Argus Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 Here's why I don't like this. There is an expected code of conduct for politicians in Canada. It's unwritten, but everyone knows it. Say and do nothing controversial. Say and do nothing without checking with your media experts. Do not respond in any kind of realistic or human fashion to questions or situations. Always modify your conduct so as to not upset anyone. Do not answer questions which might cause you bad publicity. Talk around them instead, or talk about something else. Reward your friends, particularly campaign contributors, and punish your enemies, but do it behind closed doors, where no one can see it. Keep everything about your life as secret as possible. Speak in a bland, unemotional way and always smile even when you want to punch someone. Never lose your temper. Ever. It's too human. The media pretends to hate this code of conduct, and yet are the primary enforcers of it. Any politician who steps out of line and says something human gets pounced on with glee, mocked and held up to public ridicule. We saw this with the Reform Party when they came to Ottawa. We see it with everyone who gets elected or runs for office who doesn't act like a whey faced robot. We saw it in Ottawa here with our last mayor, and the media have been all over Ford since he got elected. Politicians are not allowed to be human, not allowed to act human, not allowed to have emotions or dislikes. And every time one of them shows up who doesn't seem to realize this the media savages him. That's particularly so if the politician is seen as right wing, of course. So I'm sorry to see Ford go. He was a human being. Sure he screwed up from time to time. Sure he acted the fool. But so would almost any of us in the public limelight 24/7. I'm sure he'll be replaced by some dull nobody with a phony smile who will act ever-ingratiating to everyone around them. Just like all the rest. The media will heave a sigh of relief, hold a few celebratory toasts to themselves, then settle down to start whining again about all the phoneys in office who won't answer their questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 It's the Code of Conduct, which itself draws its powers from the City of Toronto Act. Where in the code of conduct, which I posted, does it allow council to order a member to pay money to a third party which had donated that money to a charity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 (edited) I'm still wondering why, exactly, Ford "didn't deserve" to lose his job over this. What would an appropriate punishment have been? A fine ? Paul Magder the guy who hired Ruby (who did it pro bono) can hardly talk, he's the guy who broke the law numerous times but he goes after Ford - what a hypocrite Magder is. I also believe that there's been a lynch mob after him since the get go, determined to get him out of office no matter what. I agree with Argus. The Toronto Star is probably celebrating right now. Edited November 26, 2012 by scribblet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 Nope. I'm simply adding to the discussion by pointing out that the judge made a very conservative decision and it's ironic that conservatives on this forum are upset by this. Actually I'm a bit surprised and relieved to see that most here agree that Ford behaved stupidly. Even if you like him, it's hard to defend what he did, and how he behaved in court. All Ford had to do was tell the judge he made an 'error in judgement' and he would have got a reprimand at most. He refused to do so, still maintains he did nothing wrong, challenged the judge directly and gave the judge absolutely no wiggle room, no possible 'out'. I expect nothing drastic to happen - he'll appeal and the decision will be 'stayed' until the appeal is heard and by then it'll be close to time for a new election. I hope by then Ford fans will realize that using THEIR taxpayer dollars to benefit a private charity is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 A fine ? Paul Magder the guy who hired Ruby (who did it pro bono) can hardly talk, he's the guy who broke the law numerous times but he goes after Ford - what a hypocrite Magder is. I also believe that there's been a lynch mob after him since the get go, determined to get him out of office no matter what. I agree with Argus. The Toronto Star is probably celebrating right now. Are you accusing the judge of bias or incompetence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 A fine ? Paul Magder the guy who hired Ruby (who did it pro bono) can hardly talk, he's the guy who broke the law numerous times but he goes after Ford - what a hypocrite Magder is. Sure about that? I also believe that there's been a lynch mob after him since the get go, determined to get him out of office no matter what. I agree with Argus. The Toronto Star is probably celebrating right now. Heres the skinny, Rob Ford did this to Rob Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 Where in the code of conduct, which I posted, does it allow council to order a member to pay money to a third party which had donated that money to a charity? [15] The significance of s. 5(1) of the MCIA applying to a Code of Conduct violation is that any member of council faced with a finding of a Code of Conduct violation is, when the matter is discussed at Council, disqualified from speaking or voting on the matter. This is because under the Code of Conduct, Council has the power to levy a financial sanction, thereby engaging s. 5(1) of the MCIA. This is not necessarily dependent on what the Integrity Commissioner has recommended by way of penalty, or whether or not there is a penalty recommendation, because under the Code of Conduct, pecuniary sanctions are available and it is for City Council to decide what sanction, if any, to impose. The law is well settled that a potential pecuniary interest in a matter is sufficient to engage s. 5(1) of the MCIA (see Tuchenhagen v. Mondoux, 2011 ONSC 5398, 107 O.R. (3d) 675 (Div. Ct.)). The applicant’s position is that the Integrity Commissioner’s recommendation that the respondent personally reimburse the donations engaged s. 5(1) of the MCIA, but that even in the absence of a recommended pecuniary sanction, any consideration by Council of a Code of Conduct violation would have similar effect because of the potential pecuniary sanctions which Council could impose on the member Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 was this a Onatrio supreme court ruling or canada supreme court ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 He broke the rules, he should have known better, i just hope that for the sake of the city the Adam 'ladies frames' vaughn isn't the next mayor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 was this a Onatrio supreme court ruling or canada supreme court ? Neither.Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 how far can it be appealed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 I hope by then Ford fans will realize that using THEIR taxpayer dollars to benefit a private charity is wrong. Ford used taxpayer dollars to benefit a charity? I don't recall that as being part of this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 Are you accusing the judge of bias or incompetence? Where did I say that ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 He broke the rules, he should have known better, i just hope that for the sake of the city the Adam 'ladies frames' vaughn isn't the next mayor. That rule is broken a hundred times a day across Ontario. It's just that Clayton Ruby isn't there to file private charges with the courts against the city and town councilors who violate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 Sure about that? No, I'm just looking it up now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 The financial penalties spoken of are set out in the Toronto City Council Members Code of Conduct. And none seems to apply to this situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) Well, let's hope conservatives see the reason mandatory minimums are ridiculous in all of this. I won't hold my breath though. The judge had absolutely no discretion in the matter. Edited November 27, 2012 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 Well, let's hope conservatives see the reason mandatory minimums are ridiculous in all of this. I won't hold my breath though. The judge had absolutely no discretion in the matter. mandatory minimums...like the mandatory minimum for 6 pot plants... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 This guy,in my opinion,made blunder after blunder after blunder. And Rob Ford's luck just ran out! It's about time! I briefly heard on the radio that he must go through a special process to appeal and the judgement stands unless his appeal is successful. In other words,he's out because his appeal will not come before the bi-election. (I could have understood the details improperly or am misinformed) WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 Where did I say that ? Not directly, but you blame Magder, "a lynch mob" ... but the decision was made by the judge based on law ... law that Rob Ford willfully broke and refused to acknowledge his 'error'. IE, As said ... Rob Ford did this to Rob Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) how far can it be appealed how far can it be appealed The Ontario Superior Court of Justice is the court with inherent jurisdiction in the province (in other words, they handle all of the cases that the Court of Justice isn't given statute to hear). It now would go to the Court of Appeal for Ontario, the highest court in the province. I don't know if it could go to the SCoC. Edited November 27, 2012 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 The financial penalties spoken of are set out in the Toronto City Council Members Code of Conduct. And none seems to apply to this situation. It's right there: The Integrity Commissioner may also recommend that Council or a local board (restricted definition) take the following actions: 3. Repayment or reimbursement of moneys received. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjre Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 This incident shows clearly that so called "democracy" is a lie. If Ford is elected by people, one judger with one randomly picked guy is more than enough to let him left the office. The legal system is just a weapon for attacking. When someone want to use it for his or his small group's own interest, he don't care if most other people's interested has been damaged. They are the real thugs who destroy Canadian economy and the people's life. And the legal system make such destruction possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peeves Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 The decision was right. The punishment was excessive. The charge was politically motivated. The charge was at best frivolous. Ford is bull headed and was wrong in speaking/voting on the issue. The judge should have considered the A) Political agenda b The minor infraction in his judgment. C) And he did have discretion in the finding penalty. Magder and leftist activist team were likely looking for a Ford legal issue from day 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 This incident shows clearly that so called "democracy" is a lie. If Ford is elected by people, one judger with one randomly picked guy is more than enough to let him left the office. The legal system is just a weapon for attacking. When someone want to use it for his or his small group's own interest, he don't care if most other people's interested has been damaged. They are the real thugs who destroy Canadian economy and the people's life. And the legal system make such destruction possible. Yes it's a terrible thing that people who break the law get punished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.