Last week, Jude MacDonald filed an application in Superior Court alleging that Mayor Rob Ford and Councillor Doug Ford broke the Municipal Conflict Of Interest Act by speaking and voting on various matters that affected clients of their family business (and in one case, the business itself). As a result, the brothers could be booted from office should either or both get re-elected.
But why would an average citizen, no matter how engaged, take it upon themselves to do such a thing? Why would a person choose to become a public target for hostility, potentially on the hook for their opponents’ legal fees if they lose?
Simply put, because it is the only means for enforcing what is supposed to be a fundamental law.
In Ontario, there is no public body tasked with tracking or prosecuting potential conflicts of interests among municipal politicians. The province’s law states that it’s up to an “elector” (eligible voter) to make an application to a judge within six weeks of a possible breach coming to their attention. And though a lawyer isn’t technically required to do this, an elector wouldn’t get very far without the services of a good one. (MacDonald is receiving pro bono representation from three lawyers at Dewart Gleason.)
In October 2011, Justice J. Douglas Cunningham made eight recommendations for reforming the law as part of the report he authored for the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry [pdf, p.106]. Among them was a proposal that in addition to individual electors, the Attorney General and “organizations demonstrably acting in the public interest” also be allowed to bring applications under the Municipal Conflict Of Interest Act. The provincial government has yet to introduce any legislation to that effect, and Premier Kathleen Wynne’s recent mandate letter to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing makes no mention of any future overhaul.
Shortly after news of MacDonald’s application broke, we spoke to her about why she did what she did. This interview has been edited and condensed.
What prompted you to go through with this?
Somebody had to.
Did you think right away when you read the Globe article that this was illegal behaviour?
I don’t decide whether it’s illegal behaviour, for one thing. But it started in fact for me with the Public Works meeting and the document which is referred to [listing Deco Adhesive Products and Apollo Health and Beauty Care among the companies enrolled in the Industrial Waste Surcharge program pdf, p.22].
You were at that meeting?
No, I was at the sit-in.
And so you saw that and you thought it was something that would be worth pursuing legally?
Well, I saw it, and it occurred to me that them voting on rates – when I then looked back at the results of that – that they voted on those rates and Deco was mentioned and Apollo had of course been in the news.
Why is this an important thing to pursue right now?
To be frank, that question doesn’t interest me. This thing of “importance” – either democracy means something or it doesn’t. Either accountability means something or it doesn’t. Either conflict of interest means something or it doesn’t.
You may get blowback from people who object to you taking this action while the mayor is going through his illness. What would your response to that be?
I don’t think there’s an appropriate response from me. I think people have very good reasons, if they care about Rob Ford’s welfare, there are reasons to be concerned. I think that the law has put me in a very awkward position. There is a time limit for proceeding, and the law is written so an individual will have to take this. Otherwise, there is no accountability.
What changes would you like to see to the Municipal Conflict Of Interest Act?
I think that there are people with far greater expertise than I have [who could answer that question]. There was an inquest in Mississauga with a qualified judge who explored that deeply and came up with recommendations.
Is there a particular flaw…?
Well, I think it should not be up to an individual. That individual will piece together a politician’s interests and their votes, and then publicly be the one who stands up raising it as a concern. And then they do that within six weeks. And they are willing to stand by it with the knowledge that there is a potential for liability. I think that the law sounds good and it’s on the books so politicians can say that they have a law, but it strikes me as… I don’t like the position I’m put in, but I feel that it’s important enough. I think that both the matters at hand that I’ve raised are of concern, but I think that this process is also of concern. And if I can actually play a role in making this something more functional and really highlighting the fact that this is not a healthy process for democracy in itself. The law needs to evolve. I am just, for whatever reason, I’m prepared to do it.
When you observed the last conflict of interest trial, did you imagine you would ever find yourself in that position?
No. I mean, I wasn’t looking at that one thinking, “Gosh, I can’t wait ’til I do that,” no.
jonathang@nowtoronto.com | @goldsbie
