When will they ever learn — our politicians?
How can they be so willfully blind, so deaf to the concerns about their relationship to developers, corporations and lobbyists, so arrogant and dismissive of proper and ethical conduct?
They can — and do — because, for the most part, they escape real punishment for their failings.
Nobody went to jail after Toronto’s expensive computer leasing inquiry in 2005 revealed that as much as $25,000 cash changed hands, not to mention a flotilla of gifts and benefits and booze and hockey tickets.
Mayor Rob Ford stepped all over ethical concerns — and his own council code of conduct — refused to abide by council penalties and eventually escaped censure because three judges ruled that city council applied a penalty outside its jurisdiction.
It’s come to this: our politicians take refuge in the comfort that it is difficult to prove their misbehavior in a court of law, tough to prove criminality, and near impossible to find them guilty. So, to hell with the notion that conflict of interest has as much to do with perception as it does with reality.
And if the mayor can get away with splitting hairs on the delicate matter of conflict of interest, why would we be concerned about Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti, a politician who lives on the edge of appropriateness.
Mammoliti is now under scrutiny — again — following reports he twice borrowed money from realtors whose interests (erection of billboards along Highway 401) he successfully championed at a community council.
So, what’s the problem? Surely, the loan had no impact on Mammoliti’s vote. The councillor suggested Friday that the media stay out of his private and family business.
In fact, Mammoliti’s public life is so littered with sensational material that journalists don’t have to go far to find salacious material.
But this is something we can’t ignore — because of the public interest, a matter often lost in these conflict of interest matters.
Suddenly, apologists for these politicians are clinging to claims that their guy is beyond reproach or too ethical or rich to be influenced by a gift or benefit or favour.
What matters is a good number of residents now have less confidence in the system. Increasingly, there is a blurring of the councillor’s public office and his private affairs — a damaging erosion of public trust.
Justice Denise Bellamy, who conducted the MFP inquiry, recommended that councillors and staff maintain professional boundaries and wide distance from those whose interests are often decided by council.
In recommendation 62, she wrote: “Councillors and staff should not risk compromising their position by accepting any benefits of any kind from lobbyists.”
A loan — even if the councillor were to repay it — is a benefit. Why not go to a bank?
“Councillors and staff should take steps to avoid as best they can both real and apparent conflicts of interest,” Bellamy wrote. Such actions “compromise their independence” and “corrode public trust.”
Mammoliti has paved a long path of questionable and controversial decisions and actions — from filing highly questionable expense claims to his most recent problems, where he faces legal action after an audit reported he overspent his 2010 election spending limit by 40 per cent.
Almost concurrently, Mammoliti called a news conference to say he was investigating unnamed persons who have been digging into his affairs and disclosing private information.
Now this.
One only has to read the comments of the lender’s daughter to see why councillors must stay away from such relationships.
“I don’t think any developer wants to be in a position of having p----ed off a councillor. I wouldn’t characterize it as anyone doing a special favour for anyone else, but certainly, down the road, you have no idea who you might deal with in council.”
Mammoliti claims the loans had no impact on his votes at council. In fact, the decision to approve the lender’s request to erect billboards along Highway 401 might be a great one. But consider what Bellamy wrote in 2005.
“Even the right decision is tainted by a compromised decision-maker.”
“Compromised” aptly describes Mammoliti.
Original Article
Source: thestar.com
Author: Royson James
How can they be so willfully blind, so deaf to the concerns about their relationship to developers, corporations and lobbyists, so arrogant and dismissive of proper and ethical conduct?
They can — and do — because, for the most part, they escape real punishment for their failings.
Nobody went to jail after Toronto’s expensive computer leasing inquiry in 2005 revealed that as much as $25,000 cash changed hands, not to mention a flotilla of gifts and benefits and booze and hockey tickets.
Mayor Rob Ford stepped all over ethical concerns — and his own council code of conduct — refused to abide by council penalties and eventually escaped censure because three judges ruled that city council applied a penalty outside its jurisdiction.
It’s come to this: our politicians take refuge in the comfort that it is difficult to prove their misbehavior in a court of law, tough to prove criminality, and near impossible to find them guilty. So, to hell with the notion that conflict of interest has as much to do with perception as it does with reality.
And if the mayor can get away with splitting hairs on the delicate matter of conflict of interest, why would we be concerned about Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti, a politician who lives on the edge of appropriateness.
Mammoliti is now under scrutiny — again — following reports he twice borrowed money from realtors whose interests (erection of billboards along Highway 401) he successfully championed at a community council.
So, what’s the problem? Surely, the loan had no impact on Mammoliti’s vote. The councillor suggested Friday that the media stay out of his private and family business.
In fact, Mammoliti’s public life is so littered with sensational material that journalists don’t have to go far to find salacious material.
But this is something we can’t ignore — because of the public interest, a matter often lost in these conflict of interest matters.
Suddenly, apologists for these politicians are clinging to claims that their guy is beyond reproach or too ethical or rich to be influenced by a gift or benefit or favour.
What matters is a good number of residents now have less confidence in the system. Increasingly, there is a blurring of the councillor’s public office and his private affairs — a damaging erosion of public trust.
Justice Denise Bellamy, who conducted the MFP inquiry, recommended that councillors and staff maintain professional boundaries and wide distance from those whose interests are often decided by council.
In recommendation 62, she wrote: “Councillors and staff should not risk compromising their position by accepting any benefits of any kind from lobbyists.”
A loan — even if the councillor were to repay it — is a benefit. Why not go to a bank?
“Councillors and staff should take steps to avoid as best they can both real and apparent conflicts of interest,” Bellamy wrote. Such actions “compromise their independence” and “corrode public trust.”
Mammoliti has paved a long path of questionable and controversial decisions and actions — from filing highly questionable expense claims to his most recent problems, where he faces legal action after an audit reported he overspent his 2010 election spending limit by 40 per cent.
Almost concurrently, Mammoliti called a news conference to say he was investigating unnamed persons who have been digging into his affairs and disclosing private information.
Now this.
One only has to read the comments of the lender’s daughter to see why councillors must stay away from such relationships.
“I don’t think any developer wants to be in a position of having p----ed off a councillor. I wouldn’t characterize it as anyone doing a special favour for anyone else, but certainly, down the road, you have no idea who you might deal with in council.”
Mammoliti claims the loans had no impact on his votes at council. In fact, the decision to approve the lender’s request to erect billboards along Highway 401 might be a great one. But consider what Bellamy wrote in 2005.
“Even the right decision is tainted by a compromised decision-maker.”
“Compromised” aptly describes Mammoliti.
Original Article
Source: thestar.com
Author: Royson James
No comments:
Post a Comment