged or identity-based attacks meant to dismiss, shame, or discredit the person speaking. That is why this moment affected me so strongly.
I know what it feels like when a person’s identity is used as a weapon instead of their argument being answered on its merits.
What I witnessed at this meeting felt painfully familiar. It was not just a sharp political comment. It was a personal remark tied to race and identity, directed at another elected official during debate. In my view, that crosses a serious line. It undermines respectful democratic discussion, discourages people from speaking freely, and sends a troubling message to the public about what kind of conduct is tolerated in Council chambers.
Political debate can be passionate. Council members can strongly disagree. But there is a line elected officials should not cross. Personal, identity-based remarks directed at another member of Council have no place in a respectful democratic process.
The City of Pickering’s own standards require members of Council to conduct themselves with respect, dignity, and decorum. Those standards matter most in difficult moments, not just easy ones. If Council members expect residents to engage respectfully, then Council members must model that same conduct themselves.
What makes this even more concerning is the apparent double standard. Councillor Cook’s own official City profile presents her as an “advocate for equity and inclusion”, and as someone pursuing Indigenous studies to deepen her understanding as “a settler historian and ally”. I also understand that Councillor Cook signed the Elect Respect pledge last year ( https://electrespect.ca/ ) — a pledge centred on restoring civility, rejecting personal attacks, and treating elected officials and others with respect.
That is precisely why this remark is so troubling.
The Northeast Pickering process is also one where the City itself has emphasized the importance of respectful consultation with the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation. Against that backdrop, using a phrase like this as a pointed remark toward a Council colleague during debate does not reflect leadership. It reflects the very kind of harmful public conduct elected officials are supposed to condemn, not demonstrate.
This is not about political theatre. This is about accountability. I will be personally filing a formal complaint with the Integrity Commissioner regarding Councillor Cook’s remarks at the May 20, 2026 Special Council Meeting.
In my complaint, I will be asking for a full and impartial review of what was said, whether it breached the Code of Conduct, and what consequences should follow if it did. I will also be asking the Integrity Commissioner to consider whether Councillor Cook should be required to issue a public apology to the Council member targeted by the remark, to Council as a whole, and to the residents of Pickering.
No elected official should be above the basic standards of respect and dignity that they expect from everyone else.
The public deserves transparency. The Council member targeted by this remark deserves accountability. And residents of Pickering deserve confidence that Pickering’s elected officials will be held to the same standards they ask others to uphold.
I also request that the Integrity Commissioner consider whether Councillor Cook should be required to issue a public apology to the Council member targeted by the remark, to Council as a whole, and to the residents of Pickering. Given the seriousness of the comment, the fact that it was made during a formal public meeting, the apparent inconsistency between her conduct and the standards she publicly endorsed through the Elect Respect pledge, and the impact such remarks can have on public confidence in Council, I further request that the Integrity Commissioner consider recommending the strongest corrective measures available, including remedial training, formal censure or reprimand, and, if warranted, a suspension of remuneration for the maximum period permitted under the applicable legislation and Code of Conduct framework.
No elected official should be above the basic standards of respect and dignity that they expect from everyone else.
_________________
