babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Ford Desecration Pt IV - the march to Detroit continues

855 replies [Last post]

Comments

Sineed
Offline
Joined: Dec 4 2005

Just to clarify: I think the recent events set an unfortunate precedent in labour relations. Miller negotiated in good faith, and was almost universally vilified for it. Ford was a bully, and got a quick deal.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

I knew it! Thanks, Sineed. And I agree.

 


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

I don't know if Miller was responsible for the City's refusal to put a wage offer on the table until the union agreed to give up its banked sick leave, but I recall that tactic was roundly and correctly denounced at the time as bad faith bargaining. That may be one of the reasons Miller was vilified.


Sineed
Offline
Joined: Dec 4 2005

I don't know either, M. Spector. Miller wasn't always the most effective communicator. At the time, getting rid of the banked sick time was pretty contentious, even though it's not a progressive benefit, and most unions have got rid of it (mine did in the 1980s).

I'm hoping for a better resolution on Wednesday, when TTC chair Karen Stintz will hold a special meeting that may see a partial resumption of the Transit City plan. Ford has been insisting that the entire Eglinton LRT line be buried, including under the Don Valley, and Stintz, after losing a vote at the last TTC board meeting on the topic, then successfully collected enough signatures from other counsellors to bring the issue before counsel. And the Premier says he'll listen to what counsel decides...


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003

 

TTC chief Gary Webster fired

Quote:

TTC chief general manager Gary Webster has been relieved of his duties, following a vote during a special meeting of transit commissioners Tuesday.

In a motion describing termination "without just cause," the transit commission voted 5-4 to fire Webster, who has worked at the service for 35 years, just two weeks after he expressed open defiance to a subway plan championed by Mayor Rob Ford. His ouster comes a year before he was set to retire.

"This was not how I expected this to end — certainly not how I wanted it to end," Webster told reporters shortly after his termination. "But clearly the choice has been made to replace me as chief general manager and I accept that."...

 

Calling Webster a "consummate professional," Coun. Maria Augimeri's voice broke with emotion as she faced the commission members who wanted to dump the TTC veteran.

"You're kicking success out the door. You're throwing away success with both hands. What are you thinking?" she said, moments before the vote came down.

At one point, Augimeri raised her voice to a yell, accusing those loyal to Ford of "abuse of power" for getting rid of a dissenting voice.

Also: The Torontoist's liveblog of today's hearing.

 


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

"Call it the unthinking trying to sell the uninformed on the unaffordable."

An editorial in the Toronto Star published on Saturday gives a good summary of the Sheppard subway expansion issue.


Maysie
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2005

This is what happens when no-brain fuckwad bullies run the city.

Councillor Doug Ford tangles with verbally abusive bike courier

Quote:

Doug Ford then said that last week he was accosted downtown by a bike courier, who said "some real nasty, nasty words" into the councillor's SUV and then circled back to give him another earful.

The councillor, trying to drive into underground parking, got out because the courier was blocking him from pushing a button, he said.

"I told him if I wasn't an elected official I'd kick his ass in about 10 seconds," Doug Ford said. But the courier was still cursing him when he walked up from the garage, he said.

"All these construction guys are watching and he's going at me full tilt and I'm thinking ‘Is this all part of the job, Rob never told me. . . ," he said.

Mayor Rob Ford interjected: "There'd be one less courier because, trust me, Doug has been a kick boxer 10 years . . . I guarantee you that guy would have been history in about two seconds."

So, joking about violence is funny? Bragging about it on the air is just a story to tell?

Awwww, the construction guys were watching him! Awwww poor Dougie. Waah waah!!

And "that guy would have been history"?? Who the fuck talks like this? I say, that's a death threat.

See, Fords, here's the thing. When you fuck up the city, and destroy services, it actually affects real people's lives. And you know what else? People are going to get fucking pissed off about it. You clearly don't care when we're polite. And now you get some of your macho bullshit served back at you, verbally, for a few minutes. Cry me a fucking river.


Maysie
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2005

OMG breaking news.

Clayton Ruby filing application to remove Rob Ford from office

There's a briefing at City Hall at 11am (in 15 minutes). Stay tuned.

But in the meantime: WOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!


