Canada: Premier Ford Vindicated

Last Updated: May 2 2019
Article by Stephen Thiele

 Today, politics has become a battle of perceptions over ethics and integrity rather than a battle over issues.

Ethics and integrity are, of course, important concepts. However, opposition parties, political activists and the media are sometimes more interested in trying to expose salacious scandal instead of concentrating on developing a comprehensive and fair economic or social vision that will have positive results on the daily lives of the electorate.

The effort expended in stoking the fires of alleged scandals and spinning narratives based on speculation comes at a tremendous cost for those who are required to defend themselves against these kinds of allegations and those who are innocently caught in the web of controversy.

Recently1, Ontario Premier Ford was accused of "political interference" and conflict of interest in the government's decision to hire 50-year police veteran Ron Taverner as Commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police.

As a result of the fact that Premier Ford and Mr. Taverner were friends, provincial politicians, Kevin Yarde and John Fraser, filed separate complaints with Ontario's Integrity Commissioner under the Members' Integrity Act, 1994 (the "Act") alleging, among other things, that Premier Ford had improperly furthered Mr. Taverner's personal interest. The complaints were based on information published in various media reports.

In general, Canadian courts exercise extreme caution in connection with the admissibility of media reports because although informative, they are hearsay and lack evidentiary value. In the complaints made against Premier Ford, the Integrity Commissioner found the media reports to be speculative and unsupported by the evidence.

Nevertheless, the Integrity Commissioner was compelled to conduct a fulsome investigation into Premier Ford and the hiring of Mr. Taverner based on the allegations made by Mr. Yarde and Mr. Fraser.

The Integrity Commissioner's investigation into Mr. Yarde's and Mr. Fraser's complaint lasted three months and has cost those involved much time and money.

Documentary evidence had to be gathered by witnesses and lawyers were engaged to represent a number of those witnesses.

Witnesses were also required to endure the stress of the daily media coverage (regularly containing misinformation) into the allegations, and the stresses involved in preparing for and being examined.

In the case of Mr. Taverner, the entire affair, which overlooked his stellar career as a police officer and whether he was qualified for the job, resulted in his eventual withdrawal as OPP Commissioner a few days before the release of the Integrity Commissioner's report into the allegations.

The Integrity Commissioner, however, commented that Mr. Taverner was "...a credible witness, thoughtful, soft-spoken with a gentle sense of humour, who cares deeply about his work in policing and his community. I had the opportunity of reviewing a sample of the testimonials sent to him on the announcement of his appointment from current and retired OPP officers, fellow police officers and members of the community. They are glowing in their assessment of him as a man and as one who has dedicated himself to his profession and his community."

Notwithstanding all of the public allegations made against Premier Ford and all of the costs incurred, the Integrity Commissioner's report completely vindicated the Premier.

The Facts

On September 5, 2018, then OPP Commissioner Vince Hawkes announced his retirement. The news came as a surprise to the government and it was required to react.

Two days later, the Secretary of the Cabinet, a person who serves as the Premier's Deputy Minister and is appointed by the Premier2, had a discussion with the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, Sidney Linden, about a recruitment process and who could be involved in it. Commissioner Linden, among other things, recommended that as much third-party independent validation as possible should be built into the process.

A draft recruitment plan was subsequently outlined and ultimately finalized with comment from Premier Ford during the development of the plan that it have a shorter time frame than was originally proposed. The Secretary of the Cabinet agreed with the Premier's view.

The government then recruited the services of a third-party executive search firm through a request for proposal process and had the search firm prepare a draft advertisement for the OPP Commissioner position. The draft advertisement, like the job posting used in 2010, did not contain any rank requirements for the position.

However, a government employee, acting under no direction, prepared a job description and advertisement that included a rank requirement, like the job description and advertisement used in 2014. The government employee's draft description and advertisement was finalized, even though it was not carefully reviewed, and was ultimately posted to the public.

The error in the inclusion of a rank requirement was noticed shortly thereafter, and within 48 hours the job description and advertisement was amended to remove the rank requirement. The removal of the rank requirement made Mr. Taverner eligible to apply for the OPP Commissioner job.

Mr. Taverner was one of eight candidates to be interviewed by a first round panel of interviewers, and was selected as one of three candidates for a second round interview with another panel.

