[URBAN NOTE] "Doug Ford says integrity commissioner should resign over call for sanction against may

[rfmcdonald]

Via the National Post's Natalie Alcoba comes the latest installment in the Ford family saga that has become Toronto's.

Councillor Doug Ford thinks the city’s integrity commissioner should apologize and resign after recommending a sanction that became the centre of a legal battle over Mayor Rob Ford’s job.

Janet Leiper’s proposed punishment for breaking the code of conduct — that Mr. Ford reimburse donations that lobbyists and one company had made to his charitable football foundation — was deemed by a court to have been outside the city’s authority to impose. The mayor voted to overturn the sanction, leading Toronto resident Paul Magder to take him to court for a conflict of interest violation. Last month, a Divisional Court panel of three judges unanimously ruled the city overstepped its bounds and overturned a lower court’s decision that he should be removed from office.

“I think it’s time the apology commissioner apologize,” said Doug Ford, an attack on previous instances in which Ms. Leiper has asked both him and the mayor to say sorry for their behaviour. “If it was up to me, I’d ask her to step down,” he said. “Through her lack of due diligence she has almost destroyed a family.”

Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday first asked Ms. Leiper to apologize on the floor of council Thursday as city council discussed a report she wrote explaining the court’s decision.

He said Ms. Leiper should have sought legal advice before interpreting a “grey area.”

Councillor Gord Perks was “appalled” the deputy mayor didn’t understand the importance of testing a new area of law in court. He pointed out that courts rendered two different decisions on the matter, “indicating that the areas were complex and difficult enough.”

Ms. Leiper would not respond to the deputy mayor’s apology request when asked by reporters later. She explained the rationale behind her suggested sanction, however, to council, saying she examined the penalties that were at her disposal and deemed that a member could improperly direct a benefit somewhere else that could attract a “corrective action.” So, her recommendation sought to “correct the people who were compromised, correct those lobbyists who gave donations who should not have been asked in the first place.”