"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Wednesday 27 January 2016


Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "FACTS IN EVIDENCE": 

The loss was because of a technicality. Even if a jury found in your favour, it wouldn't have been over. Somehow some way they would have found something to dismiss or overturn this case. Your win would have set precedent for future litigation with future politicians. There is no way they could have let that happen.  

Posted by Anonymous to  Our Town and Its Business at 24 January 2016 at 22:08


I took yesterday's post down. Comments had been made about an "Old Boys' club"  I couldn't make the connection so I was trying to prove a negative. That gets confusing. Editing did not improve . So it was removed 

I've thought before the only way to uncover all that happened in the Mormac years and since would be a judicial inquiry. The cost  would be in the millions. Benefit from the process  is not always commensurate.  

 Former  Prime Minister Paul Martin launched an inquiry into the federal sponsorship scandal. The tab was over $20 million.

The most remarkable thing about it was the clash of arrogance  between the Justice  inquiring and former Prime Minister Jean Chretien. The display was not illuminating. It did not reflect well on either party. 

Toronto had Madam Justice Bellamy inquire into the computer scandal. I believe the price tag  was $14 million. One recommendation that came out of it was  permissive legislation from the Province  allowing municipalities to adopt  a Code of Conduct and appoint an  Integrity  Commissioner to adjudicate complaints. 

Mississauga had their own inquiry costing millions in double digits. Nothing came of that. 

Toronto Councillors have an allowance of $20. thousand to retain legal counsel in their defence. The Integrity Commissioner has  independence to adjudicate with objectivity.

The  same cannot be said for the Aurora experience. 

We will have our conversation. 

 be said for 


Anonymous said...

A judicial inquiry? For a one-term mayor? Please, don't inflate her importance - or lack thereof - any further. It was a blip in Aurora's history, and she is merely a footnote (although a nasty, bully of a footnote, it must be said).

Anonymous said...

Integrity Commissioners give me a chill up my spine. The original idea might have had some merit but in actuality they have
proven to be a disaster.

Anonymous said...

I agree with that post at the top. It was a done deal.

Anonymous said...

It all stuck to Mr G - his run for the top job was severely hampered.

Anonymous said...

A one term mayor that got tossed out like no other, then hit with a SLAPP suit. The first in canadisn history. That will be her legacy in Aurora. No inquiry necessary.

Anonymous said...

12:05.. Who's importance is being inflated? The plaintiff or defendant? Perhaps both.

Anonymous said...

he could have just cautioned the jury to disregard whatever offended his little self.

Anonymous said...

I support an inquiry into what went on here.

Anonymous said...

Good money after bad, 10:23 - a complete waste.

Anonymous said...

10:23- Support a money making inquiry industry? Because that's what it is! With absolutely no benefit to the taxpayer? Regardless of what they find, good or bad, nothing will change. A whole pile of recommendations will be issued where maybe a hand full if that will be implemented, everyone will still have there jobs or move onto a better ones, and we're stuck with a multi million dollar bill. No thanks, you toss them out on their ass. We get this chance every 4 yrs.

Anonymous said...

missed one though