If Hackland finds Ford guilty of violating the act, the mayor would be automatically thrown out of office, unless he proves his actions were inadvertent or were the result of an error in judgment.įord would also be in the clear if the judge finds that the $3,150 in donations was too insignificant an amount to "reasonably be regarded as likely to influence the member," as it says in the act. He didn't testify, but appeared to be taking notes of the proceedings as he observed the morning session.įord was not in court when it resumed in the afternoon after a lunch break.
Timely matter code#
Ford's participation in the debate stems from the integrity commissioner's report, which found he had violated the councillor code of conduct in the manner in which he sought donations, not the MCIA.īut Nader Hasan, a lawyer at Ruby's firm argued Thursday afternoon that the act applies in this case, and said the act and the code of conduct are "complementary."įord entered the courthouse Thursday morning without taking any questions from reporters. However, one of the key arguments of Ford's legal team is that the MCIA does not apply in any case. (c) shall not attempt in any way whether before, during or after the meeting to influence the voting on any such question.
(b) shall not take part in the discussion of, or vote on any question in respect of the matter and.(a) shall, prior to any consideration of the matter at the meeting, disclose the interest and the general nature thereof.(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,
When present at meeting at which matter consideredĥ. This is the section of the act that Ford is alleged to have violated: Although as mayor he should have known the rules, "he chose to remain ignorant," Ruby said. Ruby said Thursday the mayor has shown "wilful blindness" when it comes to the act. Ford also admitted he never read a handbook given to councillors when first elected that spells out the rules for declaring conflicts. Ruby said that is not the correct interpretation of the act, which Ford admitted on Wednesday he had never read. The mayor's "peculiar definition of conflict" doesn't mesh with his extensive experience on council, Ruby said.įord asserted in court on Wednesday that his interpretation of a conflict of interest, as defined by the act, only occurs if a council member speaks or acts on a matter in which both the city and that member stand to benefit. Ruby said Ford, who was first elected to council in 2000, and then as mayor in 2010, has no credibility on the matter. Ruby told a Toronto courtroom on Thursday that he doesn't believe Ford made an honest error of judgment when he spoke and voted on the issue. 7 over the issue and in a subsequent council vote that let him off the hook for the money put the mayor in a conflict of interest as defined by the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA). The court will decide if Ford's participation in a debate on Feb.
0 kommentar(er)
