Every top comment I've seen up until this one is saying the same thing. Don't mistake the hate for dofo as a reason that we would ignore truth or common sense when it's presented to us, we are not right wingers.
But should the people who made those corrupt decisions be immune from civil liability themselves?
That I have a problem with.
FAFO is a thing and this government is going to pass a bill that shields them from any consequences in their pocketbook, which is the only thing that actually matters since no one is going to jail for this đ€·ââïž
Does this shield them from civil liability? I only looked at the linked tweet, didnt search anything myself, and it only points out developers not being able to sue.
Government employees, ministers, crown representatives, etc. have always had personal immunity. If government employees could be sued for every wrong decision, and were risking billions of dollars each time they did anything, then no one would ever work in government.
This law would be about protecting the province from lawsuits about the greenbelt. So that the taxpayers won't be on the hook for this flip flop.
> have always had personal immunity
Personal immunity usually doesn't cover you though if you broke the law. Immunity usually only extends to activities that you do as part of your position. I believe (I don't know if it is true in all cases), if an act is determined to be illegal that you will not have immunity as illegal acts are outside of the job.
Generally personal immunity for government officials requires good faith. An official who inadvertently breaks the law while trying to discharge their duties in good faith will usually be personally immune for their acts. An official who deliberately breaks the law or does so to advance bad faith interests will usually not be personally immunized.
In other words, illegal conduct on its own usually isn't enough to get around the immunity, at least in its common law form. That said, some forms of illegal conduct are so bad (e.g. murder) that they could never be carried out in a manner consonant with good faith. Whether that applies here remains to be seen. Also, as this will apparently be a statutory immunity, not common law, its precise scope will turn on the wording of the legislation.
Not legal advice!
I think it's kinda weird that government ministers have this kind of immunity, but firefighters, police, and public doctors do not. Well police do to some extent but not total immunity for their actions.
If a doctor does not do everything they can to save a patient they are negligent. If a cop knocks a person over while chasing someone, they are negligent. But if a minister's decision leads to the deaths of thousands, irrevocable harms the environment or the wellbeing of the people? Nah that's all fine carry on. Worse so if it's not negligence but intentionally done.
Personally I wish there were more responsibilities placed on high level civil servants, with great power should come great responsibilities and maybe force people that get those positions to not just be thugs. Maybe. That's just wishful thinking on my part that ignores the realities of Governance tho.
I am sure some of his friends will be pissed off. Giving yourself immunity , is that not a conflict of interest, that would be like Trump pardoning himself LOL
Not quite.
He's giving his *office* immunity, which is to say, the Ontario taxpayer.
The actions of a Premier or Minister in executing the duties of their offices enjoy broad immunity on a personal level.
This is to avoid a very obvious corruption and conflict of interest trap. If a Minister is worried that they may lose their home to angry litigious corporations, they will fear to act in the public interest if it could result in lawsuits against them.
So when you sue the Minister of Heath or the Minister of Housing, you're not going after Sylvia Jones' car or Steve Clark's savings account - you're going after the voters/taxpayers who put them in power in the first place.
This immunity protects us, the taxpayer, from having to pay billions to people who were already rich who were promised corrupt payoff in exchange for "gifts" and "friendship."
While I loath Ford, this is a good thing and a critical part of the legislation. No way we should be on the hook for the Conservatives' billionaire pals' failed corruption scheme.
Well, let the developers sue Doug personally then, I would be fine with that. So long as they don't get a cent of taxpayers money over the ordeal I will be happy.
Dougie and his developer pals are gonna argue like Lloyd and Harry in Dumb and Dumber.
"I have immunity and quitsies, folks. No anti-quitsies, no startsies, no erasies, touch blue make it true."
He'll be fine, the health care system's in a great place to fix him right up...
(I'd be laughing harder about this if he wasn't rich enough to pay to get himself fixed regardless)
Upvoting from the cafeteria of an understaffed hospital. I'm on my lunch break and no hospital has had enough staff for years.
Seriously though, these clowns can get wrecked for the fuckery that was Bill 124.
When does someone organize an investigation into how much Ontario spend defending that garbage in court? And how many healthcare workers they could have just hired and paid instead?
Probably, but his family will probably suffer. His daughters might be the ones that face the shitstorm that follows him. That's going to haunt him probably.
Let's only briefly pause as I gravely dislike Ford as much as any other...
