Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Inner
Chamber":
Evelyn:
You may not agree with me since you are
a believer in the sacred right of people to vote for those who should represent
their interests.
But you are describing the abject failure of those
elected, new or incumbent, to act on behalf of our town's residents in a manner
that is both responsible and fiscally prudent.
Maybe the British Empire
wasn't so bad after all, when the colonies were ruled by professional civil
servants. Yes, I know, some of these were ruthless and corrupt. But there was an
overall policy and direction under the Foreign Office and the Colonial Office,
something that is sadly lacking in our town and its business.
This 20
year plan of which you speak is absolute BS. Our local government couldn't get
it right with a two year plan. Computers, anyone? Asset management? What
twaddle!
***********************
At my grand-daughter's graduation from Queen's University, Geoffrey Simpson gave the last lecture. Mr. Simpson is a highly successful,well-regarded journalist and author.
His area of expertise is politics at all levels.
He has never been a politician but I thought, for a non-combatant he had a pretty good grasp of the reality..
He advised the graduates, politicians are people just like all others.
He advised them to maintain a healthy skepticism.
Never be cynical.
I do not describe the "abject failure" of Councillors "to act .on behalf of our town's residents in a manner that is responsible and fiscally prudent"
I am the narrator.I tell the story from my perspective.Clearly not the same as other Councillors.
My job is to persuade others to see things my way.
When I am not successful , I post in my blog and confess my failure.
I'm glad you my arguments make sense to you.
They don't to everyone.
Some disagree just because it's me.
I watched Steve Paikin's program on TVO last night.The subject was "corruption in government".
Rob Ford's conflict of interest was the focus. Only Ford's
An associate from the law firm, Aird and Berliss was on hand to pontificate. Along with a Professor from York,and a couple of other seeming experts.
The caption under the law firm's name read "Best Legal Firm in Canada since 2006"
Who says so, I wondered.
The associate was introduced as having represented a party in the public inquiry in Mississauga
Didn't say who.
Didn't say what the inquiry was about.
I thought since the program was about corruption in government. that was odd.
Hazel's name never came up.
But the law firm's name made me think of our experience.
It was an Aird and Berliss associate who represented our former Mayor in what has been determined to have been a SLAPP. lawsuit, paid for by public resources until a new Council turned off the tap.
I thought of the time when a lawyer from the firm suggested I had a Conflict of Interest by attending a "closed meeting of Council" where he reported the results of his "investigation" of me.
He read letters I wrote. Blogs I posted. Reviewed tapes of comments I made in public meetings.All my public utterances.
The meeting was to discuss plans of the group to engineer a complaint against me under a Code of Conduct to an Integrity Commissioner. All paid for with public funds.
He advised there was no provision for a Council to file a complaint against a Councillor.
Notwithstanding , he accepted the retainer from the group, ..
The bill is understood to have been $70,000 paid from the town treasury.
He suggested Conflict of Interest if I stayed to listen to what he had to say.
I noted his comment and informed him, according to legislation, the decision was mine to make.
As I watched Steve Paikin last night and listened to the talk about whether or not $3,150 was a significant sum.
Whether helping kids was relevant.
Whether Justice Hackland made the right decision according to the letter of the law, I wondered how the program could claim to be about corruption in politics
There they were." the best law firm in Canada since 2006" being advertised on public programming. A Professor from York University and a couple of other professional yahoos and a journalist, paid more than the Premier of the Province, pontificating about ethics and the need to bring municipal politicians , as a class, to heel.
There was no depth to the discussion.
No attempt at balance.
It was financed with public resources.
Not a single politician among them.
No attempt to offer two sides to the question.
And no vote at the end of the program to decide which argument carried the day.
I thought it was an abuse of public resources.
But ,then again, not everyone would agree..
Thursday, 6 December 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
Ah, those heady days of Glory! Carrying Madame's hand-bag & long liquid lunches at Baldwin's !
That would be Jeffrey Simpson and Aird & Berlis.
Evelyn:
It is interesting that in this province the lowest level of court is the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. When I say lowest, that is not derogatory, it simply is the first court in which a motion or action is filed. There have been many serious and complicated matters argued in the Superior Court.
The word I want to focus on is "Justice."
Would the associate from Aird & Berlis by any chance have been John Mascarin? He is that firm's reputed expert in civil law and defamation and wrote a lengthy piece on this subject for one of the law reviews. He was also Morris's bag-carrier and was very much in evidence during her term in office.
These discussions involving members of the legal profession often drift into areas of utter nonsense and they seldom deal with the concept of justice.
But you also have to take into account the judges themselves. In the Morris defamation action Justice James Spence ruled that the case was not SLAPP and awarded $12,600 to Morris. And yet Master Thomas Hawkins was very clear in his ruling that in his opinion the Morris action was SLAPP litigation and he failed to see how Judge Spence could have ruled otherwise.
The application of the law can be inconsistent and often an injustice is perpetrated.
It is interesting to note that in an application under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act the applicant cannot appeal a judge's decision, while the respondent can. This is a further example of bad law and ofter leads to injustice. And as Judge Cunnigham has stated in his lengthy report on Hazel McCallion's case he feels that the Attorney General should be able to bring Conflict of Interest filings, not leave it up to individual citizens to do this where they have to pay costs running into the tens of thousands of dollars. This alone acts as a detriment to those who believe a conflict of interest has been committed by an elected official.
What is further disturbing, and unjust, is that awards for costs are usually only a fraction of what was actually spent and costs motions have to be submitted to a judge, often with attendant court hearings which simply serve to increase costs even more.
And very often elected officials are covered by liability insurance policies so that they do not have to worry about funding their own defence. This is also a matter of injustice.
In our society there has to be equality under the law, and the rights of one party must be the same as those of the other.
Unless this occurs justice can often fail to be done and our society is the weaker for it.
The law is an ass.
Don't try to understand the logic of it. You guys are going to spin around and around until you eventually have a embolism. It's not worth the trouble.
Mascarin was wrong once already when he said that Justice Hackland would require Mayor Ford to remain out of politics for the remainder of this term. He can run if there is a by-election. Bu that hasn't slowed him down - the meter is always ticking.
2:55 PM
But it keeps us out of trouble. No?
Do you mind if I quote a few of your articles as long as I
provide credit and sources back to your website? My website is in the very same
niche as yours and my visitors would genuinely benefit from some of the information you present
here. Please let me know if this alright with you.
Many thanks!
my page ... Extreme Lean Garcinia Diet
Post a Comment