Maysie
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2005

Update from the Torontoist:

Quote:

Prominent Toronto lawyer Clayton Ruby has filed an application with the Ontario Superior Court on behalf of Toronto resident Paul Magder, alleging that Rob Ford has violated the Province of Ontario's Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

That act sets out rules that govern how municipal politicians must conduct themselves while in office; one of those rules is that members of a council cannot take part in a debate if it involves their own private financial concerns. Ruby alleges that Ford did this last month, when the mayor gave a speech and cast a vote during a debate on whether he should have to repay certain donors to the Rob Ford Football Foundation. When he did so, according to Ruby, he breached the rules that are supposed to keep municipal government free from personal interests.

The penalty set out in the Conflict of Interest Act for violations of this kind: removal from office.

What a great day this has turned out to be.


Freedom 55
Offline
Joined: Mar 14 2010

Crossing my fingers that this bid is more successful for Toronto folks than Larry O'Brien's legal saga was for Ottawans.


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Thank you Toronto for furnishing me with this melodrama of endless political comedy. With the CBC's assualt on political satire through its travesties (and not in a good way) Air Farce and 22 Minutes, I am grateful to still have reason to chuckle.


Rabble_Incognito
Offline
Joined: Feb 21 2012

Maysie wrote:

Update from the Torontoist:

Quote:

Prominent Toronto lawyer Clayton Ruby has filed an application with the Ontario Superior Court on behalf of Toronto resident Paul Magder, alleging that Rob Ford has violated the Province of Ontario's Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

That act sets out rules that govern how municipal politicians must conduct themselves while in office; one of those rules is that members of a council cannot take part in a debate if it involves their own private financial concerns. Ruby alleges that Ford did this last month, when the mayor gave a speech and cast a vote during a debate on whether he should have to repay certain donors to the Rob Ford Football Foundation. When he did so, according to Ruby, he breached the rules that are supposed to keep municipal government free from personal interests.

The penalty set out in the Conflict of Interest Act for violations of this kind: removal from office.

What a great day this has turned out to be.

True 'dat.


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

yes, Happy spring break week!


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Clayton Ruby was interviewed on P&P. I am not a lawyer (IANAL) but it sounds to me that he has an extremely weak case, and I'm surprised a lawyer of his reputation would take it on. Nevertheless, I hope Ford is thrown out of office - he's a world class prick.


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

Paul Magder, his client, has plenty of money to fund the litigation, even if it's a longshot. For Ruby it's a chance for more self-promotion. Think of it as a strategic lawsuit.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Can't be very strategic if it's almost a sure thing that Ruby will lose, and not much good for his reputation.


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

Before he loses he will get much attention from the media, and many opportunities to denounce Rob Ford. He will further his reputation as a crusader against the powerful and corrupt. 

The reason certain lawsuits are called "strategic" is that their importance doesn't depend on whether you ultimately win or lose. By the time you get a verdict, the lawsuit has already served its purpose.

If you lose, you can say it was an uphill fight, but worth undertaking. If you win, you look like a hero.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Oh - okay - understood. Thanks!


Maysie
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2005

Rob Ford in fight to save mayoralty

Ha ha.

Quote:
Rob Ford is facing a legal challenge to his mayoralty.

On Friday he was slapped with an unprecedented legal application that seeks to remove him from office.

The action, filed by prominent lawyer Clayton Ruby on behalf of Toronto resident Paul Magder, stems from allegations Ford acted improperly when, as a city councillor, he solicited donations from lobbyists and others doing business with the city to his football foundation using city letterhead. In 2010 the integrity commissioner directed him to repay the money, but at a council meeting last month councillors voted to waive that penalty.

Ford however spoke and voted on the issue at that February 7 meeting, and Ruby says doing so was a clear violation of the Municipal conflict of Interest Act.

"It's a very serious breach of statute," said Ruby at a press conference at City Hall Monday morning. "It's not a minor political poke. It's something we take very seriously in a democracy."

.....

Rob Ford is facing a legal challenge to his mayoralty.

On Friday he was slapped with an unprecedented legal application that seeks to remove him from office.

The action, filed by prominent lawyer Clayton Ruby on behalf of Toronto resident Paul Magder, stems from allegations Ford acted improperly when, as a city councillor, he solicited donations from lobbyists and others doing business with the city to his football foundation using city letterhead. In 2010 the integrity commissioner directed him to repay the money, but at a council meeting last month councillors voted to waive that penalty.

