The lawyer for Councillor Carilyne Hébert insists that a 90-day pay suspension recommended by the city’s Integrity Commissioner is “drastic” and “unprecedented.”
Integrity Commissioner Tony Fleming is “pushing the envelope in his interpretation” of the law in suggesting the pay suspension for the councillor’s alleged breach of conflict of interest regulations, contends Guy W. Giorno, urging council to accept the councillor’s apology and impose no punishment.
“This is a novel case, not dealt with in the jurisprudence,” asserts Giorno in a letter to city council.
“Because the situation was unprecedented, there was no clear rule to follow. Councillor Hébert was navigating in the absence of clear guidance. What occurred was a misunderstanding or inadvertence or, at worst, an error of judgment made in good faith. The question before you is whether Mr. Fleming is right, in this circumstance, to recommend that you punish her severely based on his unprecedented and – in my respectful submission –unreasonable interpretation of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA.) Obviously, what occurred is not grounds for such a drastic result,” he argues.
Fleming acknowledges that the councillor did not have direct communication with council members with respect to the letters of support for the Social Development Council funding.”This observation is
significant,” writes Giorno, because no judge has applied the MCIA to such a circumstance. “In the case law, there has never been a situation precisely like this. No judge has ever interpreted the MCIA the way Mr. Fleming has done in the report before you,” he adds, affirming, “The problem with his report is that the Legislature intended that only a judge can decide whether the MCIA was breached.”
He cautions if the city council oversteps its authority as provided under the Municipal Act, the decision could be set aside by the Divisional Court.
“In my view, this penalty is grossly disproportionate to the situation. A 90-day suspension ought to be reserved for the worst breaches where there are no mitigating factors,” says Giorno.
He says that Hébert “was sincerely trying to do the right thing,” has apologized and “did not personally benefit from anything that occurred.”
