Toronto Mayor Rob Ford

[a_majoor]

As much as the PCPO would like to have a conservative standard bearer in TO, they also need to be pragmatic about who they want to be seen representing them.

The comment by the Deputy Mayor is a bit disengenious, since the council wasn't exaclty standing in the door against Mayor Miller's spending plans. They know the voters are PO'd, and even if/when Rob Ford is gone the voters are likely to be looking in that direction in the future. Best get ahead of the crowd now before it becomes a "running of the bulls".

As a BTW, this is something close to one of the things I am always warning about in other threads: either we do a controlled drawdown of the "Progressive project" or we will be faced with an uncontrolled collapse and the appearance of "The Man on the White Horse".

 

[The Bread Guy]

As much as the PCPO would like to have a conservative standard bearer in TO, they also need to be pragmatic about who they want to be seen representing them.

Tactfully put, and true. 

Meanwhile, let the distancing begin!

Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives will consider any request from Toronto council to stabilize the situation with Mayor Rob Ford, Tory Leader Tim Hudak says.

“Obviously, the situation we’re in today needs clarifying and Rob needs to get help,” Hudak said Monday.

“Ultimately, if the city says that it legitimately cannot function, then we do have an obligation at the provincial level — within the powers that we have — to ensure some clarity and stability. Right now, it looks like the city is taking its own action.” ....

 

[pbi]

I watched the CBC interview with the Ford brothers last night. Very interesting, and something that I think the CBC should have done earlier than this, although Doug says that this was the first "sit-down interview" they have granted to any media.

I came away with two conflicting impressions.

First, Rob appeared at times to be genuinely sorry for his behaviour, and to realize (as he said at least once) that "I've let a lot of people down". He admitted to misusing booze and taking marijuana (all old news now), and to using "crack" but not "cocaine".The person that both brothers seemed to be the most upset about "letting down" was Jim Flaherty. Interestingly, Doug stated that of all the members of both the Federal and Provincial Tories, only Jim Flaherty had ever expressed any personal support for Rob Ford (apparently because of a long standing family friendship). They didn't seem particularly surprised (or even upset) that both levels of Tories have distanced themselves, which makes me wonder (contrary to my earlier comments..) just how close the relationships really were. Finally, both Rob and Doug talked about how Rob is going to undertake various steps to deal with his problems including weight and booze.

All good.

On the other hand, I saw once again the attitudes that have made me so sceptical from the very beginning about the moral and ethical judgement that Rob (and Doug) bring to this vitally important task of leading our biggest city. Both of their dialogues were littered with comments to the general effect of:

"Everybody else does it";

"Lots of those other councillors do marijuana/drink and drive";

"The pot calling the kettle black";

"I just had a few bad Friday and Saturday nights";

"These are just personal issues"; and

"This is a coup d'etat against democracy" (Referring to the council votes to restrict his powers under the Toronto Act)

Nowhere (despite Peter Mansbridge's prompting) did I ever hear the slightest recognition, from either of them, of the fact that as Mayor he is held to a higher standard and has a duty to set an example for behaviour in public office. Everything appears to be the fault of others (media, political opponents, etc) or can be justified by comparing it to the behaviour of others. They both seem to see the media as their enemy (it "besieges" Rob), but also as a friend ("we're getting our message out"). The criminal issues around Lisi and the police investigation were side-stepped, but that was (I think) a legitimate and wise tactic.

All behaviours considered, there still seems, IMHO, to be a fundamental lack of a moral and ethical compass at the level required of a modern metropolitan Mayor. What I do see is roughly similar to what I would expect of a young teenager.

By his own claim, he is the "best Mayor Toronto ever had", has "helped more people than anybody ever"; and "has saved the taxpayer more money than anybody else." He was bit disingenuous here, since he took credit for privatizing garbage collection which, AFAIK, started before he was elected, and for building subways, which I don't think has happened yet.

So, I guess I will watch to see how the Mayor reacts if a low-level City employee is caught engaging in any of these "personal" activities. Will the Mayor stay silent, so the "pot" doesn't call the "kettle" black?, or will he rage for vengeance like he did about the employee caught sleeping at work?

For a guy who announced himself to be so hard core for law and order and against gang-bangers (remember his "hug a thug" comments?) and druggies, how will he react now? If his drug use and questionable associations are "just personal issues" that we should all excuse him for, will the same excuse apply to some bunch of young black kids scooped up in another drug raid in north Etobicoke? Do they need understanding and forgiveness too, as he claims for himself?