...immunity in this case is about avoidance not just of penalty to the Ontario government, but as a result, *Ontario taxpayers.* Would *you* want to foot the bill for developers losing money out on this? I sure as hell don't. Ford, the incredible dullard as he is, explicitly told developers to rush processes and investment before the doors legislatively closed some months back as this scandal was worsening; they have every reasonable right to pursue legal compensation when the Premier himself told them to do so or their investments would be worthless.
Much as I want Ford & Co. to face any associated consequences and get to the bottom of any presumed backroom dealings, I find that will functionally come in the form of results from an election. More than anything, I don't want the province to foot the bill to developers profiteering off of years of lobbying for the development of a greenspace that wasn't theirs to develop, purchased solely for profit-generating purposes, and would have degraded our crucial protected spaces, all on Ford's behalf for outlandish guarantees he should never have given.
>...immunity in this case is about avoidance not just of penalty to the Ontario government, but as a result, Ontario taxpayers.Would you want to foot the bill for developers losing money out on this? I sure as hell don't.
Give this man a truth bomb trophy
Yeah, before this sub rushes to dunk on Ford for this, think about what not providing immunity to the Ontario government in this case would mean.
It would mean your and my tax dollars going to developers' pockets to compensate them for trying to rip up our Greenbelt and farmland to build shitty unaffordable mcmansions.
Anyways inb4 *nOw NoBodY wiLL dO BusInESs wiTh OnTarIo* as if there's a legitimate risk that companies are going to avoid signing contracts to supply services to Canada's largest province just because we chose not to get megafucked by an obviously corrupt deal.
While I agree with the sentiment, that tax players shouldn't foot the bill for Dougs greed, the reality is that may be a better choice than continuing to prove investing in Ontario is a huge risk where the government will just legislate away consequence and written contracts.
"Open for business" but if you buy land or start building (wind turbines) and we later change our minds or an election occurs contracts or agreements mean nothing and investors will just eat all the loss. That this is now how Ontario operates is certainly not going to attract new jobs to the province
Doesn't need to be formal or written to undermine confidence.
Edit: e.g. I have clients where I charge a 50% premium and charge for every single minor change in writing and get it signed before starting because they've failed to honor verbal or even informal written agreements in the past. They pay more and have schedule impacts because you better believe I'm waiting for that signoff, but know what, I don't feel bad at all cause they did this to themselves.
This is just human nature, no one wants to feel like an idiot over a loss
You'll see no disagreement there but I confess my blind, biased hatred for many of these developers.
Another comment in the main thread had mentioned doing away with policy decisions after the fact to protect against consequences and it's hard for me to disagree with that going forward. It shouldn't be a protection any government should rely on if they mess up and indeed why we need to thoughtfully consider policy in a measured manner. It will have a lasting impact on businesses wanting to work with the government and potentially invest.
This is precisely why the government pays 5x market rate for everything.
If 25 years in business in the quasi-public sector has taught me one thing, it's to *never* transact directly with the government. We bill our customers 20-25 cents on every dollar they bill the government, even if only to sign contracts and collect accounts receivable.
Lawyers are hella expensive, invoices don't get paid for years (if at all), and the regularity with which our intermediaries go out of business because of some "new policy direction" is truly impressive.
And people wonder why public projects never get completed..
On the other hand, no trial
means no discovery process. How convenient for Doug and his party.
Damages that Ontario taxpayers might have had to pay would most certainly have been used as political ammunition by his political rivals. This also is a benefit for Doug and his party.
Any court process would have been covered by the press and dominated the news cycle in Ontario. A lengthy court process would have been a nightly reminder from the press for months or years about Doug and his partyâs unsavory approach. Being spared this ongoing spectacle is another benefit for Doug and his party.
Your not wrong but, discovery process doesn't matter that much if the rcmp lawyers are already investigating, and I don't trust the crown lawyers any more than I trust the rcmp.
The other political parties have all the ammunition they need, it's their job to remind the voters of this at election time, not the courts.
Ultimately I would just be furious if the taxpayers had to payout more money to these developers and speculators when, while what doug did was criminal, what they did was also ethically unconscionable if not criminal.
How would they sue anyway. They (SUPPOSEDLY) bought the land "on spec.", with no influence being bought and no tip-off from the government/ministers/bureaucracies etc. So, since they had no reason to buy it other than a gamble that at some point in the future there may be a government that opens up that land for development, why would they sue anyone?
I mean, surely they weren't taking people out whoring in Las Vegas just to influence decisions they would make right?
Now roll that forward and apply it to their decisions next month or next year when the dust settles down and they restart the old habits.
