The Ford government is taking its proposed bill to take energetic measures against negligent and moody municipal politicians along the way this summer with plans to have it in place before the civic elections of 2026.
But critics say that the new rules are “fatally defective” and will be ineffective.
The hearings of the Committee on Bill 9, called the Municipal Responsibility Law, began last week in London and the Niagara cataracts to collect comments on the progressive conservative plan. He would see the process to handle the standardized misconduct in the 444 municipalities of the province and give the advice the ability to eliminate one of their pairs from office.
The Minister of Municipal Affairs, Rob Rack, told the Committee that the Government is open to comments, but aims to approve the bill in autumn. That would mean that it would go into force before the municipal elections of 2026, he said.
“We all know and understand what is at stake with this legislation,” Frack told the All-Party committee last week. “We know that responsibility is not optional, it is essential.”
The mayor of Pickering and the members of the City Council are asking the province to legislate stricter sanctions for the councilors after their colleague appeared in a podcast where the host labeled pedophiles, Nazis and fascists. As Chris Glover of CBC explains, the Doug Ford government confirmed a review of the municipal law is now underway.
PCS reintroduced the bill to address misconduct in May
The Government reintroduced the legislation in May after the order of the Order died when the SNAP elections were convened earlier this year. This is the third attempt of the PCs to introduce legislation aimed at addressing serious misconduct by the municipal councilors.
They are responding to years of requests from municipal politicians and personnel who have requested tools to deal with accusations of sexual harassment, discrimination and ethics abuse.
Flack said the current process is not uniform and gives councilors the ability to suspend salary, even in the most serious cases. He undermines the public’s vision of equity and responsibility in municipal councils, he said.
“This current system, in a nutshell, does not work as planned and has produced challenges in all ontarium,” he said.
The new bill would require a local integrity commissioner to investigate accusations of misconduct. If that person believed that a violation of the Code of Conduct justified the elimination of a politician, the case would be transmitted to the Ontario Integrity Commissioner for review.
If that guardian dog also recommends the elimination, the case would be transmitted to the local council for a decision within 30 days. A councilor could only be eliminated by a unanimous vote of all council members who are not subject to the complaint.
Bar is too high for the elimination of a councilor for bad behavior, critics say
The municipal lawyer John Mascarin said that leaving the final decision in the hands of politicians will ensure that the law is never used. Leaving the final call to the courts would depolitize the process and guarantee equity, he said.
“I think the bill is incredibly defective, fatally defective,” said Mascarin, who is a partner of the Aird and Berlis firm.
“Are you going to tell me that in a great advice of 16, 20, 25 members … you will not find a member who betrays his good conscience and his fiduciary obligations?”
The critic of Liberal Municipal Affairs, Stephen Blais, has submitted three bills of private members trying to give improved municipal integrity commissioners. These bills would have allowed the guards to refer the most atrocious code of behavior violations to the courts. A judge would determine if a politician must be withdrawn from the position and forbidden to run in later elections.
Each time, the bills have stagnated in the legislative process of Queen’s Park or have been rejected by the government of Prime Minister Doug Ford. Blais said he believes that the standard in this bill to eliminate a councilor is too high.
“I think the government has overcome the brand. I think it’s not just high, I think it’s in external space,” he said.
The critic of Municipal Affairs of the NDP, Jeff Burch, who is also a former city councilor, said that the Government has accepted years of demands for this legislation, but has made it ineffective.
“This bar is too high,” he said. “Why should politicians, who should have a higher level, have such a lower standard and be able to keep their work in situations that make other people feel insecure?”
The municipalities want more tools for “progressive discipline,” says Amo
The president of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario says that the group is happy of the government is moving forward with the legislation. But Robin Jones, who is also Mayor Westport, Ontario, says that the amendments would make it more effective. Amo previously advocated cases that involve the possible expulsion of the Council to address the courts. Reducing the bar of the entire council to a two -third majority vote for elimination would address some concerns, he said.
“We believe that a superity should be enough,” he said. “We understand that it can be more than a simple majority.”
Jones said the councils also want more average land to be incorporated into the legislation to give them options for other sanctions. The salary suspension is not a great motivating in many smaller tips where wages are small for what is considered part -time work. The new bill would add the elimination of the Council as next, and only another sanction available for the Councils.
“We really believe there should be a kind of progressive discipline opportunity,” he said.
In the hearings, Flack defended the government’s position over the entire advice that is required to eliminate a partner. PCs want to prevent the process from “armed,” he said.
“By the time I vote, there must be few doubt that elimination or disqualification, if recommended, is done,” he said.
A Flack spokesman said in a statement that a high bar is required for any vote to eliminate a acting politician.
“The elimination of the position is a serious measure, reserved for the most extreme code of behavior violations, and safeguarded by a high threshold and an exhaustive review to ensure that it is never taken lightly,” said Alexandra Sanita.