It's not at all impossible that he could reform himself and come back to a Mayoral victory. And, if he were truly to demonstrate a real reformation of character, not some superficial nonsense about losing weight and "getting big arms", then he might deserve that victory.

But I don't see it.

 

[GR66]

I'm not a Rob Ford fan.  I've always thought he was a buffoon and never in a million years would have voted for him (despite sympathies with his "Ford Nation" fiscal responsibility platform).  Ever since this fiasco started I've felt that he should do the proper thing and step down (preferably to get himself the help he clearly needs or at the very least just to stop being such a negative distraction for the city).

That being said, I can't help but feel uncomfortable with the actions of the Toronto city council.  Rob Ford has not been charged with any criminal offence.  He has shown extremely poor personal judgement and as I already stated I think he SHOULD step down.  He has NOT to my knowledge been accused of any fiscal wrongdoing in the performance of his duties as mayor.  Is it proper then for city council to restrict the powers of this elected official because they don't like his personal behaviour and the way it reflects on the city?  Isn't that a very slippery slope to walk on?  Where does one draw the line if that becomes the benchmark for restricting the powers of an individual elected by the voting public?

Toronto mayor Mel Lastman made many stupid comments that made himself and the city the butt of jokes in the world media.  Should he have had his powers restricted as a result?  What if a mayor was found to have done something "immoral" like have an affair?  Is smoking a joint enough to trigger the response....hash...or is crack where the line is drawn?

As distasteful as this whole continuing soap opera is, would it not be better to simply try to get about the business of the city as much as possible, don't give him the stage to continue to die upon and let the voters make their wishes known in the next election.  Should he end up being criminally charged with some offence then action could/should perhaps be taken to remove him from his position. 

 

[Remius]

@GRR6:

          Valid concerns.  People (media, leftist types etc) were gunning for Ford even before all of this stuff came to light.  He was derided for his weight, his way of speaking, his rough edges etc etc.  They even tried to remove him as mayor over a smaller but ethically questionable act on his part.

          What council is doing now however is well within their powers.  Now is right though?  Being Mayor is more than just fiscal responsibilities, to which it would seem, he has aquitted himself well enough.  He represents the face of the city.  It was mentioned in one of he news pieces that he is also responsible for the 6th largest economic entity in the country.  It becomes a matter of trust.  Would you trust someone who has used crack cocaine, is known to associate with criminal elements (serious ones at that) and is part of a criminal investigation to which he has been advised to keep silent about to manage that?  This is what council is facing.  It isn't just a small group of councillors leading this.  The whole council (minus the Ford brothers) is doing this.  Mayor Ford has lost their trust.  While he is just one vote on council he does exercise executive powers that they feel he is no longer fit to execute.  Keep in mind that even his supporters are voting in favour of limiting his power.

          While the Mayor was elected, yes, so were the councillors that are trying to limit his shenanigans by limiting his power.  They, I believe, are doing this in what they think is in the best interest of the city and the wards they represent. 

        This fiasco has reached international proportions beyond the 15mins of infamy and it is starting to hurt the city's brand.  Ford has isolated himself by his own actions and admissions but more so by his refusal to do what everyone thinks is the right thing to do and step aside.  He does have his brother and loyal core of supporters however, but that core is eroding. 

        But, he is well within his right to remain in office, and I think he will, but come election time, if anyone with name recognition or similar fiscal policies as him runs (John Tory, Olivia Chow), I don't think his Ford nation will be enough to carry him through.

 

[mariomike]

So, I guess I will watch to see how the Mayor reacts if a low-level City employee is caught engaging in any of these "personal" activities.

The policy for City of Toronto Paramedics is, "Certain jobs require a high level of skill and a high level of trust from both employers and the public. For employees working in those types of positions, it’s possible that off-duty behaviour can call into question that trust, if it demonstrates poor judgment. And if an employer no longer has confidence that an employee has the judgment to perform a job of high skill and responsibility, the result could be dismissal."

And, if he were truly to demonstrate a real reformation of character, not some superficial nonsense about losing weight and "getting big arms", then he might deserve that victory.

I hope he takes care of his health.

By co-incidence, the last time a City of Toronto mayor died in office ( collapsed at the George Bell Arena during a charity hockey game ) was 50 years ago tonight. Judging by his photos, he looked fit and healthy. But, privately he relied on nitroglycerine pills.