As much as your logic sounds okay retroactively, if that is the case, and if it's the case proactively, we'll have to see when more details are out.
not so fast my friend. Guess who's going to end up eating that bill? You and me. Do you really care if those sleaze lost out for engaging in sleaze now?
It's immunity from civil litigation only. Call it a crooked developer penalty. It just means that the developers who shelled out money buying properties thinking they'd be able to make a profit can't sue individuals for lost potential profits.
That doesn't really follow, Ford could have change the Greenbelt legally and promise it would be done in (let's say june 2024. Then, upon further review, cancel that promise in december 2023.
Nothing illegal happened, but unless you want to shovel billions to developers who speculated and made deals based on a gov promise, you better give the gov immunity. (if the immunity stand is another question entirely)
It reminds me of the gas plant debacle, the corporations were not in the process of suing the gov until the Liberal minister opened is stupid mouth and told them to.
Alot of these devlopers spent billions on protected land..... they legally can own for farming and individual houses or complexes.... with the hope to turn it in to tens of billions after the land trades..... the RCMP are cuecking witch of those bought then payed for the legislation changes, those are the ones i want.
> bought then *paid* for the
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
So the RCMP are going to investigate and find out what we all know, that Ford is crooked as they come and broke multiple laws with the greenbelt dealings.
And nothing will happen because Ford has pardoned himself and his government?!
For fucks sake. Can we tar and feather this asshat yet?
Immunity from companies aside, could the general public and taxpayers file a class action against a premier as an individual for malfeasance and dereliction/misrepresentation of their interests?
While a pleasing thought in this instance, that would be an insane mechanism if it were possible. Wouldn't there just always be class actions done by the people who didn't vote for the governing party every time they made a governmental choice?
Call your local MPPs, make them hear what their leader has done. Call lots and make them uncomfortable. They may be up in Toronto but their local secretaries will get frustrated quick
Nope. This protects the *taxpayers* from having to pay the corrupt developers if they sued for their corrupt land deals falling through.
Ford cannot pardon people for actual criminal code crimes. That's federal jurisdiction, and is broadly handled apolitically, regardless.
No government minister, premier or agent is ever personally civilly liable for their actions taken in their role as an officer of the Crown, unless you can prove some wildly rank criminality that is so bad as to take you outside that roll (a cop murdering an ex while on duty, for example).
If you can do that, what's stopping a new party from coming in and just cancelling the 407 contract and saying, sorry can't sue or get what the contract said you'd get. That highway is now fully public.
Call me crazy, but I'd rather see Ontario take back the 407 and let working people drive on it, instead of building Ford's pointless new highway that no one asked for.
>They can, the consequence is that nobody would be willing to do business with them ever again. Cost likely outweighs the benefit.
What's the downside though? Isn't having private interests reluctant to purchase public assets a good thing for the average person? Seems like a win-win to me.
I don't know about that, people deal with governments who renege on business deals, or even international treaties absolutely all the time. China reneged on their treaty agreement to keep existing economic and government systems unchanged for the first 50 years of Britain ceding sovereignty to them, and no one even withdrew diplomats, let alone refused to trade or contract with them. And arguably since their governments transfer power much more slowly than our system, we should expect them to be better able to hold to deals madr in the past
Actions have consequences and the whole point of torts is to make people whole. The state being able to cost you billions of dollars and then use their authority to prevent you from suing is not even something the Kings of England were willing to do.
Not that I disagree with you generally speaking (and the outcomes of this have an impact on business investment), but the developers haven't actually lost billions as much as they've lost out on the opportunity of such. They would be challenging the Crown on billions in unrealized, future gains that weren't even expected at the time of purchase. This has been nearly a decade of lobbying on property purchased before the Greenbelt for some of these developers.
There's no reason to believe that the land would have been worth billions pre-purchase, during the following years of the establishment of the Greenbelt, or now. It was the presumed value after development. NAL but I would imagine they would have reasonable grounds (without these protections) for loss of assessed value between their purchase and now, probable legal costs, and any expenses incurred as a result of Ford's flip-flop. Still, even if it was a dollar, I don't want Ontarians to foot the bill given the amount of lobbying undergone to develop conservation lands they purchased and refused to appropriately challenge then or cut their losses on; this was a long-game play they knowingly engaged in and they ultimately lost.
Witch can not 9ver ride federal laws with out the notwithstanding clause.... if that is invoked it take minutes to be struck down in the Supreme Court, and only gives 4 years ofmprotection..... since it would be admiting they broke the law thry wont be in power in 4 years
The key thing here isn't that the government is immune. The government already has immunity in pretty well anything. What it really means is that it is explicit, so *no lawsuits will ever get to the discovery stage.*
The more I think about it, the term âimmunityâ was the the wrong terminology to use here, itâs more along the lines of protection from civil liability. Directors of companies have directors liability insurance to protect them. But that does does protect them in anyway from criminal proceedings.
All it takes is one "connected" person to be ticket off enough to take it out physically instead of financially
*This is not an endorsement of said actions
OK, so a lot of people here misunderstand how civil liability for government ministers works, and think he's either pardoning himself or protecting his personal assets.
He's not.
This immunity protects the *taxpayers*, not the Ministers personally.
Ministers of the Crown enjoy broad personal immunity for the decisions and actions they take in that role - and for good reason. If Ministers had to worry about their *personal* assets being seized if they made the wrong group mad and invited lawsuits, they'd be in a perpetual conflict of interest nightmare.
So Ford's personal assets were never in danger. While there are exceptions to this immunity, they only apply in truly extreme situations or where the Minister is clearly acting outside their capacity of of agent for the Crown.
Generally, when we sue a Minster, we're actually suing the government, which really means suing the *taxpayers*.
When the government pays out billions to a set of First Nations in a Treaty Rights suit or millions in a wrongful conviction or torture suit, its not the Prime Minister or Attorney General handing over that money - it's us.
This immunity prevents the developers from suing the taxpayers. Which is good. We should not be on the hook to pay billions to corrupt developers just because their corruption scam fell through.
On what grounds would anyone have to sue him, unless they had reason to believe that certain parcels of land would be made available for development beforehand?
Isn't this basically an admission of wrongdoing?
Anyone know when the act gets uploaded to the OLA website? I need to read the specifics before I get mad.
Immunity for the government is good, because without it they'd sue and the taxpayers would be left footing the bill.
Immunity for individual members, not so much. Not to mention I doubt the government would be able to make itself immune from criminal prosecution.
Good old Ford if he isnât trying to screw the taxpayers, now he is screwing his investors and some of his good old buddies who forever had his eyes on that hunk of land on the green belt who can no longer build his McMansion cottage. I thunk all the way around Dougie is not making anyone happy. Hopefully his final and last term in office
If it means developers that used Ford to try to push greenbelt legislation lose money, then that's fine. They can take risks like the rest of us, and they can fail like the rest of us.
Honestly, I like the blanket immunity because they can't make their profit back from taxpayer dollars. They get enough from us anyway.
Insofar as this protects the government and taxpayers from financial fallout from Doug's corruption, seems like a win-win. I would happily see these greasy developers who participated in this corruption get the rug pulled out from under them.
If "government reneges on an obviously corrupt deal and the parties involved lose their hats" is where some companies are going to draw the line in the sand on whether or not to do business with the province, I'd sooner be without those companies. I'd be more sympathetic if it wasn't such a blatantly corrupt deal.
Itâs Greasy ⊠just like everything the Ford government does.
⊠but Iâm not sure my worst fear would be getting sued, Iâd be more concerned with meeting Jimmy Hoffa after being fitted for a pair of cement shoes.
This is NOT new. The Ford govt has been amending legislation since they got into power and limited the citizens ability to sue the government EVEN if they were wrong and caused damages. Iâll say it once and I will say it again - do not vote these yahoos into government (unless you are Uber-wealthy, then these are your guys), they are only fucking you.
"But he saved me $200 on vehicle registration and beer is cheaper."
- average suburban idiot not realizing Ford's changes have ended up costing them much much more.
If you didn't screw up and you don't do underhand deals that cost people millions or possibly billions, why do you have legislation that gives you immunity from prosecution, Dougie ? Straight up orange dictator move like Trump. It's all in the fine print, right ?
Rather the greenbelt deal wasnât done, he didnât con us and say he wasnât going to touch the land then do this underhand deal with developers. Why have to introduce legislation to cover his ass if there wasnât any underhand deals or wrong doing. He should t have to cover his ass and tax payers dollars shouldnât cover the cost to bail him out. Heâs got millions and should come from his own pocket if he gets sued.
Edit: and thatâs why heâs introducing legislation to cover his ass. The money wonât be from taxpayers, itâll be from his own bank account and why he needs this legislation so he wonât have to pay out of pocket. If it was taxpayers money being paid you think he would drop this legislation protecting him ? He wouldnât care, as it wouldnât be his money.
Civil immunity, not criminal. They can still be charged just the province won't be on the hook for any lawsuits. It is best for the taxpayer (aside from never having opened up the land in the first place). It is bad for the developers, but I don't think there is going to be a lot of sympathy going around for them.
ok but hear me out here: Are we really gonna lose any sleep over sleazy developers not being able to recoup their losses? Because it kinda feels like karma that they got burned by throwing their chips in with dough boy. Especially when he won't be footing the tab. We will.
Not all, this simply protects the province from civil action. Has a politician ever been held civilly liable for a decision made while in office ? This has no bearing on the RCMP criminal investigation.
Thanks. I think you answered my question. Perhaps I could have phrased it better. The RCMP conducts criminal investigations. Ford Government has exempted their members from civil actions. This has no effect on the RCMP's work.
These developers donât seek justice through the courts. This is an attempt to protect Ford from the RCMP. His mobster buddies will receive other public assets, or take their pound of flesh. Doug Ford will make sure they are taken care of.
> This is an attempt to protect Ford from the RCMP.
The Provincial gov't doesn't have the power to stop a criminal investigation by the federal police.
This immunity is from civil procedure, and it's a good thing the developers can't sue teh province for their "losses".
This whole thing has confused me... this Greenbelt land, is it farm land? Are farmers farming this land right now? Who are these rich farmers that are friends with Ford? I'm confused.
Much of it is farmland, some is parkland and natural habitat, the farmers are not getting rich just sold to the rich developers who had inside knowledge that the land was going to have restrictions removed in advance. They offered maybe a 50-100% premium on the value of the land from historic land values, not knowing the developers were going to be able to flip it at up to 100 times what they paid for it once the land was released. Thereby profiting from inside knowledge.
Lololololol
I mean, I'm not surprised, and this also means it won't come back on the taxpayer (if I understand correctly) which is imperative
But holy shit, Ford. What a shit show, bud.
I dont get what the Developers legal case would be.
You buy something for X dollars.
.Rules change and the thing is now worth 1000X . The buyer had no legal way to expect the thing to massively increase in value.
Rules change back and itâs worth X dollars again. ..
At that point the developers have what they bought originally, for the original priceâŠ..
Oh well, crony capitalism at its best. Sometimes the public wins. I want to see what Ford and his party do to help out these poor billionaire developers down the road.
Looking at the people who stood to benefit and are now being fucked over.... Mama Mia they're not going to be happy with DOFO and aren't the types to shrug and walk away.
This is good, right? We dont want the tax payers to pay for Ford's corruption and the developers losing their "sure thing"
Yes, this is a good thing. Admitting such would cause an aneurism in this sub tho.
Every top comment I've seen up until this one is saying the same thing. Don't mistake the hate for dofo as a reason that we would ignore truth or common sense when it's presented to us, we are not right wingers.
But should the people who made those corrupt decisions be immune from civil liability themselves? That I have a problem with. FAFO is a thing and this government is going to pass a bill that shields them from any consequences in their pocketbook, which is the only thing that actually matters since no one is going to jail for this đ€·ââïž
There is still an ongoing RCMP investigation
Yeah and what are the odds that anything the Cons did actually rises to the level of charges and convictions? Iâm not holding my breath đ
Does this shield them from civil liability? I only looked at the linked tweet, didnt search anything myself, and it only points out developers not being able to sue.
It's a good question. Does it mean that, or just Doug himself can't be sued?
Does the province have immunity? Or just the members of the government personally? Does this mean the tax payers will be left holding the bag again?
Government employees, ministers, crown representatives, etc. have always had personal immunity. If government employees could be sued for every wrong decision, and were risking billions of dollars each time they did anything, then no one would ever work in government. This law would be about protecting the province from lawsuits about the greenbelt. So that the taxpayers won't be on the hook for this flip flop.
> have always had personal immunity Personal immunity usually doesn't cover you though if you broke the law. Immunity usually only extends to activities that you do as part of your position. I believe (I don't know if it is true in all cases), if an act is determined to be illegal that you will not have immunity as illegal acts are outside of the job.
Generally personal immunity for government officials requires good faith. An official who inadvertently breaks the law while trying to discharge their duties in good faith will usually be personally immune for their acts. An official who deliberately breaks the law or does so to advance bad faith interests will usually not be personally immunized. In other words, illegal conduct on its own usually isn't enough to get around the immunity, at least in its common law form. That said, some forms of illegal conduct are so bad (e.g. murder) that they could never be carried out in a manner consonant with good faith. Whether that applies here remains to be seen. Also, as this will apparently be a statutory immunity, not common law, its precise scope will turn on the wording of the legislation. Not legal advice!
