In the last year, Cumberland Village council has conducted approximately fifty "In Camera" meetings that have been closed to the public. In each case, Council has consistently stated :

THAT under the provisions of Sections 90(1)(c) & 90(1)(k) of the Community Charter notice is hereby given that an In Camera Meeting closed to the public will be held at the conclusion of the regular Council meeting to consider;

* labour relations or other employee relations;

* negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a Municipal service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the council could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the municipality if they were held in public.

QUESTION TO COUNCIL : According to this protocol for In Camera meetings who, other than yourselves, determines whether or not the negotiations and related discussions spoken of above "could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the municipality if they were held in public." ? In other words, where does public accountability enter the process? What sort of harm do you consider to be possible through open disclosure?