Interestingly, "After 10 months in office, Donald Summerville’s intensive work schedule worried his city council colleagues. Though only 48 years old, Summerville had suffered a heart attack two years earlier. When it was suggested that the city hire an official civic greeter to lessen his workload, Summerville, who often put in 16-hour days, insisted that he should make a special effort to be available to community groups who requested a mayoral presence at their functions."

His death led to the creation of the Department of Emergency Services.

Toronto mayor Mel Lastman made many stupid comments that made himself and the city the butt of jokes in the world media. 

He was our first Mega-mess Mega-city mayor:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115637/mel-lastman-torontos-offensive-adulterous-mayor-rob-ford

Before Mayors Lastman, Miller and Ford, it was the Metro Chairman who ran things. 

 

[pbi]

That being said, I can't help but feel uncomfortable with the actions of the Toronto city council.  Rob Ford has not been charged with any criminal offence.  He has shown extremely poor personal judgement and as I already stated I think he SHOULD step down.  He has NOT to my knowledge been accused of any fiscal wrongdoing in the performance of his duties as mayor.  Is it proper then for city council to restrict the powers of this elected official because they don't like his personal behaviour and the way it reflects on the city?  Isn't that a very slippery slope to walk on?  Where does one draw the line if that becomes the benchmark for restricting the powers of an individual elected by the voting public?

Just like in the military, I think that where it comes to elected officials we have to distinguish between what is a "disciplinary" matter (ie: you charge someone and deal with it by CM or summary trial), and "administrative" or "performance" issues that are typically dealt with by non-judicial methods (like RW, C&P, removal from command, restriction of duties, etc). Both can result in severe sanctions.

This, in my opinion, is where our provincial system in Ontario lacks the capacity for recall that exists in BC. and several US states. As I understand the system that generally prevails in the relevant US states, criminal offences by elected officials are dealt with by impeachment processes (or just by judicial procedures).

Loss of confidence or bad behaviour, as far as I understand, are dealt with by voter recall. While it varies from state to state, in essence it requires that a fixed percentage of the electorate, or of the legislature, etc, etc. vote to remove an elected official from office before term expiry. This is, in my view, a very democratic process, as it allows either the majority of elected representatives, or the majority of voters (generally the latter), to get rid of someone they no longer feel can discharge their office properly. Because it would require a majority vote, it could not really  be "coup d'etat" as Rob Ford so dramatically distorts things.

Toronto mayor Mel Lastman made many stupid comments that made himself and the city the butt of jokes in the world media.  Should he have had his powers restricted as a result?  What if a mayor was found to have done something "immoral" like have an affair?  Is smoking a joint enough to trigger the response....hash...or is crack where the line is drawn?

As distasteful as this whole continuing soap opera is, would it not be better to simply try to get about the business of the city as much as possible, don't give him the stage to continue to die upon and let the voters make their wishes known in the next election.  Should he end up being criminally charged with some offence then action could/should perhaps be taken to remove him from his position. 

Two points:

-I'm fairly familiar with the antics of Mayor Lastman: I was the G3 of LFCA (now 4 Div) for the Great Snowstorm (among other activities involving T.O.). As bizarre as he could be,(and he could be!) I can never recall him ever provoking the extreme reaction in Council that Ford has ultimately generated after a long, long series of bad behaviours. And I personally never, ever, felt the moral doubts I feel where the current Mayor is concerned (although perhaps Lastman might not be seated at the right hand of God when the time comes....). It's also worth noting that well before becoming Mayor of T.O., Lastman was a proven quantity, both as a very successful small businessman (Bad Boy's Appliances ), and as the Mayor of North York who presided over the latter stages of its transition from a semi-rural township to a very successful borough and then (IIRC) a city in its own right, before it was sucked into the TorontoBorg.  Ford, to the best of my knowledge, has had no such track record, either with the family company or as an alderman in Etobicoke;

-I'm fairly sure that Council wants to get on with business, especially if they would like to get elected again (assuming they are not swept away in the FordNation Jihad that Rob is threatening...).  As Crantor points out

The whole council (minus the Ford brothers) is doing this.  Mayor Ford has lost their trust.  While he is just one vote on council he does exercise executive powers that they feel he is no longer fit to execute.  Keep in mind that even his supporters are voting in favour of limiting his power.

