« The Big Explain | Main | Olive oil, haircolour make campaign trail slippery »

October 17, 2006



This is what Di Paola has posted on the yorkregion.com 'election' website. Could somebody please
decipher the meaning in/of this statement:

"While I am confident we are starting to move in the right direction with new provincial legislation and the expansion of our VIVA and GO service, we must continue to fight to protect all remaining greenspaces."

How on earth do we elect people like this!?!?

Tanis Hargrave

I find the article on the kiss of death very interesting, however there is no mention about who ....if any are, on the take in Whitchurch Stouffville.

Sandra Carvello

'no mention about who...if any are, on the take in Whitchurch Stouffville'!!!!?????? 'If any'? Please, we know who 'they' are. This blaring omission of Whitchurch Stouffville makes me wonder who else is being controlled.

Sandra Carvello

'no mention about who...if any are, on the take in Whitchurch Stouffville'!!!!?????? 'If any'? Please, we know who 'they' are. This blaring omission of Whitchurch Stouffville makes me wonder who else is being controlled.


Who's on the take in Richmond Hill?
Clue: who campaigns hardest with a message of responsible growth, sustainable development and GREEN spaces!!
You guessed it!


Who's on the take in Markham?
Clue: Which Markham Councillor provides legal representation for large development corporations in his ward while moonlighting as a councillor in the same ward?

Randy Mole

Wayne Emmerson's last campign was almost entirely financed by the developers and half of Sue Sherban's last campaign was financed by developers . The 2 have made some questionable decisions and very pro development stands . I believe there are people out there who are more interested in the integrity of the Candidates rather than their ability to collect developers dollars


Financing municipal campaigns

Well, the system is broken. The senior levels of government (Feds and Prov) grant themselves tax exemptions for their election expenses, one way and another, while they have not "downloaded" the same priviledges to the municipal level.

They don't seem to mind downloading responsibilities!

This means that candidates, who will be making serious decisions on behalf the public interestwhen elected, must rely on whatever money they can get their hands on to run.

Fine for the well-to-do - they hve deep pockets. Not so good for everyone else.

So, if you want to win an election, it is not easy to turn down support - from whatever quarter. Some that I know accept no compensation for running - reasoning that it will only take 10 weeks of salary to cover the expense if they win.

Not a good system for the majority - though probably effective for those who do not necessarily have the public interest at heart, some developers for example.

We really need to think about the systematic problem while recognizing the behaviours of our politicians. We will remind them that donations must not sway their judgement and decisions.

It is in large part the duty of us all to keep a close eye - to insist on accountability. As long as we remain awake to the probem it can be managed.

We could have a better system, less prone to abuse.


There should be some sort of legislation in place to prevent individuals, like the Markham councillor, from getting paid by developers while they are on council. Councillors do have to declare conflicts of interest before debates but this does not address what happens behind closed doors or in the back rooms of council. What it amounts to is legal and legitimized corruption.
While this councilor is being paid by taxpayers in his ward he's also on the payroll of the developers.

This is a gross ethical violation by any standards and represents a viscious attack on the trust vested in the representative by his constituents.

Sadly, it would seem that the local press is more interested in reporting on the geometric variety of lawn signs rather than tackling tough issues like this.

Randy Mole

Our press really hasn't made much of the issue . The Council in Stouffville all received a golden handshake from WalMarts for helping them get the new store open for Christmas. Not many (maybe only one, I don't know the question never got asked!!) refused that . I've heard people say "oh $750is nothing that can't buy a vote . Maybe but those 750's do buy an election. and my question to those who think it doesn't matter is . "Why do developers bankroll the incumbents then if not to create an obligation?" and if the incumbents want that money next time? I am certainly not naive enough to think there is no pressure to perform

The comments to this entry are closed.

Joan Ransberry


Veteran reporter Joan Ransberry has seen and heard it all in the many years of covering municipal, regional, provincial and federal politics. Not afraid to blow the whistle, poke fun or venture where others won't go, her blog takes a peek at the human, the stupid and goofy side of government.


LEGAL NOTICE: Copyright Metroland York Region Newspaper Group. All rights reserved. The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Metroland York Region Newspaper Group or www.yorkregion.com. Distribution, transmission or republication of any material is strictly prohibited without the prior written permission of the York Region Newspaper Group. For information please contact the BLOGmaster