Chianello: How to fire bad councillors — Ontario isn't getting it right
Article content
Yes, people were appalled by the stories: disturbing accounts from women who said they were told by Chiarelli not to wear bras to public events, were given flimsy clothing to wear, and taken to bars to 'recruit' men as volunteers. But what stunned people even more was the realization that nothing could be done to remove Chiarelli from office. Not by the province. Not by the public. Not even after multiple damning reports from both the city's former and current integrity commissioners.
Article content
Article content
Article content
And that disbelief never really went away.
Article content
Over the past five years, I've heard from dozens of people — victims, staffers, elected officials, voters — all asking the same question: how is it possible that an elected official can be found to have harassed or harmed others in the workplace, and still keep their job?
Article content
Now, the province has finally responded — in theory.
Article content
This spring, Ontario's Progressive Conservative government introduced Bill 9, the Municipal Accountability Act, 2025, which passed second reading last month. On paper, it's the government's answer to calls from multiple quarters for a legal mechanism to remove municipal councillors from office for egregious misconduct.
Article content
Bill 9 does offer a few welcome changes. It mandates training for councillors on their codes of conduct. It gives the province authority to impose those codes if municipalities fall short. And it adds oversight to ensure municipal integrity commissioners don't have conflicts of interest — a needed step, especially after revelations by CBC Ottawa that some commissioners were also serving as their municipality's lawyer, a conflict the Ontario ombudsman rightly flagged as problematic.
Article content
Article content
But on the core issue — the ability to remove a council member who has seriously violated the code of conduct — Bill 9 falls short. In fact, it sets up a process so convoluted and politicized that it's hard to imagine it ever being used successfully.
Article content
Article content
Here's how it would work.
Article content
If a local integrity commissioner finds that a councillor's misconduct caused harm to someone's health, safety or well-being — and potentially if the behaviour was repeated — they can recommend removal from office. That recommendation then goes to Ontario's Integrity Commissioner, who launches a second full inquiry.
Article content
If the provincial commissioner agrees the councillor should be removed, they make a recommendation. But that recommendation doesn't trigger removal.
Article content
Instead, it's sent back to the councillor's own colleagues — their fellow council members — who must vote unanimously to remove them from office within 30 days. And every single councillor must be present for the vote to count. If someone is sick, on vacation, or slinks off to the washroom, the vote fails. And if council doesn't hold a vote within that 30-day deadline, Bill 9 is silent on what happens next.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
18 hours ago
- CTV News
Tinted windows: the benefits and potential legal pitfalls
An "Enforcer II" tint meter was used on a piece of glass on July 22, 2025. (Spencer Turcotte/CTV News)
Vancouver Sun
2 days ago
- Vancouver Sun
Opinion: B.C. government advertising: Time to buy local
For more than 100 years, member publishers of the B.C. & Yukon Community News Media Association have served British Columbians. With more than 90 newspapers and a combined readership of almost two million, we keep British Columbians connected and engaged. In an era of fake news, real news is more important than ever before. Real news — meaning fact-based, fact-checked original news — costs real money. Traditionally, newspapers relied heavily on advertising revenue to fund the original content our journalists create. Over the past 15 years, those advertising dollars have shifted from authoritative Canadian sources, like newspapers, to U.S.-based web giants. In 2012, Canadian newspaper advertising revenue stood at $3.55 billion. Today, it is less than $1 billion. Yet, four out of five Canadians still read newspapers, regardless of format, at least once a week — essentially unchanged since 2012. A daily roundup of Opinion pieces from the Sun and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Informed Opinion will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. To illustrate the point, the federal government reports that during fiscal year 2022 to 2023, it spent more than $86 million on advertising. Of that, less than $1 million went to all print publications in the country combined. In the face of threats to our economy and our sovereignty by U.S. President Donald Trump, Canadians are showing their pride and buying Canadian. You can see it in the grocery aisle, where shoppers choose fresh fruit from B.C. over fruit from Washington or California. So, why do governments buy advertising from American tech giants? Shouldn't British Columbia adopt advertising procurement policies to support trusted Canadian news brands? This has been done in other jurisdictions and it is working. Last year, Ontario's Progressive Conservative premier, Doug Ford, directed that 25 per cent