Understanding the Unwritten Rules: Examining the use of Ontario Parliamentary Convention to Guide the Conduct of Elected Officials in Ontario by Ian Stedman A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws Faulty of Law University of Toronto © Copyright by Ian Stedman 2015 Understanding the Unwritten Rules: Examining the use of Ontario Parliamentary Convention to Guide the Conduct of Elected Officials in Ontario Ian Stedman Master of Laws Faculty of Law University of Toronto 2015 Abstract Government ethics legislation in Canada guides and restricts the conduct of parliamentarians. Ontario established an independent officer of the legislature in 1988 who is responsible for administering its government ethics legislation. In 1994, an undefined behaviour-guiding standard called “Ontario parliamentary convention” was added to the legislation. This paper explores the history of Ontario’s government ethics regime and examines its response to specific scandals, in order to describe the emergence of Ontario parliamentary convention as a ii standard of conduct. It then provides a full discussion and complementary summary of the specific parliamentary conventions that Ontario’s legislative ethics officers have determined must guide the conduct of Ontario’s parliamentarians. This discussion and summary illuminate the problematic and inconsistent use of this standard by Ontario’s legislative ethics officers. Two sets of recommendations are then offered to help modernize and strengthen the legislation for the benefit of Ontario’s parliamentarians. iii Acknowledgments I am deeply indebted to my wife and children for their support and patience throughout the completion of this thesis. Aimy, Lia and Ivy have spent a great deal of time this past year without their husband and father and this accomplishment is as much theirs as it is mine. I also wish to thank my wife’s parents, Hoa Bui and Minh Lieu, for the endless sacrifices they have made to ensure the continuing growth, strength and stability of our family. I am also grateful for the invaluable guidance and feedback that I received from Andrew Martin. I am fortunate to have found a colleague who was passionate about challenging my ideas and helping me to improve my writing. Your contribution to this project is greatly valued. I also wish to thank my supervisor, Professor Simon Stern. I sincerely appreciate your advice and critical comments on my work. I learned a great deal from you that I will take with me as I move forward in my academic career. Finally, this project would not have happened without the confidence and support of Professor Ian Greene at York University. Your generosity and selflessness towards others epitomizes what it means to be a true professional. I will never be able to thank you enough for your mentorship. iv Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 2 THE HISTORY OF GOVERNMENT CONFLICT OF INTEREST RULES IN ONTARIO ......................................................................................................................... 9 2.1 THE NORTHERN ONTARIO NATURAL GAS COMPANY ............................................. 11 2.2 MUNICIPAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ...................................................................... 12 2.3 PREMIER BILL DAVIS’ 1972 GUIDELINES ................................................................ 16 2.4 PREMIER DAVID PETERSON’S 1985 GUIDELINES ..................................................... 18 2.5 MINISTER ELINOR CAPLAN’S SCANDAL .................................................................. 20 2.6 MINISTER RENÉ FONTAINE’S SCANDAL .................................................................. 22 2.7 THE AIRD REPORT ................................................................................................... 25 2.8 BILL 160 ................................................................................................................. 28 2.9 BILL 23 ................................................................................................................... 30 2.10 MEMBERS’ CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT, 1988 ......................................................... 31 2.11 PREMIER BOB RAE’S 1990 GUIDELINES .................................................................. 34 2.12 STANDING COMMITTEE REPORT ON PREMIER RAE’S CONFLICT OF INTEREST GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................ 36 2.13 MINISTER EVELYN GIGANTES’ SCANDAL ............................................................... 40 2.14 MEMBERS’ INTEGRITY ACT, 1994 ............................................................................. 42 3 PARLIAMENTARY CONVENTION ..................................................................... 45 3.1 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS ............................................................................ 47 3.2 THE PATRIATION REFERENCE (1981) ...................................................................... 48 3.3 CANADIAN CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS .......................................................... 51 3.3.1 Powers of the Governor General and Lieutenant Governor .......................... 52 3.3.2 Responsible Cabinet Government ................................................................. 52 3.3.3 Workings of the Legislature .......................................................................... 53 3.3.4 Federalism ..................................................................................................... 54 3.3.5 Judicial Independence ................................................................................... 55 v 3.4 CONFLICT OF INTEREST COMMISSIONER ................................................................. 57 3.5 1991-1992 ANNUAL REPORT .................................................................................. 59 3.6 REFERENCES TO PARLIAMENTARY CONVENTION IN LEGISLATIVE DEBATES PRIOR TO 1991-1992 ............................................................................................... 62 3.7 1992-1993 ANNUAL REPORT .................................................................................. 64 3.8 1993-1994 ANNUAL REPORT .................................................................................. 66 3.9 STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY .............................................. 67 3.10 LEGISLATIVE DEBATE REGARDING THE PASSING OF THE MEMBERS’ INTEGRITY ACT, 1994 .............................................................................................. 69 3.11 DO THE WORDS “PARLIAMENTARY CONVENTION” HAVE PRIOR MEANING? ......... 71 4 THE EVOLUTION OF “ONTARIO PARLIAMENTARY CONVENTION” ... 73 4.1 COMMISSIONER EVANS ............................................................................................ 75 4.2 COMMISSIONER RUTHERFORD ................................................................................. 83 4.3 (INTERIM) COMMISSIONER EVANS ........................................................................... 85 4.4 COMMISSIONER OSBORNE ........................................................................................ 87 4.5 THE SPEAKER’S JURISDICTION OVER MEMBERS’ CONDUCT .................................. 102 4.6 COMMISSIONER MORRISON ................................................................................... 108 4.7 SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. 116 5 UNDERSTANDING THE CATEGORIES OF ONTARIO PARLIAMENTARY CONVENTION ............................................................................................................. 118 5.1 PARLIAMENTARY CONVENTIONS GROUNDED IN CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS 119 5.2 CONVENTION BASED ON THE IMPROPER USE OF GOVERNMENT OR LEGISLATIVE RESOURCES, INCLUDING CONTRACTUAL BENEFITS AND STATUTORY RIGHTS AFFORDED TO MEMBERS ........................................................................................ 121 5.3 AN ONTARIO PARLIAMENTARY CONVENTION THAT OUGHT TO BE DISMISSED OUTRIGHT .............................................................................................................. 124 5.4 WHAT IS NOT AN ONTARIO PARLIAMENTARY CONVENTION ................................. 126 6 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 128 6.1 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER .................................... 130 vi 6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LEGISLATORS ................................................................ 134 6.3 CLARITY AND LEGITIMACY .................................................................................... 135 7 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 137 vii ! 1 Introduction Questions about the ethical conduct of government officials throughout Canada have taken up residence on the front pages of our local and national newspapers. As the public scrutiny of elected officials grows and becomes more accessible,1 it is important that citizens engage in critical and meaningful discussions about the rules that we have put in place to promote ethical conduct and accountability from those individuals. Members of the media and members of the public should be aware of the rules and should be able to challenge those rules when they are deficient. The rules currently in place in Ontario