Ford however spoke and voted on the issue at that February 7 meeting, and Ruby says doing so was a clear violation of the Municipal conflict of Interest Act.

"It's a very serious breach of statute," said Ruby at a press conference at City Hall Monday morning. "It's not a minor political poke. It's something we take very seriously in a democracy."


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

actually BB, it isn't a weak case at all. Conflict of interest is not considered weak and is pretty cut and dry. Ford put a motion forward to rescind a sanction below:

Legal experts weigh in on application to remove Mayor Rob Ford from office

 

Some key statements: violating the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act for financial gain.

Lawyer Clayton Ruby alleges Ford breached the act in February when he asked council to remove a year and a half old sanction placed upon him by the city’s integrity commissioner. Ford had been ordered to repay $3,150 worth of donations to his football foundation he solicited using councillor letterhead. Ford then voted on the issue, which passed.

So he not only put a motion forward but voted on it - it was a clear conflict of interest. Ruby won't lose.  Oh, and there has been previous municipal and school trustees dinged for the same thing.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Well, Rosie Barton - not that I put much stock in anything she says - pointed out that she has legal information that all Ford has to do is pay back the $3000 or whatever it was, and maybe an apology, and he's off the hook.


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

I'll make sure to remember that defence next time I rob a bank.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

MS: Laughing 

I think Ford is digging in his heels from what I saw on the CBC lst night - maybe he expects Toronto City Council to back him up on this?


writer
Offline
Joined: Apr 11 2002

So what if the majority on council does "back him up"? How is that relevant to the courts?


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Testify on his behalf and suggest a compromise whereby he pay the $3000+ and make a pubic statement - maybe an apology? His defense attorney might make the argument that this is all a bit much, and ask for the charges to be dropped - with the support of Council? There could be other avenues to pursue as well.

 

I would love to see Ford thrown out of office, but I'm not holding my breath.


writer
Offline
Joined: Apr 11 2002
Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Yeah, that was shown on P&P last night. I'll be watching this case as best as I can, because I can't stand Ford, and I don't even live there. I still think Ford will survive this, however, but hope springs eternal.


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

Thank Writer for posting the law on conflict of interest:

Duty of Member

When present at meeting at which matter considered

5.  (1)  Where a member, either on his or her own behalf or while acting for, by, with or through another, has any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in any matter and is present at a meeting of the council or local board at which the matter is the subject of consideration, the member,

(a) shall, prior to any consideration of the matter at the meeting, disclose the interest and the general nature thereof;

(b) shall not take part in the discussion of, or vote on any question in respect of the matter; and

(c) shall not attempt in any way whether before, during or after the meeting to influence the voting on any such question. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.50, s. 5 (1).

So Ford had an "indirect interest" in the matter in which he brought up. At least he could have been wiser (I know, I know) and had his brother bring up the matter but R. Ford is not wise. R. Ford than went on and violated (a), (b), and (c).

It's not relevant at this time what city council has to say as it is before the courts. He is either guilty or not. The charge "conflict of interest" is not about paying the money and thus it too is irrelevant to the case before the courty. The leeway would be whether he knew or should have known he was in conflict.  Thus here is where R.Ford could play dumb and thus be found guilty but get some lenancy. But since he has shown in the past to declare "conflicts of interest" it could be shown that he knew he was in conflict but decided to "abuse his position of power" on city council when he knowingly became the mayor and having a majority on his side to vote the matter down.


Aristotleded24
Online
Joined: May 24 2005

Freedom 55 wrote:
Crossing my fingers that this bid is more successful for Toronto folks than Larry O'Brien's legal saga was for Ottawans.

And jealous of the fact that there is no mechanism in place to have the mayor of Winnipeg removed from office.


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

well Aristotleded 24, it requires activitist citizens to attend meetings and read minutes of meetings to ensure correct goverance processes are followed. Conflict of interest must be citizen led. So a politician does not have to disclose their conflict and it is not the role of mandate or responsibility of the governing body to tell the politician they may have a conflict.

Sometimes those who are elected and more often are elected in more lofty positions such as majors think that the position comes with "special privleges" and they become blind or ignore their conflicts.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments