Rob Ford's Toronto

[PinkLucy]

And even if Rob was advised properly, he probably ignored the advice.

 

[Lenser]

Is there not a city clerk that should have been, you know, watching the rules and, perhaps, saying "Mr. Ford, you need to abstain from this vote"? Is that not the person we should be really looking at with regards to continued employment?

Too lenient on the mayor. Of all people in civic government, should we not expect our top leader to be mindful of regulations and realize that, in certain instances, refraining from voting is fair and proper? The man makes his own bed, does he not?

 

[TOareaFan]

Set aside (if that is possible) personal opinions of Rob Ford

That's right, throw the civil servent under the bus while the overpaid politician, who is supposed to know better, get's a hug.
That's pathetic.

Too lenient on the mayor. Of all people in civic government, should we not expect our top leader to be mindful of regulations and realize that, in certain instances, refraining from voting is fair and proper? The man makes his own bed, does he not?

And even if Rob was advised properly, he probably ignored the advice.

I guess it is not possible

 

[PinkLucy]

Actually, I'd feel the same about any politician or executive accepting responsibility rather than blaming a subordinate. It's the old "the buck stops here" thinking

 

[Lenser]

Actually, I'd feel the same about any politician or executive accepting responsibility rather than blaming a subordinate. It's the old "the buck stops here" thinking

+1000%

 

[TOareaFan]

Actually, I'd feel the same about any politician or executive accepting responsibility rather than blaming a subordinate. It's the old "the buck stops here" thinking

To be clear, I have not seen anything where Ford blames the clerk....I was simply wondering if a) one vote in a 10 vote majority was really worth dismissing the electorate's choice for Mayor and b) was there not someone else that could/should be responsible for managing the vote to make sure only those that should vote did vote.

The City Clerk's office themselves (in their strategic plan) suggests that they are the ones that "make government work"

We make government work by managing government decision making, supporting elected and accountability officers,...

.

Anyway, the courts, I guess, will decide who the Mayor should be.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

In August 2010, city council found that Ford, who was then a city councillor running for mayor, had violated the Code of Conduct for Members of Council while soliciting funds for his private football charity.

Wouldn't he and his staff telling a lie to the residents of Toronto (re: him not attending the Pride week flag-raising at NPS) also be a violation of the Code of Conduct?

 

[doug]

I guess it is not possible

it's not possible for the mayor to be responsible for his own actions?
Shouldn't the mayor set an example of good governance? Why do you feel you have to defend him at every turn, do you think he's not capable of taking responsibility for himself? Do you think this is a good quality in a leader?

 

[TOareaFan]

it's not possible for the mayor to be responsible for his own actions?
Shouldn't the mayor set an example of good governance? Why do you feel you have to defend him at every turn, do you think he's not capable of taking responsibility for himself? Do you think this is a good quality in a leader?

I, really, wasn't aware that I "defended him at every turn". In fact, as someone who does not get a vote in Toronto's elections, I make it a point to stay away from the never ending Rob Ford debates/discussions. I just found this a bit interesting and it struck me that someone was sitting back, rule book in hand, waiting for him to make a technical error, ready to pounce.

Like I said, I have no knowledge of him not taking repsonsibliity for his actions in the case and my suggestion that, perhaps, there was someone else who made a mistake here was just my own thought in reading the quoted piece that I re-quoted above.

 

[doug]

I make it a point to stay away from the never ending Rob Ford debates/discussions

Then why post in this thread?

I just found this a bit interesting and it struck me that someone was sitting back, rule book in hand, waiting for him to make a technical error, ready to pounce.

you mean, like a cop, at a speed trap?

 

[TOareaFan]

Then why post in this thread?

I think i answered that in the very paragraph you partially quoted...but, if you missed it

I just found this a bit interesting and it struck me that someone was sitting back, rule book in hand, waiting for him to make a technical error, ready to pounce.

you mean, like a cop, at a speed trap?

I think your analogy would be right if, say, a cop at a speed trap just ignored a racing driver who then went on to be in an accident. Sure the driver (Ford in this case) is to blame and responsible for his own actions....but someone (me in this case) might wonder if the accident would have happened at all if the police officer had executed his duties at the speed trap.

 

[jamincan]

It is possible for more than one person to make a mistake, and both of them be entirely responsible for their own actions. Ford is equally culpable whether there is some sort of employee who should have reminded him or not.

 

[Lenser]

It is possible for more than one person to make a mistake, and both of them be entirely responsible for their own actions. Ford is equally culpable whether there is some sort of employee who should have reminded him or not.

Indeed. The only way it would make sense otherwise is if this were a world where all our political leaders have designated fart-catchers whose main job is to hurl themselves under the proverbial bus each and every time his blundering boss messes up, thereby sparing him from justice being properly meted out.

That world is a craven, terribly bleak one. The big man should know the rules and refrain from pretending he's too important to have to abide by them.

That's Rob Ford - clearly hoping he can bluster his way through yet again.

 

[cdr108]

That's right, throw the civil servent under the bus while the overpaid politician, who is supposed to know better, get's a hug.
That's pathetic.

also, RF is not some newbie.
he's been on council for many many many years; although if actual attendence is counted, then yes, he could be considered a newbie.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

He had been a councillor since 2000 - he really have absolutely no excuse for not understanding the conflict of interest rules. His intransigence on the matter is yet another illustration for his disregard for anything but his own personal judgement. Individuals as such really have no business of running a system that is for the better or worse, based on a clear understanding on what the rules are and acting within its' confines.

Ah, cdr beat me to that point by a minute

AoD