Unsuitable for Public Office

There we go again, allegations laid against Ottawa mayor, Larry O'Brien, already facing legal action for behaviour unbecoming a candidate for public office. This blowhard of a businessman turned politician already faces charges of illegally offering an opponent for the office of mayor a hefty $30,000 bribe to opt out of the electoral race, and portraying himself as having influence at the federal level which would result in a plum job offering.

An Ontario Provincial Police investigation resulted in charges being laid against Mayor Larry O'Brien, and the case is set to go to trial in the spring of 2009.

Mr. O'Brien insists he is innocent of all charges, and has refused to step down from public office. Amazingly, although he ruffled feathers, both among the city's elected councillors and the staff at city hall, there does not appear to be a backlash, with detractors insisting that he take a leave of absence until the trial has established his guilt or innocence.

After a number of stumbling false starts Mr. O'Brien appears to have firmly established himself among his colleagues with some credibility respecting his attention to mayoral duties.

This glad-handing, super-confident, egotistical man does have his supporters, those for whom facade is sufficient to carry the day, but the simple fact remains that this man, despite his protestations to the contrary, has engaged in under-handed tactics which might work in the business world, but have no place in politics, unless we're willing to accept mild corruption, working its way into the system, and becoming systemic and of a more serious nature.

Now another "allegation" of an ethical lapse in conduct has been revealed, with a contractor coming forward with a complaint of having been lobbied by Mayor O'Brien's ex-wife to contribute a donation toward the mayor's legal expenses. The contractor had been successful in obtaining a $1-million contract with the city. Doesn't this coincidence strike generally as being suspect? How would the mayor's ex-wife even know of such contracts?

Why would she undertake to lend herself on her husband's behalf to such a shady manoeuvre?
The underlying and seemingly obvious context is that anyone awarded such a sizeable city contract should be prepared to hand out funds in gratitude (graft) in support of the mayor. Implicit in the technique is a form of economic blackmail: for continued consideration of city contracts, make the right impression, and you're in.

The mayor claims to have spoken with his wife, and having received assurances from her that no such incident ever occurred. Why, then, would a contractor doing business with the city come forward with such a claim? Certainly the Ottawa police chief takes it seriously; he has handed it on for further examination to the Ontario Provincial Police. It's a serious lapse of ethics, even if it can be overlooked as just a slight stink, legally.

It's past time for Ottawa's ethics-challenged City Hall to welcome the appointment of an integrity commissioner, something they've already voted against. As long as municipal politicians feel confident in their ability to refrain from behaving unethically, while at the same time seeing nothing amiss in accepting gifts from influential business interests in the city, taxpayers will not feel comfortable in trusting the choices, commitment and values they represent.

We need a lobbyist register, a clear and concise conflict-of-interest code, and the appointment of an integrity commissioner. Clearly.