Prior to the second round interview, Mr. Taverner and the other approved second round candidates were given a psychometric assessment. As determined by the Integrity Commissioner, no candidate's results were significantly better or worse than the results of the other candidates.

The second round interview panel consisted of the Secretary of the Cabinet, the Deputy Minister, Community Safety, Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, and a partner of the executive search firm.

Initially, Premier Ford's Chief of Staff, Dean French, was proposed to be on the second round interview panel. However, before second round interviews took place, Mr. French advised that he would not be participating in the interviews. Mr. French described his reasons for not wanting to participate as an interviewer to the Secretary of the Cabinet as follows:

To be consistent with the approach I have used throughout this entire process to date, I do not wish to be part of any candidate interviews as the selection committee undertakes its work.

I have always believed in the integrity of having a separate committee of talented individuals meet with candidates, and to provide Cabinet with their professional opinion on who best should be the new commissioner of the OPP.

The second round interviews took place as scheduled, with the panel unanimously recommending Mr. Taverner as the new OPP Commissioner.

Mr. Taverner's appointment was approved by the Public Service Commission and subsequently the Solicitor General or Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services brought an Order-in-Council to Cabinet to approve the appointment. The Solicitor General only brought Mr. Taverner's name forward for the appointment.

At the Cabinet meeting, Premier Ford announced that he was friends with Mr. Taverner, and then, as found by the Integrity Commissioner, withdrew from participation on the matter. "...[N]o discussions...[took place] about Premier Ford recusing himself from the meeting; no concerns were raised by any Cabinet members about Mr. Taverner's appointment; and no vote [was] taken."

On November 29, 2018, Mr. Taverner was announced as the new OPP Commissioner.

Within a week, Mr. Yarde filed his initial complaint. Premier Ford responded to the complaint, and Mr. Fraser filed a second, but related, complaint.

The Complaints

The complaints essentially accused Premier Ford of having been in a conflict of interest, that Mr. Taverner's appointment had been improperly influenced by the Premier and that the Premier had failed to recuse himself from the decision to appoint Mr. Taverner.

Combined, Mr. Yarde and Mr. Fraser alleged that Premier Ford had breached sections 2, 4, 8 and 16 of the Act.

The Relevant Statutory Provisions

Section 2 of the Act provides that "A member of the Assembly shall not make a decision or participate in making a decision in the execution of his or her office if the member knows or reasonably should know that in the making of the decision there is an opportunity to further the member's private interest or improperly to further another person's private interest."

Section 4 of the Act provides that "A member of the Assembly shall not use his or her office to seek to influence a decision made or to be made by another person so as to further the member's private interest or improperly to further another person's private interest."

Section 8 of the Act provides that "A member of the Assembly who has reasonable grounds to believe that he or she has a conflict of interest in a matter that is before the Assembly or the Executive Council, or a committee of either of them, shall, if present at a meeting considering the matter, (a) disclose the general nature of the conflict of interest; and (b) withdraw from the meeting without voting or participating in consideration of the matter."

Section 16 provides that "A member of the Executive Committee who has reasonable grounds to believe that he or she has a conflict of interest in a matter requiring the member's decision shall ask the Premier or Deputy Premier to appoint another member of the Executive Council to perform the member's duties in the matter for the purpose of making the decision, and the member who is appointed may act in the matter for the period of time necessary for the purpose."

The Premier's Argument

The Premier argued that he did not contravene the Act in any manner whatsoever. He contended that he was never in a conflict of interest in connection with the appointment because he did not receive a personal gain from it and that he did not improperly further Mr. Taverner's personal interest.

In addition, the Premier contended that he did not in any manner whatsoever influence the hiring decision to further his own personal private interest or to improperly further Mr. Taverner's private interests.

Accordingly, section 8 of the Act did not apply to the appointment, and even if it did, Premier Ford had effectively withdrawn as required.

Section 16 was also inapplicable.

Premier Ford noted that the decision to appoint a Commissioner under the Police Services Act was a Cabinet decision.

Integrity Commissioner's Decision

The Integrity Commissioner agreed with Premier Ford.

