[Peepers]

I do enjoy people like this, who hide behind the veil of 'fiscal responsibility' when doing things like this.



http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/cit...g-review-of-ombudsman-and-other-watchdog-jobs

A review of these "watchdog" jobs is long overdue in my opinion. If the Ombudsman and Integrity Commissioner were carrying out their actual duties in a non-partisan manner I would say "hands off" them - but they are not. Both Janet Lieper and Fiona Crean have demonstrated their clear political bias.

In the case of Janet Lieper if she was truly non-partisan she would have reprimanded Kyle Rae when he blew $12,000 of taxpayer money on a going away party for himself. She would have demanded that Kyle Rae pay back the misappropriated money instead she ignored numerous requests from citizens to investigate Kyle Rae.

If we are going to have an integrity commissioner shouldn't that person - as a first requirement - have integrity? By picking and choosing which complaints she pursues based on political leanings - Lieper have proven that she has no integrity. I actually think we should do away with this position altogether. Why do we need a high-paid bureaucrat to police what elected officials say or do? I want to know what is on the minds of my elected politicians. I don't want their comments to be constrained by the threat of censure by "miss manners". If I don't like their views I can deal with them at the ballot box.

As for Fiona Crean she is clearly on a political vendetta against Ford. Proof of this are the numerous links that were on her website to articles critical of Rob Ford. It was clearly wrong for her to have these links on her website. An Ombudsman must be completely neutral. It is not her job to inflame the debate. Fiona Crean must know that she crossed the line and has since taken these politically incendiary links down.

The ombudsman shouldn't even be scrutinizing the actions of elected officials. That is outside of her purview. You will never see the Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin come out with a report alleging that a premier "interfered" with the appointment process. The very notion that there would be something wrong about a Mayor providing a list of candidates that he would like to see be given consideration for an appointment is ridiculous. Every politicians does this. It is their prerogative. David Miller did this. How do you think his buddy Alok Mukhherjee got appointed Chair of the Police Services Board (a disastrous choice) ?

What I would like to see is the Toronto Ombudsman office closed down and that this function be out-sourced to the Ontario Ombudsman's office. I am sure that Andre Marin could take on this responsibility for far less money than what it costs to operate an office at city hall. Marin has been impeccable as the Ontario Ombudsman, so much so that you really have no sense of his political leanings. I don't know if he is Liberal, PC or NDP and that is how it should be if an Ombudsman is doing their job properly.

If it were possible to farm out this function to the Ontario Ombudsman's office I don't see how any Councillor - on the left or right - could object to such a move.

 

[adma]

May I offer a telling metaphor to consider...

A stone citadel built in 1781 to repel bandits, the Ajyad fortress's demolition sparked an international outcry in 2002, but this was quickly rebuffed by the Saudi Islamic affairs minister. "No one has the right to interfere in what comes under the state's authority," he said. "This development is in the interest of all Muslims all over the world."

When it comes to tasteless-crimes-in-the-name-of, "Muslims" = Ford Nation's "taxpayers".

 

[Joe R.]

Actually, I remember asking earlier in this thread for you to prove your Scarberian mettle by identifying Doris McCarthy without Google-cheating. (It's interesting to consider how some of those disgruntled suburbanites who resort to supporting Ford might be profoundly ignorant re their own turf. Y'know, it's their own home as "taxpayers" and all; but anything to do with indigenous history, culture, etc might as well be out there in la-la land...)

Oh come on! Most people in the city couldn't tell you who Doris McCarthy is. Who cares? Everyone isn't as interested in art as yourself. And how would his identification of Doris McCarthy prove that he's from Scarborough? Are you really insinuating that he couldn't possibly be from Malvern because he isn't aware of a local artist? That's such farcical logic.

 

[adma]

Oh come on! Most people in the city couldn't tell you who Doris McCarthy is. Who cares? Everyone isn't as interested in art as yourself. And how would his identification of Doris McCarthy prove that he's from Scarborough? Are you really insinuating that he couldn't possibly be from Malvern because he isn't aware of a local artist? That's such farcical logic.

It's more that he's been defending himself on "Scarberian" grounds, knocking those instances where crimes and whatever are identified as being in "Scarborough" rather than "Toronto", and of course, the whole Ford Nation "suburban taxpayer disgruntlement" angle.

