Why not? Because he did not resign his seat. Only the Office of Premier.
Isn't that convenient.
Isn't that convenient.
But if the purpose was to remove himself from responsibility for the decision made on the power generating plants , and let someone else carry the can, why not resign his seat ?
Why not indeed?
The party then would been left with a one seat majority.
A Ratberger resignation from the ranks like Ratberger on principle from Harper's Party would have leave them with no majority at all.
Would The Honorable Andrea Horwath be able to master sufficiently intricate steps to justify keeping this government in power and maintain face?
It's not c;ear she accomplished that with her last performance.
It's not c;ear she accomplished that with her last performance.
Information the Premier's Office broke the law and deleted records related to a near billion dollar decision to cancel legal contracts for political gain cannot be overlooked.
I think by maintaining the government in office, as of now, all three parties at Queen's Park are complicit in obscuring the facts..
The Old Boys Network is functioning well at Queen's Park.
Not so well on Parliament Hill.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it should be the Old Girl's Network.
Damn. It is going to be really tough to decide for whom to vote in the next Ontario election. But I might disagree with you about the efficiency of the Liberals right now. There simply has to be someone[s] to carry the can. This is too big to sweep away. They may have to turn on one of their own.
ReplyDeleteIt's Rathgeber NOT Ratberger.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteHot off the press:
"Morris launches lawsuit against Town over 2010 defamation case"
This bitch never quits!
Jumpin' Jehoshaphat !
ReplyDeleteMorris is suing the Town of Aurora for HER legal fees!!
We should sue her for defamation of our town !!!!!
@
ReplyDelete5:46 PM That was truly lame.
The Auroran is up early. Wonder where they got that story?
ReplyDelete6:35... what defamation? She never defamed the Town. Nice hyperbole though.
ReplyDeleteI've read the piece in the Auroran. Her lawsuit won't fly. She refused to sign off that any money that came in was to go to the town - more than once - when she was asked to do so. Hence the entire thing was her very own from the beginning. That is a huge speed-bump. And the town gave her plenty of warming that they wanted to stop the funding. She did not negotiate any settlement. The town's lawyers just have to check with the defendants' lawyers to confirm.
ReplyDeleteFor reference to the new Morris legal action and The Auroran see:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newspapers-online.com/auroran/?p=2487
Good read from Brock Weir.
I would assume that this would all come in under the area of contract law as to what she argues “the Town” said and promised to her in the initial legal action and the validity of that information and argument under contract law.
From Brock’s article:
“Ms. Morris states that as a result of the breaches of contract, misrepresentations and negligence of the Town and those for which it is liable at law, she has sustained losses and damages, including but not limited to liability to pay a cost award in respect to the Town action, a liability in respect to legal fees incurred in the pursuit of the Town action, and other legal fees incurred to obtain legal advice in respect to the Town’s actions.” (end of quote)
I can’t blame anyone for whatever reasons for seeking to get money back that has been paid out of their own pocket. They are simply trying to recoup their losses. But also at some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions and stop pointing the finger externally at everyone else.
This isn’t something that someone has come up with all after the fact. “Oh, by the way, now that this is all over and you’re out of pocket thousands of dollars, you can go back and sue the Town”. I would bet she’s been holding this card in her back pocket waiting for the outcome of all the actions and then throw it out there so that she can recoup her personal losses and expenses which were based on her personal decision to continue the actions. Why hasn’t this all come out sooner? Like when she decided to go it alone? Why didn’t she cry foul then to the Town? (She’ll argue that she was negotiating with the Town all along to pay her way).
What a mess!!!
This action will take years once again and who knows she may even win. If so, she and all her supporters will claim a moral victory even though the original action was a loss and deemed a SLAPP. The result will be a SLAPP addendum in that the Town (read the taxpayers) would be responsible for all legal costs throughout all of this mess. The winners will be the lawyers – not a slight against them as that’s their business. They will win regardless of the outcome as they provide their services.
More money will possibly be spent by the Town defending themselves than would be spent paying out and at some point someone will be suggest settling the action just to make it got away and to cut the losses to the Town.
Also noted from Brock’s report:
In the initial defamation lawsuit, lawyers for Ms. Morris argued that the case in question was not a municipally driven lawsuit, but a lawsuit by Ms. Morris to protect her reputation. In the subsequent hearings stemming from an unsuccessful lawsuit by resident George Hervey claiming Ms. Morris breached the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by participating in the closed session meeting which ultimately lead to the defamation case, it was argued the case was brought about by the Town simply using Ms. Morris’ name. (end of quote)
So the facts are confusing and in my opinion construed to meet the argument of the moment.
I wouldn’t doubt that Mr. Cooper, Town Solicitor when all this started, is certainly regretting his time spent in Aurora and wishing he could wipe it off his resume. As are most likely all other Town employees who were also caught in this soap opera. No doubt any loyalties, friendships, respect of colleagues have gone awash.
This may be another test case as there may be no precedent for personal continuation of what was eventually deemed a failed SLAPP to be thrown back at the SLAPPer to finish payment over a contract law argument.
Win or lose we could be reading this one as a sample of contract law in a future edition of Canadian law text books.
I wouldn't doubt that Councilor Ballard's talk in the past about that there's more to the whole Morris-Town-SLAPP action than what everyone knows about is somehow tied to this new lawsuit. He always seemed to have something up his sleeve that he wouldn't or couldn't speak of but was itching to tell and set everyone straight. And he's infamous for his "Let the games begin" line that he stated when he first elected. All the dirt on this case will continue as it can't be deemed conflict of interest, but council voting as to what to do with this new action will be along both political and personal allegations with everyone claiming to take the high road.
ReplyDelete10:53 AM
ReplyDeleteCouncillor Ballard has always wanted his very own lawsuit. I don't think he can call this one his own but we are just observers. Close observers, of course.