News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 124     0 
News   Jul 15, 2024
Sculptural Pre-Cast Panels Now Adorning ANX near Dupont Station
 882     3 
News   Jul 15, 2024
Resubmitted Agincourt Condo Proposal Bumps Height, Reduces Parking
 1K     1 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
downradio said:
With all due respect, we're nothing like either. Hyperbole that big can literally kill people.
Click to expand...

I guess some people still want to believe that "Toronto is like New York run by the Swiss"...
My point was that big city corruption is here. This is not just about one man's addictions. So is this a case of corruption percolating through the system from the importing of illegal substances (Chicago 1929) or is there a darker, wider level of systemic rot happening based on a large approval rating for an obviously corrupt politician(s).
 
jusbokeh said:
I dont care about ethical.

Our charter of rights of rights exists to hold everybody to the same legal standards and rights
Click to expand...

Lawful evil is still evil.

edit I'm wrong. This is lawful neutral. Jusbokeh doesn't care about ethics, if he were lawful evil he would care about being bad. Apologies, I should not have implied that Jusbokeh was evil.
 
Last edited:
jusbokeh said:
I dont care about ethical.

Our charter of rights of rights exists to hold everybody to the same legal standards and rights

I dont even care about rob ford. I will defend the charter of rights from being desecrated by any party.
Click to expand...

The concept of ministerial responsibility is also one of the (unwritten) parts of our Constitution. There's no conflict here. Ford has a right to remain silent for personal reasons but he doesn't have an absolute right to hold an executive position in government. The test for ministerial fitness is much lower than 'beyond a reasonable doubt', and it's his own fault that he's caught in the middle. As an elected official, Ford is expected to comply with constitutional norms developed over 900-odd years of representative government.
 
Last edited:
Bennett000 said:
Lawful evil is still evil.
Click to expand...

Evil doesn't exist, it's a convenient way to label things and people you don't like. This is a story of politics, addiction, and mostly incompetent buffoonery. Rob Ford will face whatever legal consequences he has brought upon himself and he gets the same due process as everyone else in the mean time.
 
thisbusymonster said:
Evil doesn't exist, it's a convenient way to label things and people you don't like. This is a story of politics, addiction, and mostly incompetent buffoonery. Rob Ford will face whatever legal consequences he has brought upon himself and he gets the same due process as everyone else in the mean time.
Click to expand...

That's relativism - you can literally justify murder and genocide going down that road. And the ideal of due process is great - it just happens to ignore the reality of money and power/connections in the justice process. You know, the old debate between equality and equity.

AoD
 
jusbokeh said:
Our charter of rights of rights exists to hold everybody to the same legal standards and rights
Click to expand...

This is not a matter of rights, but of politics. As a private citizen, Ford has the right to remain silent. As a political body, Council has the right to request that Ford speak, and to censure him if he doesn't. If he wants to avoid such request, he can simply go back to being a private citizen.

There are plenty of jobs that place an additional burden of disclosure and limitation of rights on the individual. If you work with children your "rights" are somewhat reduced in that you may be required to undergo a police background check, a clear invasion of your privacy. If you don't want such invasion, don't apply for such jobs. If you don't want potential corruption and personal drug use to be investigated by City Council, don't run for mayor.
 
thisbusymonster said:
Evil doesn't exist, it's a convenient way to label things and people you don't like.
Click to expand...

It was a reference to AD&D, not meant to be taken quite so literally.

thisbusymonster said:
This is a story of politics, addiction, and mostly incompetent buffoonery. Rob Ford will face whatever legal consequences he has brought upon himself and he gets the same due process as everyone else in the mean time.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Although arguably Ford is being treated better than the common drunk driving crack smoker; hopefully there's a reason (bigger fish) for this.
 
Typically, the Mayor speaks to anything he makes a key item for Council. When the Mayor speaks, Councillors are able to ask him follow-up questions. They get five minutes each. Under Council rules, the Speaker is directed to ensure that a question is answered. While the answer could be "I cannot comment," that in itself will be a very powerful kind of statement. This will not be like a scrum or media event. And, unlike a police interview, the public will be watching, and the meeting will be recorded. Media will be watching too, of course.

This motion (http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.MM41.25) does not call on the province to remove the Mayor.

With all of this in mind, it's worth thinking about the kinds of questions many Councillors would want to ask the Mayor in relation to this DMW motion:

1. City Council request Mayor Rob Ford to apologize for misleading the City of Toronto as to the existence of a video in which he appears to be involved in the use of drugs.

2. City Council urge Mayor Rob Ford to co-operate fully with the Toronto Police in their investigation of these matters by meeting with them in order to respond to questions arising from their investigation.

3. City Council request Mayor Rob Ford to apologize for writing a letter of reference for Alexander "Sandro" Lisi, an alleged drug dealer, on City of Toronto Mayor letterhead.

4. City Council request Mayor Ford to answer to Members of Council on the aforementioned subjects directly and not through the media.

5. City Council urge Mayor Rob Ford to take a temporary leave of absence to address his personal issues, then return to lead the City in the capacity for which he was elected.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
jusbokeh said:
Because his charter rights as a citizen trumps his duty as mayor. He has the right to not incriminate himself or cooperate with the police
Click to expand...

OK! but:

AlvinofDiaspar said:
Anyone who put himself in such a position and have to choose between their rights as a citizen and compromising their duty as mayor has one option to resolve this conflict - resign.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Fail to see what the problem is with this line of thinking. No-one is asking Ford to give up his rights; they're asking him to do his duty as Mayor. As it is impossible for him to do so, he should resign.
 
Last edited:
needlehaystack said:
First time poster, long time reader. This thread has me enthralled.

Question: if it comes down to a vote to remove him from office, is Rob Ford allowed to vote on it, or does conflict of interest apply? Doesn't it have pecuniary consequences for him whether or not he stays in office, and therefore a COI?
Click to expand...

That's a good point. Maybe he'll miss the connection again and vote to save his job (his salary is a pecuniary interest) and we can save the COA charge in case he gets re-elected.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top