The
Webster's Dictionary describes the word 'integrity' to mean: 3 “the
quality or state of being of sound moral principle, uprightness,
honesty and sincerity.” It
would be expected that if one was to lay claim to integrity, that same
individual would not attempt to deceive through omission or use
trickery in their chosen language. In fact, honesty and sincerity as
components require being “free from deceit, frank and
open,” and “without
pretence or hypocrisy,” again
quoted from Webster's.
In
Canada we have a bunch of what are called Integrity Commissioners
established to patrol one of the oldest professions, politicians.
These Integrity Commissioners supposedly enforce a certain code of
ethics for those we elect to take care of our affairs as a community.
Regardless of what your opinion is of anyone in the game of politics
it is a sad fact that we do need them. After all imagine what would
it be like without our political leaders. Reality soon wipes the
smile off our face.
As
an individual who is chosen to take up the mantle of an Integrity
Commissioner it would be expected that these Webster style traits are
demonstrated in that individual's personality and history. Then
mother reality crashes through the door and throws into the mix human
nature with all its ugliness. Ego steps in and then we have nothing
left of Webster and his high aspirations.
There
is further reality to deal with here, one which raises a question of
the real purpose of such creatures. They are paid with public money
to supposedly enforce a certain code of ethics in our elected members
of government. Yet they have no authority to do anything about the
most serious of breaches of that code. The most severe penalty that
they can recommend, and yes only recommend, is to remove the one who
may have committed deceit or worse from pay for 90 days. Even here
the commish can only recommend the penalty and it is up to the
respective council to decide if they implement it.
In
the Niagara Region of Ontario one of these knights came crashing in
with his ego in tow. Robert Swayze was brought to town to
investigate two complaints brought against Councillor Andrew
Petrowski. This whole issue was covered
in an article titled Integrity Commissioner's trial of bias and does not need
repeating. It is what Robert Swayze did later that brought a need to
revisit these questionable muddy waters.
On
February 26th
2014 an email was received by artist Alexandra Davidoff sent by
Robert J. Swayze. This email identifies the sender clearly and
although its grammar is equivalent of a lower grader it has
CONFIDENTIAL atop of it, and further repeated below. Alexandra
Davidoff is the artist, a very talented artist, who provides some of
the articles on Mayorgate with rather thought provoking caricatures
as she had done with the article relating to Robert Swayze.
Robert
Swayze's ego jumps forward with his statement that he is an integrity
commissioner for “9 other municipalities,” and
it appears he is doing some kind of educational presentation. He
asks to have permission to use Alexandra's artwork in what he refers
to as a “power point presentation.” At
no time does Robert Swayze explain how he is wanting to use the
artwork or why. Everything about Robert Swayze's request reeks of
deceit and subterfuge.
Webster's
Dictionary describes integrity as being frank and open, without
pretence or hypocrisy. Reading Swayze's email sees no openness, no
honesty. What did Robert Swayze have in mind only a guess could be
used. He has shown that his ego is indeed large. In an article
written by Micheal McKiernan titled 'Lawyers grabbing a
piece of integrity commissioner action' for
Lawtimesnews.com Robert
Swayze is quoted as saying, “It's an evolving field,
changing all the time. There's such an enormous variety of issues
that come up and you're always creating new law and new approaches.”
It
would seem that Robert Swayze ignores the Municipal Statute Law
Amendment Act 2006, Bill 130. In section 223.3 the Role of Integrity
Commissioner is expanded on, and section 223.4 explains the authority
and powers of an Integrity Commissioner. There is a reality that
escapes Robert Swayze, he cannot be “creating new laws,”
they are set out by the provincial government. His authority is
extremely limited even if he finds serious breaches and wishes to
make them public.
Robert
Swayze decides to contact artist Alexandra Davidoff requesting
permission to use her art yet is unwilling to fully explain how is it
that he wishes to use it. What was the motivation behind this veiled
request? Motivation was clearly at question when Swayze rode though
the City of Guelph. It was again questioned in the issues
surrounding his guest appearance in the Niagara Region. Motivation
clearly remains a question in relation to Integrity Commissioner
Robert Swayze.
As
we try and grapple with codes of ethics, human nature and politics we
find ourselves in very muddy waters. The notion that Integrity
Commissioners are an answer is slowly becoming a false hope. Ethics
and politics are extremely strange bed fellows and without real
authority no knight who is simply highly paid with public money is
worth a dollar bill, or is it a loonie?
Robert
Swayze may see himself as something high on a horse, in this case he
simply tried to play tricks without waiting for Halloween. Both the
Swayze email and response to it are published here, maybe Robert
Swayze would care to shed some light on all of this.
Send comments to: demtruth@gmail.com