1. 无忧资讯 /
  2. 本地 /
  3. 我看福特免职:始作俑者 咎由自取 /

我看福特免职:始作俑者 咎由自取

福特免职,其中一个重要原因,源自他的性格。

从来不听别人说话,我行我素,是多伦多市长福特的弱点,性格使然,是结构性的缺陷。

本来福特以高票当选市长,市议会中,同路人又佔大多数,他只要推动受市民欢迎的理财谨慎政纲,一一兑现竞选承诺,顺风顺水,人人称快。

很可惜,从推动地铁大计,福特便因为:驾驭不力,不擅发挥团队精神,不听专家甚至同僚的意见,一开始,便有公车局主席阵前起义,唱对台,等到市长有 机会妥协,可以扭转形势时,又没有及时把握机会,为解决筹集资金而集思广益,从长计议。福特个性上,沉不着气,没有耐性 ,是他的致命伤。

跟着,又有保守阵营的同僚劝勉他:应以市议会财务责任的大局为重,公务期间,不宜分心于足球教练的私事,以免招人公私不分,不知轻重的话柄。忠言逆耳,一于我行我素!

等到操守问题,浮上水面,带到议会,他也一贯不听市政官员的专业意见,操守专员三番四次的诚恳劝谕和温馨提示:利用市议员公家信纸,向游说人员募捐的行为,明显违反议员操守,无论个人有否得益,或者议会有否受损,都是法例不容许的行为,当有关议题,呈上市议会时,应该避嫌,不发言,不投票。福特一于不理,对于专业意见,视若无睹,他好像一个倔强不听父母话的孩子,固执性格,尽露无遗,令到庭上主审法官,别无选择,只好秉公处事,依法处理。没有人可以逍遥法网之外,或者凌驾法律之上。何况这位由保守党政府总理哈珀委任的法官Charles Hackland海克兰,一向审案,都以公正严明着称。

法官裁决判词中,指出他不相信福特犯规,只是无心之失,或者一时的错误判断 。观诸福特一向的行事作风,颇有同感。

福特今次做错事,不是一时失误,而是一连串相似行为的表徵,恰似长期慢性病症其中一环。他违反利益冲突的法例,只是多项引人注目行为之中,最严重的一个例子。

福特引起争议,频频见报,不守规矩的言行,以至审毕未判的诽谤官司,令到不少观察家认为这宗利益冲突官司最终入罪,是意料中事,可见福特积习成性,鲁莽任性,是他自己个性招致的结果。

率性,率真,是福特一贯支持者最珍惜的美德。任性,死性不改,也是令很多支持者摇头叹息的原因。

强势不等同强顽。强势市长,一样需要民主作风、团队精神、尊重法律,听取专业意见,和公务人员衷诚合作,可惜福特一一欠奉,强顽的个性,令他往往我行我素,作风傲慢。

福特市长好像由始至终,都不明白权力需要制衡。 防止利益冲突、惩罚涉及公器私用、公开透明,保持廉结奉公的原则,是相关法例可取精神。迥避利益冲突,应是议员的基本操守,也是政治常识。

福特做过十年市议员,辩称自己从来没有看过这类指引文件或相关法例,很难令人信服。
“无知”,并非犯规脱罪的藉口。犯规就是犯规。明知故犯,固然罪加一等,在法例面前,视而不见,罪无可恕,更是这宗国际注目官司的症结所在。

福特陷自己于不义,不是什麽左翼势力阴谋围攻,不是什麽传媒兴风作浪,更不是委任的法官,侵犯民主选举的市长。

始作俑者,只有福特自己,不得诿过他人。咎由自取,比较接近实情!