But as I've stated before re the Danzig shooting: maybe all those "Scarborough" references in the media don't reflect Scarborough's *negative* identity so much as, reflexively, a positive identity, self-identity, even. Which includes, well, Doris McCarthy. A place with a history, with stories to tell, even recent and not bound to Anglo-Saxon norms. Scarborough as a place to be proud of, and which Toronto can be proud of having within its municipal apron.

Knowing your Doris McCarthy is part of a "civic cultural literacy"--and if you *really* want to convey and share pride in your geography, your local neck of the woods, then...

Paradoxically, I'll betcha that oh so many of these Scarberian Ford Nation sorts are the sort who are thoroughly illiterate in such civic-cultural matters. IOW, IMO, they're insults to the turf which they defend.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

A review of these "watchdog" jobs is long overdue in my opinion. If the Ombudsman and Integrity Commissioner were carrying out their actual duties in a non-partisan manner I would say "hands off" them - but they are not. Both Janet Lieper and Fiona Crean have demonstrated their clear political bias.

In the case of Janet Lieper if she was truly non-partisan she would have reprimanded Kyle Rae when he blew $12,000 of taxpayer money on a going away party for himself. She would have demanded that Kyle Rae pay back the misappropriated money instead she ignored numerous requests from citizens to investigate Kyle Rae.

If we are going to have an integrity commissioner shouldn't that person - as a first requirement - have integrity? By picking and choosing which complaints she pursues based on political leanings - Lieper have proven that she has no integrity. I actually think we should do away with this position altogether. Why do we need a high-paid bureaucrat to police what elected officials say or do? I want to know what is on the minds of my elected politicians. I don't want their comments to be constrained by the threat of censure by "miss manners". If I don't like their views I can deal with them at the ballot box.

As for Fiona Crean she is clearly on a political vendetta against Ford. Proof of this are the numerous links that were on her website to articles critical of Rob Ford. It was clearly wrong for her to have these links on her website. An Ombudsman must be completely neutral. It is not her job to inflame the debate. Fiona Crean must know that she crossed the line and has since taken these politically incendiary links down.

The ombudsman shouldn't even be scrutinizing the actions of elected officials. That is outside of her purview. You will never see the Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin come out with a report alleging that a premier "interfered" with the appointment process. The very notion that there would be something wrong about a Mayor providing a list of candidates that he would like to see be given consideration for an appointment is ridiculous. Every politicians does this. It is their prerogative. David Miller did this. How do you think his buddy Alok Mukhherjee got appointed Chair of the Police Services Board (a disastrous choice) ?

What I would like to see is the Toronto Ombudsman office closed down and that this function be out-sourced to the Ontario Ombudsman's office. I am sure that Andre Marin could take on this responsibility for far less money than what it costs to operate an office at city hall. Marin has been impeccable as the Ontario Ombudsman, so much so that you really have no sense of his political leanings. I don't know if he is Liberal, PC or NDP and that is how it should be if an Ombudsman is doing their job properly.

If it were possible to farm out this function to the Ontario Ombudsman's office I don't see how any Councillor - on the left or right - could object to such a move.

Which of the things that Ford has done would not have been investigated by an Ontario ombudsman?

As for Rae, I believe he blew the rest of his budget allowance, no? You may not have liked it, but the Ombudsman does not reveal 'negative' results, so Rae might have hit the radar and been judged not reprimandable, despite your personal outrage.

If Ford stopped doing goofy crap worth investigating, he'd stop getting investigated.

 

[Lenser]

maybe all those "Scarborough" references in the media don't reflect Scarborough's *negative* identity so much as, reflexively, a positive identity, self-identity, even. Which includes, well, Doris McCarthy. A place with a history, with stories to tell, even recent and not bound to Anglo-Saxon norms. Scarborough as a place to be proud of, and which Toronto can be proud of having within its municipal apron.

Knowing your Doris McCarthy is part of a "civic cultural literacy"--and if you *really* want to convey and share pride in your geography, your local neck of the woods, then...

Enough with citing Doris McCarthy, please. It just comes off as gratuitous and elitist. It's all well and good to be proud of one's neighbourhood or city, but some of us are more inclined to remember sports legends, or notable figures in the health sciences, or even notorious rappers. We're not all mandated to be proud of the same things - nor to even know that certain individuals ever existed.

Pretending that knowledge of who Doris McCarthy was amounts to some sort of litmus test of civic pride is just silly. I am a long-time friend of the McCarthy family and this brandishing of her hame in clashing arguments about Rob Ford's vision of Toronto comes off as unseemly.

 

[adma]

It's all well and good to be proud of one's neighbourhood or city, but some of us are more inclined to remember sports legends, or notable figures in the health sciences, or even notorious rappers. We're not all mandated to be proud of the same things - nor to even know that certain individuals ever existed.

Though, to some degree...why not, at least in principle, allow for that scope of "local history and stories", rather than being taxpayer-obtuse about it all.

Look at it this way: the disgruntlement sounds it's based upon a "treating Scarberians like crap" complex...but my point is, if (generically) you're that obsessed over being treated like crap, maybe it's because even as a Scarberian, you're crap. Or at least, caught in a vicious crap circle, so to speak. You're an bileful insult to your own domain. Be a more competent Scarberian, and then maybe lefty-pinko downtown elitists will pay you more respect, even be somewhat proud of having you as part of our vast municipal apron. In the end, we *don't* want to hate you because you're from Scarborough. Just give us something that's not worth hating, and we'll hate you less than we'll hate an inner-city bozo who tears down an Eden Smith house for schlock.

It's like, going to the other end of town: a lot of those Humber Valley Village NIMBYs who are all wound up over the proposed Humbertown development ruining their neighbourhood are the sort who, through McMansion rebuilds, are just as obtusely guilty of "ruining the neighbourhood", if not more so...

 

[Lenser]

It's simple. If you, in your words, "allow for a scope of "local history and stories," rather than being taxpayer-obtuse about it all" (how very generous of you), you still don't get to dictate terms as to what qualifies as authentic respect for and pride in any given neighbourhood. Really, what makes you an authority on such matters? Apart from your own set of assumptions and biases, nothing.

Secondly, your superficial use of inflammatory terms aside: why would "a competent Scarberian" (again with the inherent judgement call, I see) care at all about the precise degree of respect a lefty-pinko elitist is likely to pay him? Respect ought to be a two-way street; wouldn't it be more germane to assume that all parties involved are greater than the sum of superficial traits assigned them by such glib terms? You're treating cartoon stereotypes as the real deal. How is that supposed to further the argument?

 

[Peepers]

Which of the things that Ford has done would not have been investigated by an Ontario ombudsman?

As for Rae, I believe he blew the rest of his budget allowance, no? You may not have liked it, but the Ombudsman does not reveal 'negative' results, so Rae might have hit the radar and been judged not reprimandable, despite your personal outrage.

If Ford stopped doing goofy crap worth investigating, he'd stop getting investigated.

The Ontario Ombudsman would not have been investigating Mayor Fords involvement in making appointments to boards and neither should Fiona Crean.

Here is a list of services that the Ombudsman is allowed to look at:

http://ombudstoronto.ca/city-services-we-look

Notice that the Mayor's office is not on this list? (nor is the Police Service where most most misconduct occurs in the City). If Fiona Crean is not allowed to investigate the Mayors office what was she doing placing links on her website to articles critical of Rob Ford? What does that have to do with her mandate?

As for Kyle Rae, the fact that the money for his going away party came from "surplus" funds from his budget does not change the issue, in some ways it makes it even worse. He had taxpayer money left in his budget and he decided to use it to splurge on a party for himself. This was a clear cut case of lack of integrity on the part of a Councillor and Kyle Rae should have been ordered to pay back the taxpayers in full. What was the purpose of this party anyway? Was it used as a launching pad for the consulting business he set up as soon as he left office? A business that provides consulting services to developers?

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

Maybe she cannot investigate Ford but she might have the power to bring up and point out what Ford has done wrong and get the attention of the person (or group) who can handle the issues in question

 

[cdr108]

“Our roads are not here for automobiles. Our roads are here for people to get around.†- Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York City - July 10, 2012

i like your tag line ... if Frod and the rest of the city want to compare Toronto to world-class cities like NYC, Chicago, Paris, London, etc - he should take a cue from some of their planning and mayors.

 

[cdr108]

The Ontario Ombudsman would not have been investigating Mayor Fords involvement in making appointments to boards and neither should Fiona Crean.

Here is a list of services that the Ombudsman is allowed to look at:

http://ombudstoronto.ca/city-services-we-look

Notice that the Mayor's office is not on this list? (nor is the Police Service where most most misconduct occurs in the City). If Fiona Crean is not allowed to investigate the Mayors office what was she doing placing links on her website to articles critical of Rob Ford? What does that have to do with her mandate?

....

i see Human Resources as part of the list and Frod was cited for the unbalanced approach to fill positions.

 

[spider]

Mods.
It may be time to turn off Adma's bile faucet by sending him to his room for a time out. His offerings lately have been pretty close to the Ad Hominem attacks that have banished other far less opiniated members to the hinterlands.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Notice that the Mayor's office is not on this list? (nor is the Police Service where most most misconduct occurs in the City). If Fiona Crean is not allowed to investigate the Mayors office what was she doing placing links on her website to articles critical of Rob Ford? What does that have to do with her mandate?

No offense, but if Fiona Crean is so biased, then why did both Ford Brothers actually voted in favour of her recommendations, stemming from her investigations?
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/cit...-fiona-crean-under-attack-for-scathing-report

So you are saying that the Ombusperson should investigate issues surrounding the appointments process while avoiding the fact that the changes to the process is directed from the mayors office leading to the foul-up? Is that the love that doesn't dare speak its' name?

As for Kyle Rae, the fact that the money for his going away party came from "surplus" funds from his budget does not change the issue, in some ways it makes it even worse. He had taxpayer money left in his budget and he decided to use it to splurge on a party for himself. This was a clear cut case of lack of integrity on the part of a Councillor and Kyle Rae should have been ordered to pay back the taxpayers in full. What was the purpose of this party anyway? Was it used as a launching pad for the consulting business he set up as soon as he left office? A business that provides consulting services to developers?

The first part is optics, the second part is purely conjecture masquerading as fact. BTW a sitting mayor directing (read: prioritizing) city staff in person to spruce up his family company's property - including property staff has no business in dealing with in the first place over the regular process, constitute a misuse of power and city resources for clear personal gains without ifs, ands or buts. Plus, Kyle Rae didn't run on a platform of accountability, transparency and gravy - his worship did. So if you want to compare the two on that basis, be my guest.

Oh and I haven't even brought up the issue of using city funded staff for running his football team.

AoD

 

[Joe R.]

It's more that he's been defending himself on "Scarberian" grounds, knocking those instances where crimes and whatever are identified as being in "Scarborough" rather than "Toronto", and of course, the whole Ford Nation "suburban taxpayer disgruntlement" angle.

But as I've stated before re the Danzig shooting: maybe all those "Scarborough" references in the media don't reflect Scarborough's *negative* identity so much as, reflexively, a positive identity, self-identity, even. Which includes, well, Doris McCarthy. A place with a history, with stories to tell, even recent and not bound to Anglo-Saxon norms. Scarborough as a place to be proud of, and which Toronto can be proud of having within its municipal apron.

Knowing your Doris McCarthy is part of a "civic cultural literacy"--and if you *really* want to convey and share pride in your geography, your local neck of the woods, then...

Paradoxically, I'll betcha that oh so many of these Scarberian Ford Nation sorts are the sort who are thoroughly illiterate in such civic-cultural matters. IOW, IMO, they're insults to the turf which they defend.

What if certain Scarberians don't care about culture? Why is it necessary for people to have awareness of individuals such as Doris McCarthy and other local artists, for you to have any respect for them? Do you not associate with anyone that isn't artistically inclined? There are more facets to life than the arts and maybe the reason suburbanites generally don't care about culture is because of the hubris that is often attached to it, stemming from the experts. One could argue that you're an insult to the artistic community of Toronto with the way you scoff at those who are uneducated about such things. If you want to make people more aware of their history, then you're going to have to try a more tactful approach. Getting back to Doris McCarthy...why would anyone know who she is? You're a smart guy--surely you realize that your knowledge of art and the city in general is esoteric? The average Scarberian doesn't care enough to engage themselves in the art scene, probably because they're too busy raising families and paying off their homes. I think they're more concerned with their own lives, and there's nothing wrong with that. As far as I know, you're not married and don't have a family to look after, so you have more free time to educate yourself in all aspects of the city.