IT surprised me that my minor missive in the Tele Postbag page on lack of councillor participation in recent budget debates received a response.

Councillor Stephen McCabe was prophetic in his prediction of increased participation at the full council debate on February 29 (Postbag, February 22).

I should be careful of what I wish for. The meeting did not make for edifying viewing.

Councillor Quinn was right to be angry. The comments and gestures thrown in her direction were shocking.

I've sat in meetings myself where participants threw points of order like confetti, tempers flared and we tested rules, all without adding anything to the debate.

In these circumstances, we should interpret the Council Standing Orders liberally.

It matters not a whit if two SNP councillors made speeches when they were not supposed to. Unless some legal requirement is being violated, who cares?

If Councillor Quinn wanted to comment on her amendment, why not?

Watching these debates about an issue of such importance to our community, I realised we still get ourselves mired in the petty language of conflict when it is so obvious we need to work together.

Indeed, in his response, Stephen refers to me as his ‘sparring partner’ and promises me further skirmishes in the council tax debate.

Personally, I am not proud of some the sparring I did 25 years ago. It did not make me an effective councillor. I wish now I had buried my ego.

I am perhaps naïve in suggesting that all the political parties might benefit from reflecting on the many calls for egoless compromise over conflict, compassion over anger.

At the very least, it might moderate the hostile climate Councillor Quinn mentions.

The task our councillors undertake is tough enough.

John Moody

Port Glasgow