. Council took a long time to get to where they are now, and given the internal divisions (as well as the blood and thunder threats of the Fords) it probably was not easy. The Council acted within their powers as they understood them (advised, I'm quite sure, by the City's Legal Dept). Since it was by an overwhelming majority vote cast by democratically elected representatives, I'm not sure how it can be characterized as "undemocratic". But, I suppose that if the Fords raise a legal action the Ontario courts will ultimately decide.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Globe and Mail reports that "Deputy Mayor Norm Kelly plans on pursuing a similar agenda of fiscal conservatism as Mayor Rob Ford’s, but with a more co-operative style." So that satisfies (should satisfy, anyway) Conservatives in Queens Park and Ottawa.

I don't know what Toronto's rules are like, but I would hope that Mayor Ford could go on sick leave for a while (preferably quite a long while) to get some physical, mental health and substance abuse treatments.

 

[mariomike]

Globe and Mail
Nov. 13 2013

"What could happen to his job if Toronto Mayor Rob Ford were a ‘regular city employee’?":
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/top-business-stories/what-could-happen-to-his-job-if-rob-ford-were-a-regular-city-employee/article15413421/

 

[Edward Campbell]

I'm posting this article, an opinion piece which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail, here, rather than in the Rob Ford thread, because it illustrates media bias, albeit of a sort hat some members here do not find objectionable:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/television/why-the-ford-nation-tv-show-is-a-stroke-of-genius/article15456681/#dashboard/follows/

Now, I agree with John Doyle that we live in a (horrid) "reality TV world" and, on that basis, giving the Ford brothers their own TV show is, indeed, a stroke of marketing genius. But it is, also, a direct attack on the mainstream, Laurentiam consensus media. This is media bias writ large; it is part of Sun media's continuing attack on, especially, the CBC. Canadians should not be persuaded that this is about giving Ford a voice or even about exploiting a situation for profit: this a one wing of media bias versus another.

Well, according to an article in the Globe and Mail, that didn't last very long. The Ford Nation TV show on Sun is cancelled. The problem seems to be that the Fords are good, maybe even very good in a live, direct "chat" format but Sun is not willing to let them go "live," and the prospects for success in a taped format are poor.


Edit to add:

I also suspect that sponsors were scarce, most likely non-existent ... in fact I suspect that some sponsors, and Sun has few enough as it is, threatened to abandon the network entirely is Ford Nation continued. There's an interesting tweet from Canadian Tire that says: "For clarity to our customers – we won’t be advertising on Ford Nation and are asking our manufacturers to not use our logos on the show."

 

[The Bread Guy]

Meanwhile, let the distancing begin!

Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives will consider any request from Toronto council to stabilize the situation with Mayor Rob Ford, Tory Leader Tim Hudak says.

“Obviously, the situation we’re in today needs clarifying and Rob needs to get help,” Hudak said Monday.

“Ultimately, if the city says that it legitimately cannot function, then we do have an obligation at the provincial level — within the powers that we have — to ensure some clarity and stability. Right now, it looks like the city is taking its own action.” ....

The Conservative distancing (this time, from the feds) continues apace ....

One of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s top cabinet ministers is calling on Toronto Mayor Rob Ford to resign after bringing “dishonour” to Canada’s largest city — as some differing opinions emerge on the issue from the Conservative government.

A day after the Prime Minister’s Office called allegations against Ford “troubling” — but avoided saying whether he should resign — Employment and Social Development Minister Jason Kenney on Tuesday took a much sharper tone on the matter.

Kenney said it’s ultimately up to Toronto city council to “sort out this mess,” but he believes Ford — who has admitted to smoking crack cocaine while mayor — has embarrassed the city and should resign.

“I will say, though, as an elected official, that I think Mr. Ford has brought dishonour to public office, to the office of mayor, and his city,” Kenney told reporters Tuesday in Ottawa.

“I wished he had taken a leave of absence some time ago to go and deal with his personal problems. But not having done that, I personally think he should step aside and stop dragging the city of Toronto through this terrible embarrassment.” ....

 

[George Wallace]

Am I the only one who gets the impression that both Rob and Doug Ford were the schoolyard bullies and now are getting their uppance?

 

[GAP]

Am I the only one who gets the impression that both Rob and Doug Ford were the schoolyard bullies and now are getting their uppance?

Well........like most bullies, they supply their own ammo..............twits, the bunch of them, on both sides... :

 

[pbi]

Am I the only one who gets the impression that both Rob and Doug Ford were the schoolyard bullies and now are getting their uppance?

 

This is exactly how I've always seen the pair of them. If they aren't busy denying something, they are threatening, slagging or making ridiculous overblown claims. It''s like  "Municipal Politics by Jerry Springer" . Or Mississippi in the 1920's. All that's missing are the hound dogs, the jug and the rocking chairs on the porch.