After determining that the term "private interest" as used in the Act applied only to pecuniary interests and purely personal interests, the Integrity Commissioner found that there was no evidence that the appointment of Mr. Taverner furthered Premier Ford's pecuniary or personal interest.

As well, the Integrity Commissioner concluded that there was no evidence that Premier Ford improperly furthered the pecuniary or personal interests of Mr. Taverner.

The Integrity Commissioner examined five factors, which included the relationship between Premier Ford and Mr. Taverner, to assess whether Premier Ford's conduct improperly furthered Mr. Taverner's pecuniary or personal private interest.

With respect to the relationship between Premier Ford and Mr. Taverner, the Integrity Commissioner explained that a close friendship – in and of itself – was insufficient to establish impropriety.

The Integrity Commissioner also found that while Premier Ford was involved in discussions related to the timeline for choosing a new OPP Commissioner, the Premier was at arm's length with the hiring process that had been developed by the Secretary of the Cabinet, members of the public service and the executive search firm.

Premier Ford had no communications whatsoeverwith the panellists who conducted the interviews, with the exception of the Secretary of the Cabinet. However, the communications with the Secretary of the Cabinet were unrelated to the recruitment process.

Similarly, there was no evidence that Premier Ford had any involvement in the design of the recruitment process, its application or the resulting recommendation from the second round interview panel even though the Secretary of the Cabinet and the Premier's Chief of Staff had some contact with one another during the entire process.

As well, the Integrity Commissioner did not find that the process was unfair or not open or that there was no objective basis for selecting Mr. Taverner as the new OPP Commissioner. Indeed, the Integrity Commissioner expressly found that when viewed objectively, there were many positive indicators to suggest that Mr. Taverner was qualified to be the Commissioner of the OPP.

Given that Premier Ford neither breached section 2 nor section 4 of the Act, section 8 of the Act did not apply.

Even if it did apply, the Integrity Commissioner found that at the Cabinet meeting where Mr. Taverner's appointment was finalized Premier Ford openly and notoriously fully disclosed his friendship with Mr. Taverner and then effectively withdrew from the meeting.

With respect to s. 16, the appointment of the OPP Commissioner did not require Premier Ford's decision. His signature was not required on the Order-in-Council and he did not, in fact, sign it.

Based on procedures in place since 1917, the Order-in-Council could have been accomplished by a "walk around", in which only four ministers other than the Premier could have approved the appointment.

The Appointment Process In General

The Integrity Commissioner noted that the appointment process in the statute was flawed.

What has been widely misreported in the media, however, is that the "flaw" is the fact that the statue has no process whatsoever.

It is to be noted that this issue long precedes the Ford Government as this section of the Police Services Act has been the law of Ontario for almost 30 years.

The Integrity Commissioner pointed out that, contrary to media reports made at the time of Mr. Taverner's appointment, which purported to criticize the Premier because the process used to appoint Mr. Taverner went against long-standing practice, there was, in fact, no long-standing practice at all.

The practice of appointing a Commissioner of the OPP had been inconsistent from one Premier to the next and from one appointment to the next. The Integrity Commissioner specifically noted the 2006 appointment of Julian Fantino as Commissioner of the OPP occurred after Mr. Fantino received a phone call from Premier Dalton McGuinty's Chief of Staff and after being interviewed by the Premier. That was the extent of the process for his appointment.

The 2010 job description and advertisement had no rank requirements, while the 2014 job description and advertisement included rank requirements.

All of these various 'processes' were in full compliance with the Police Services Act because this statute prescribes no process whatsoever.

The Integrity Commissioner suggested that this 'flaw' in the Police Services Act should be remedied so that future appointments of future OPP Commissioners do not fall prey to such criticism.

Representation of the Premier

Premier Ford was represented throughout the Inquiry by Gavin Tighe, partner at Gardiner Roberts LLP and a certified specialist in civil litigation.

Mr. Tighe was assisted throughout by Stephen Thiele, partner and Director of Legal Research at Gardiner Roberts LLP and Rojin Jazayeri, student-at-law.


1 Report Re: The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, Office of the Integrity Commissioner, March 20, 2019

2 The Secretary of the Cabinet for Premier Ford was the same individual who was the Secretary of the Cabinet for former Premier Kathleen Wynne.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions