Jump to content

General FY Moments


Orion VIII
 Share

Recommended Posts

Having the Ontario Photo Card service (a non-drivers ID card for Ontario residents aged 16 and older who don't have a drivers licence) expanded to many ServiceOntario centres in Ontario. By the end of this year, it'll be "Standard equipment" throughout the province at each and every ServiceOntario centre.

The only problem is, I wish there should be an "system" in place telling the customer who applied for a drivers licence (if they decide to drive at some point later) informing that if they have the Ontario Photo Card with them. The similar situation is true - if you want to apply for the Ontario Photo Card, you must surrender your driver's licence and it'll be cancelled in the system. You cannot have an Ontario Photo Card and a drivers licence at the same time.

Not many people don't seem to listen even though it's a criminal offence to possess both of these identification cards.

Maybe you should create a new topic for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A big FY to Purolator.

Let's just say if you're looking for a courier to deliver a parcel on time, make sure you don't use Purolator.

My father was supposed to receive a parcel last Friday, however, nobody was home to collect it. Due to this, arrangements were made for a re-delivery on Monday. Monday comes around, no delivery. Apparently, they forgot to put the parcel on the delivery truck.

Tuesday comes around, still no delivery. They forgot to put the parcel on the delivery truck yet again!

We finally received the parcel yesterday afternoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Rob Ford no longer the mayor of Toronto! :D:D:D

Mayor Rob Ford kicked from office, found guilty of conflict of interest

David Rider

Urban Affairs Bureau Chief

In a bombshell ruling, a judge has found Mayor Rob Ford guilty of breaching provincial of conflict of interest law and ordered him removed from office, but put that ruling on hold for 14 days.

That apparently means Ford remains in office while his lawyer launches an appeal and asks Divisional Court to put an indefinite stay on the removal order pending the outcome of that appeal.

Rob Ford out: Text of judge’s decision

It also gives city council time to figure out how to deal with the prospect – unprecedented, in modern times – of a mayor being removed from office by the courts.

James: All Torontonians will pay for Rob Ford's ‘wilful blindness’

If Ford’s lawyer cannot convince Divisional Court to stay the removal order within 14 days, council will have the option of either appointing a councillor to be caretaker mayor until the end of the term in December 2014 or triggering a $7-million byelection.

Justice Charles Hackland’s decision appears to disqualify Ford from running in a byelection before the end of the current term, but does not say he can’t run in future civic elections.

In finding the mayor to have violated the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, Hackland had the option of banning Ford from running for up to seven years.

The hotly awaited decision followed a two-day hearing in early September that saw Ford grilled over his conduct at a Feb. 7 council meeting and the events that led up to it.

The city’s integrity commissioner ruled in 2010 that then-councillor Ford was wrong to use official letterhead and other city resources to solicit donations from people lobbying him for his namesake football foundation.

Council agreed and ordered Ford to repay $3,150 to lobbyists, their clients and one private firm. Ford ignored six reminders from the integrity commissioner before she brought the issue back to council Feb. 7.

There, Ford made an impassioned speech about why he shouldn’t be forced to repay the money, arguing it was spent distributing football equipment to schools. He voted with the 22-12 majority to cancel the order that he repay.

In March, Toronto resident Paul Magder alleged Ford broke a provision in the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act which states elected officials can’t speak to, or vote upon, items in which they have a “pecuniary interest.”

At the hearing before Hackland, Magder’s lawyer Clayton Ruby argued Ford was “reckless” and “wilfully ignorant” of the law when he did not recuse himself from the debate and vote.

Ford, who was on council for a decade before becoming mayor in late 2010, testified he never read the Conflict of Interest Act or the councillor orientation handbook. Nor did he attend councillor training sessions that covered conflicts of interest.

The mayor promised in his oath of office to “disclose conflicts of interest” but, when asked by Ruby if he understood the words, Ford said: “No. My interpretation of a conflict of interest, again, is it takes two parties and the city must benefit or a member of council must benefit.”

Ruby accused Ford of “wilful blindness.”

“As mayor he ought to have had a clear understanding of his obligations. This entire pattern of conduct shows that he chose to remain ignorant, and substituted his own view for that of the law,” Ruby said.

Ford, longtime coach of Etobicoke’s Don Bosco Eagles, vehemently disagreed, saying he acted only in the best interests of high school students.

Ford’s lawyer, Alan Lenczner, offered a three-pronged defence.

He said council had no legislative authority to make Ford repay $3,150 in football charity donations in the first place.

Second, that if council did impose a penalty it was under Toronto’s code of conduct, not the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, so Ford could not have breached the act. If the Act applied, elected officials could not defend themselves when criticized by the integrity commissioner, he added.

Finally, that if Ford did err by not declaring a conflict, it was an inadvertent “error in judgment.”

“He may (have been) wrong (to vote),” Lenczner said. “And the case may allow for that, because that’s what an error of judgment is. You’re wrong, but that’s an excuse under the Act.”

Ford himself went into the trial saying he did nothing wrong. During the grilling by Ruby, he allowed that, if he had been advised that voting on the matter could land him in court, he wouldn’t have voted.

“I would have declared a conflict like I have every other time,” the mayor said. “But now that we’re here, I’m here. I can’t change what happened.”

http://www.thestar.c...t-can-run-again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...