Scanned, recopied or Internet copy, if there are errors, please e-mail me with corrections:
Opening comments: More at the end.
Isn't this interesting - That at a Inquiry that claims to be open to the public has held its first SECRET Hearing?
"The affidavit has been filed and cross-examination was conducted earlier this month, but the transcripts remain confidential." - "cross-examination of McCallion". Yes the bridge has been crossed.
To the main Judicial Inquiry page - to the Hazel McCallion page.Comments by others to this web-page - 6 - to this web-page at time of posting.
Mississauga News - Apr. 30, 2010 - By Louie Rosella - firstname.lastname@example.org
The News makes motion at inquiry
A motion filed by The Mississauga News at the judicial inquiry calling for Peter McCallion's affidavit,
detailing intimate financial information showing why he needs taxpayers to foot his legal bill,
to be made public is being considered by commissioner Douglas Cunningham. File photo
Mississauga judicial inquiry commissioner Douglas Cunningham is considering a motion filed by The Mississauga News this morning calling for Peter McCallion's affidavit, detailing intimate financial information showing why he needs taxpayers to foot his legal bill, to be made public.
Ryder Gilliland, lawyer for The News, said the public interest in the affidavit and cross-examination of McCallion on that affidavit outweigh the need for confidentiality in this case.
The affidavit has been filed and cross-examination was conducted earlier this month, but the transcripts remain confidential.
"The principle of openness is alive and well in these proceedings," Gilliland told the Burnhamthorpe Rd. W. courtroom. "I am not aware of any evidence relating to specific harm if these materials were released."
McCallion's lawyer, Brian Gover, and commission counsel William McDowell opposed The News' motion.
Gover said his client gave intimate details regarding personal, financial information in the affidavit on the promise it would be confidential.
"(Confidentiality) ensures fairness to Mr. McCallion," he said. "Openness isn't compromised."
McCallion didn't ask for this inquiry, but has been "swept up in the process of a public inquiry," Gover argued.
McDowell said, "how much cash (Peter McCallion) has in a bank account, or how much he pays for gas or mortgage payments," doesn't need to be disclosed publicly.
Matters of public interest will be made public during the inquiry, McDowell said. They "just won't be immediately disclosed now," he said.
Gilliland argued the matter relates to a recommendation regarding taxpayers' dollars.
"It's not too much to ask that if you want a recommendation that public funds be used to your advantage, that it be done openly," he said.
City Council has already approved funding to McCallion of up to $100,000, on the condition that he provide evidence of his inability to pay, and only covering the time that he testifies and matters relating directly to him. Claiming he needs more money to cover legal expenses, however, McCallion has asked Cunningham to request the City of Mississauga to reconsider the limit.
Cunningham ordered McCallion to swear an affidavit as to his ability to pay for legal counsel, and that commission counsel cross-examine him on that affidavit.
Cunningham has yet to decide on his recommendation to the City.
The $2.5-million inquiry will, among other undertakings, probe conflict of interest allegations against Mayor Hazel McCallion and the role of her son, Peter McCallion, in a $14.4-million failed bid by World Class Developments Ltd. (WCD) to purchase a 3.5-hectare parcel of land owned by the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS).
WCD hoped to build a hotel and convention centre on the land in the City Centre. The deal eventually fell through.
(The deal involved private meetings between Mayor McCallion, the developer and OMERS, while zoning of the land was still before Council. OMERS subsequently sold the land to the City, which, in turn, leased it to Sheridan College).
The inquiry is scheduled to get underway May 25.
Comments by others - 6 - to this web-page at time of posting;
Apr 30, 2010 1:49 PM
@ Randy. Putting you down as "Public Right to Know" Thank you.
Will share mine (say) Sunday. Have a good weekend.
Apr 30, 2010 1:48 PM
Yes, MissyNews did come up with another article and on exactly the issue that I expected
http://tinyurl.com/399ykd9 In short, the Mayor who boasts about not having to campaign (and has a legion of supporters right here deleting my comments) now raises concerns that her campaign against me (a "fringe" candidate) and this other guy will hurt her campaign.
Apr 30, 2010 1:48 PM
If he is requesting public funds, the public has a right to know
Apr 30, 2010 1:37 PM
I was there and videotaped the entire thing. (also will be interesting if there's a follow-up article...)
I videotaped my "call" inside the courtroom both before the proceedings and after so I could share them later. My views did not change although I was less sure by the end of hearing both sides. But first, I want to hear from readers here about the issues raised in this article. Public Right to Know? Protection of Privacy? Thanks.
Home Page - Main Table of Contents - Back up a page - Back to Top
[COMMENTS BY DON B. - ]