以上文章为加国无忧网站有偿征文作品
■ 非合作媒体如未征得加国无忧网站许可,请勿转载此文 ■
诚征写手 欢迎来稿 加国无忧网站有偿征文

网友评论

网友评论仅供其表达个人看法,并不表明 51.CA 立场。
我觉得福胖子是被人给陷害了。投票就是关于他的筹款的事,难道他不知道是有利益冲突的吗? 如果他没想起来,那他的助手和智囊团也不知道吗? 一个可能就是陷害他的人有意隐瞒了投票内容,或者引诱他认为可以投票。
回复
胖子比窦娥都冤
回复
文中说法官Charles Hackland海克兰是由保守党政府总理哈珀委任的。法官Charles Hackland海克兰不是安省高等法庭法官吗?如此看来,联邦政府的总理还要委托一大批省级法官。原来加拿大的三级政府并不是互相独立的,不知道我这样理解是否正确,请哪位高人给指点一下,谢谢了。
回复
Hackland不是总理任命的。 再补充一下啊: 总理宣布委任的一般是Chief Justice、Associate Chief Justice、Puisne Chief Justice这个级别的大法官。在宣告中是PM announces打头, 而Hackland是由司法部长宣布任命的,在宣告中是Ontario Judicial Appointments Announced。 而最高法院的大法官是由总理推荐,总督委任的。省级高等法院Superior Court和联邦最高法院Supreme Court不是一回事,以前俺有弄混过。 关于大法官任免的程序:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_appointments_in_Canada -------------------------------- WHAT DO JUDGES DO? A judge’s role is to make a decision between parties in a legal dispute, based on the facts of the case and the law that applies to the facts. The parties must accept the judge’s decision as final, unless one of them appeals the judge’s decision to a higher court. How do judges get appointed? Judges are appointed “to the Bench.” The federal government appoints judges who hear cases in the superior courts (which include: provincial and territorial superior courts, provincial courts of appeal, the Federal Court, the Federal Court of Appeal, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada, the Tax Court of Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada(最后这句不严谨...)). The provincial and territorial governments appoint judges who hear cases in the provincial and territorial (lower) courts. Judicial candidates must have practiced law in Canada and have other important qualifications. After they are appointed, judges have access to special training on all aspects of judging and all areas of the law. How long can a judge remain a judge? Once a judge is appointed, they are eligible to be a judge until the age of retirement. For federally appointed judges, retirement is mandatory at age 75. In some provincial and territorial jurisdictions, the retirement age is 70. A judge can be removed from office only if an independent investigation shows that they have not met the high standard of personal conduct required of judges, both in court and in public, and that the Canadian Judicial Council recommends to Parliament (through the Minister of Justice) that the judge be removed from office. Judicial councils have responsibility for promoting professional standards and conduct of judges. There is a separate judicial council for judges appointed by a province or territory, and those appointed by the federal government. A judicial council may recommend that a judge be removed from office if it finds that a judge has been guilty of serious misconduct. The Canadian Judicial Council is responsible for federally appointed judges only. The process for making a complaint about a federally appointed judge and the Council’s review of that complaint is described in another part of this website called Expected Conduct of Judges. What is judicial independence? Judicial independence is paramount in the Canadian judicial system. The Canadian Constitution provides that the judiciary (the judges) is separate from and independent of the other two branches of government – the legislative and the executive. So, while the government’s role is to create laws for Canadian society, a judge’s job is to interpret those laws. It is important to remember that the courts do not make new laws; they make decisions based on existing laws that the government has passed. Judicial independence means that judges are not subject to pressure and influence, and are free to make good decisions based solely on fact and law. Independence is ensured by three things: Security of tenure – Once appointed, a judge is entitled to serve on the Bench until the age of retirement, unless there is good reason for them to be removed from office. Financial security – Judges are paid sufficiently so they are not dependent on or subject to pressure from other institutions. Administrative independence – The chief justice in each province and territory decides how that court manages the litigation process and which cases the judges will hear. ------------------------------------------- 【Judicial Appointments】 http://www.canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/news-nouv/index.asp?tid=4 【Hackland的委任通知】 The Honourable Charles T. Hackland, a Judge of the Superior Court of Justice in and for the Province of Ontario is appointed a Regional Senior Judge of the Superior Court of Justice in and for the Province of Ontario for the East Region. Mr. Justice Hackland is replacing Madam Justice Monique Métivier. Mr. Justice Hackland received a Bachelor of Arts in 1972 from Carleton University and a Bachelor of Laws in 1975 from the University of Ottawa. He was admitted to the Bar of Ontario in 1978. Mr. Justice Hackland was an associate with Binks, Chilcott & Simpson from 1980 to 1986, a partner with Lang, Michener from 1986 to 1990 and a partner with the Ottawa firm of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP until being appointed a judge in 2003. These appointments are effective immediately.
回复
回复 ariel.c:谢谢指点!看来哈珀和Hackland没有直接联系,希望作者今后注意论述的准确性,人为误导读者终究不是什么好事。
回复
回复 良心发现:补充两点: 第一,Charles Hackland法官确实和哈珀有点关系。他是哈珀政府的司法部长Rob Nicholson于2008年提拔成现在的东区高级法官senior regional judge, East Region. 第二,您为何不把“Charles Hackland”和Harper放一起Google一下?Hackland曾经做出对Harper有利的判决。 如果有人因为Hackland判决福特而认定他是“左派”,那么Hackland判决哈珀的案子是否可以认定这个法官是“右派”?
回复
苗大伟当了几年市长,没有操守问题,没有政治不正确的问题。可是他对多伦多造成的伤害,死有余辜。把拉士曼留下的210亿储备金花个精光,还要加汽车牌照税,还要加土地转让税,强抢普通老百姓的血汗钱,拿去给他的工会主子们进贡。前一天晚上4枪3死,第二天他就带着警政委员会主席和警察总长领导同性恋上街大游行,还恬不知耻地说要把多伦多建成全世界的同性恋首都。这种工会的看门狗和左派媒体的宠物,都可以连任,可见工会和左翼媒体的势力之强大。福特要想为普通老百姓说话和做事,当然是整死你没商量。
回复
不止一件啊...
回复
看看本帖就知道是谁了。。。 你要对号入座,也没办法
回复
Whatever~ Again,poll,please。 ——你喜欢臆想贴标签,我喜欢刨根问题。😁
回复
回复 ariel.c:自己去听广播。,。俺没功夫。洗洗睡了。。劝你也别操心。再上来一个米勒一样的市长,对你未必是福 俺只要垃圾工人不罢工就行 -- 福特,干的好
回复
回复 熊熊燃烧:天天听广播,抱歉没听到过这样的调查结果,莫非是我偏台或走神了?呵呵... 实话实说,俺一向不信调查结果的,俺只想确认你不是习惯性道听途说而已。😁
回复
福特,得罪是这些人渣,爱罢工的工会和同性恋团体,拿社会福利的懒虫。 这些利益团体就到处煽动反对福特。。。。51 中不乏这些人。。。
回复
x
x