There was an interesting piece on Global  TV tonight in which they replayed some of Ford's recent bombastic claims (mostly on US TV) about his mayoral record, then provided some statistics that seem to make a liar out of him. Again. Still.

It will be quite something to see how (if...)  City Council functions now. Maybe they can get back to business.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>that this person is utterly unfit

Ford has been mayor for almost three years.  Reflecting on how Toronto's city business has gone in that time, at what point did Ford become "utterly unfit"?  Did it coincide with a concerted campaign by his political foes in politics and media agencies to throw sh1t until something stuck?  And does the pot-stirring deserve consideration as a militating factor in Ford's performance?  (Friction wears at everything.)

Notwithstanding my view that people with severe shortcomings of character don't belong in charge of important organizations, so far Ford's escapades only rate "1" on the following scale:
1. Human weakness (eg. adultery, substance abuse).
2. Misusing office for personal gain (eg. expense account abuse, bribery).
3. Misusing office to secure gains for others (eg. cronyism) and to secure and maintain political power (eg. Adscam).
4. Subverting corrective and investigative processes in order to secure and maintain political power (eg. writing fraudulent documents).

I can point quite squarely to several prominent parties and politicians guilty of level (3) and (4) misdeeds and not only are their supporters quite willing to overlook those faults, but they probably don't understand why a (3) or (4) is much, much worse than a (1) or (2).

 

[pbi]

eflecting on how Toronto's city business has gone in that time, at what point did Ford become "utterly unfit"

It became evident gradually, but my firm belief is that the spots were always on the dog. People just didn't see them.

Did it coincide with a concerted campaign by his political foes in politics and media agencies to throw sh1t until something stuck?

I don't think this is a realistic assessment. There was just way too much, over too long a period, from too diverse a  range of sources, for this to be plausible. And, don't forget, most of Council was actually supporting his agenda for his first couple of years in office. If  that wasn't the case, he never would have gotten anything past a vote. Some stalwarts like the Deputy Mayor and Minnan-Wong eventually turned against him, not to mention the  Provincial and Federal Tories. (Although, as I observed earlier, those two relationships may not have been all they were cracked up to be...). Even the Toronto Sun, which was definitely in his corner at the start, cut him dead not long after he phoned up one of their reporters and started screaming obscenities at him.

As far as dealing with stress: that goes with the job. I've seen lots of very unpopular politicians get roasted by the media, but I've never seen one act like this.

I can point quite squarely to several prominent parties and politicians guilty of level (3) and (4) misdeeds and not only are their supporters quite willing to overlook those faults, but they probably don't understand why a (3) or (4) is much, much worse than a (1) or (2).

Excellent. Let's root them out too: Right, Left, liberal, NDP, whatever.  If  they behave like these two, I don't care what political altar they worship at.  I'm probably hopelessly old school, but I expect more. Falling back on the old refrain that "everybody else does it" is a surefire way to ensure we never do anything about the character and behaviour of people in public office.

 

[Remius]

Interesting contrast here from our friends south of the border:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/20/politics/congressman-cocaine-possession/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Although a bit different there are many similarities between both stories and how each man has taken a  different approach...

 

[a_majoor]

Here is the real problem; it isn't the political class or Rob Ford (although they have cultivated the opposite attitudes in voters and exploited it to their advantage); it is there are so few of these people left to work and vote in our communities:

Here each individual is interested not only in his own affairs but in the affairs of the state as well:
even those who are mostly occupied with their own businesses are extremely well-informed on general politics
—that is a peculiarity of ours;
we do not say that a man who takes no interest in politics is a man who minds his own business;
we say that he has no business here at all.
We Athenians, in our own persons, take our decisions on policy or submit them to proper discussions,
for we do not think that there is an incompatibility between words and deeds;
the worst thing is to rush into action before the consequences have been properly debated.
And this is another point where we differ from other people.
We are capable at the same time of taking risks and of estimating them before hand.
Others are brave out of ignorance; and, when they stop to think, they begin to fear.
But the man who can most truly be accounted brave is he who best knows the meaning of what is
sweet in life and of what is terrible, and then goes out undeterred to meet what is to come….

 

[pbi]

:goodpost:

Well said. I believe that too.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Let's root them out too

Agreed.  But only if they do, in fact, get rooted out; unilateral political disarmament is foolish.  The BC NDP should have outcast Adrian Dix entirely, but instead they made him leader of their party.  Apparently, there are different standards for acceptable behaviour on the political left and right in Canada.