of his government's advertising spending, including that of Ontario's Crown corporations, be set aside for news publications. On the other side of the border and of the political aisle, then New York City mayor Bill de Blasio, a Democrat, mandated that city agencies allocate at least 50 per cent of their print and digital advertising to community and ethnic media. According to The Center for Community Media at CUNY, 'The impact of this policy cannot be overstated: In its first five years, it injected more than $72 million into the local community media sector. This helped critical information reach New Yorkers who rely on community media as their primary source of news, and added an important source of revenue for these outlets.' The not-for-profit Rebuild Local News found that advertising set-asides, done right, have the following benefits: First, they can provide substantial revenue to local news organizations and help community journalism thrive. Second, it is money the government is already spending — not new money — so it does not require enlarging state or local budgets or raising taxes. Third, government messages can reach a full range of residents, including those who may not be using larger media. Fourth, as advertising, it is payment for a service rendered, not a subsidy per se. Finally, advertising in community news helps government be more effective by reaching audiences through community and ethnic publications that are more trusted in their communities. According to a recent study, advertising in trustworthy environments leads to a 25 per cent lift in brand rating. News publishers in aggregate are seen as 35 per cent above the baseline level of trust across information environments. And local news publishers see an additional 16 per cent gain in perceived trustworthiness among local audiences. It's time for B.C. to adopt a minimum 25 per cent set-aside for government advertising, as well as at Crown corporations like B.C. Hydro, B.C. Transit, and the B.C. Lottery Corporation, to help preserve local journalism jobs and keep local and community newspapers open. And those journalists keep communities and residents informed, so they can effectively participate in democratic processes. It would also send an important signal to private sector advertisers about keeping ad dollars here in B.C., rather than sending them to Big Tech behemoths in California, whose algorithms amplify misinformation and disinformation. Premier Eby, let's support the home team. Kelly Keil is chair of the B.C. & Yukon Community News Media Association and is the publisher of the Powell River Peak
CBC
2 days ago
- CBC
Hogan says new cash benefit for departing ministers axed, in wake of CBC report
Premier John Hogan says his cabinet has met and decided to "immediately rescind" a new policy that provided outgoing ministers between $12,000 and $48,000 on their way out the door. In a post on Facebook late Friday afternoon, Hogan reiterated that he was not in cabinet and was not involved in the decision to approve the policy. The new benefit — which came into effect April 1 — was never publicly disclosed, until it was revealed by CBC News on Friday morning. "I became aware of the matter following inquiries from the media and acted quickly to revoke the allowance," Hogan noted in his Facebook post. The stunning reversal came 10 hours after CBC News broke the story about the new transitional allowance policy for ministers. It provided one month's salary for each year of service in cabinet, on a prorated basis, for a minimum of three months and a maximum of 12 months. The province's Executive Council declined to say when the decision was made, noting that it was a decision of cabinet and those deliberations are protected. On Thursday evening, a spokesperson for Hogan told CBC News that the premier was not in cabinet when the decision was made, and he was not involved in the decision. That statement sparked barbs from both opposition parties Friday. "I think that's a cop-out," Progressive Conservative Leader Tony Wakeham said in an interview early Friday afternoon. Wakeham called the allowance "another Liberal scandal," and said Hogan, as premier, would be well aware of a decision made by cabinet. "At a time in Newfoundland and Labrador when so many people are hurting with the cost of living, to see taxpayers dollars being secretly paid out to Liberal cabinet ministers and approved by their own ministers, this is scandalous," Wakeham said. NDP Leader Jim Dinn said the decision left him "shaking my head [in] disbelief," and recalling what he's heard while hosting town halls about affordability. "It shows a lack of sensitivity to the struggles that many people face in the province," Dinn said. "If you can make decisions like this, surely there are other things you can do just as easily to help people of the province who are struggling with cost of living." Both leaders spoke to CBC News before Hogan's Facebook post announcing the reversal of the benefit. Since April 1, when the now-rescinded policy came into effect, eight cabinet ministers have either already left or signalled their intentions to not run again when voters go to the polls in a looming provincial election. Hogan's statement on Facebook did not address whether the decision is retroactive, and how it would apply to any money already paid out.