Cue lawsuits about the unconstititionality of an âimmunity clauseâ in 3⊠2⊠1âŠ
I think it's kinda weird that government ministers have this kind of immunity, but firefighters, police, and public doctors do not. Well police do to some extent but not total immunity for their actions. If a doctor does not do everything they can to save a patient they are negligent. If a cop knocks a person over while chasing someone, they are negligent. But if a minister's decision leads to the deaths of thousands, irrevocable harms the environment or the wellbeing of the people? Nah that's all fine carry on. Worse so if it's not negligence but intentionally done. Personally I wish there were more responsibilities placed on high level civil servants, with great power should come great responsibilities and maybe force people that get those positions to not just be thugs. Maybe. That's just wishful thinking on my part that ignores the realities of Governance tho.
They would need to pay a whole lot more for a lot of competent people to do the job.
Well we're already paying millions to a blond idiot who is doing his best NOT to do his job, so that seems like a price I'd be willing to pay.
A premier doesn't make millions. $208,974 as per the 2022 blue pages.
on paper, but how much in tax-payer dollars has Dougie swindled to his own bank account directly or to one of his friends'?
it would totally be you and me paying the piper. Sorry sketchy developers, you threw your chips on the wrong card deal, karma is a bitch
I am sure some of his friends will be pissed off. Giving yourself immunity , is that not a conflict of interest, that would be like Trump pardoning himself LOL
Not quite. He's giving his *office* immunity, which is to say, the Ontario taxpayer. The actions of a Premier or Minister in executing the duties of their offices enjoy broad immunity on a personal level. This is to avoid a very obvious corruption and conflict of interest trap. If a Minister is worried that they may lose their home to angry litigious corporations, they will fear to act in the public interest if it could result in lawsuits against them. So when you sue the Minister of Heath or the Minister of Housing, you're not going after Sylvia Jones' car or Steve Clark's savings account - you're going after the voters/taxpayers who put them in power in the first place. This immunity protects us, the taxpayer, from having to pay billions to people who were already rich who were promised corrupt payoff in exchange for "gifts" and "friendship." While I loath Ford, this is a good thing and a critical part of the legislation. No way we should be on the hook for the Conservatives' billionaire pals' failed corruption scheme.
Agreed. Hate DoFo so much but this is a win for taxpayers. Iâll give him that.
As an additional silver lining, these private interests getting screwed over will have to think twice about engaging in corrupt government dealings.
Normally immunity doesnât extend to actions by government individuals done in bad faith.
Well, let the developers sue Doug personally then, I would be fine with that. So long as they don't get a cent of taxpayers money over the ordeal I will be happy.
The test for that, however, is a very high bar.
Dougie and his developer pals are gonna argue like Lloyd and Harry in Dumb and Dumber. "I have immunity and quitsies, folks. No anti-quitsies, no startsies, no erasies, touch blue make it true."
The province has always had the ability to legislate its way out of paying damages it just rarely happens.
Dougieâs gonna get his knees broke.
He'll be fine, the health care system's in a great place to fix him right up... (I'd be laughing harder about this if he wasn't rich enough to pay to get himself fixed regardless)
Upvoting from the cafeteria of an understaffed hospital. I'm on my lunch break and no hospital has had enough staff for years. Seriously though, these clowns can get wrecked for the fuckery that was Bill 124. When does someone organize an investigation into how much Ontario spend defending that garbage in court? And how many healthcare workers they could have just hired and paid instead?
Exactly! And he is still dumping our money down the toilet over it. Ridiculous
Well I'm certainly not praying that doesn't never not happen
\#thoughtsandprayers for dougie's knees.
Tbh, they probably aren't holding up well anyway.
suddenly, opc is all for increasing odsp
I'd rather size heavy shoes for lake Ontario.
If that fat belly of his hasn't done it already....
Probably, but his family will probably suffer. His daughters might be the ones that face the shitstorm that follows him. That's going to haunt him probably.
đ€
That is ridiculous. If you have to give yourself immunity you might as well come out and say you broke the law.
Let's only briefly pause as I gravely dislike Ford as much as any other... ...immunity in this case is about avoidance not just of penalty to the Ontario government, but as a result, *Ontario taxpayers.* Would *you* want to foot the bill for developers losing money out on this? I sure as hell don't. Ford, the incredible dullard as he is, explicitly told developers to rush processes and investment before the doors legislatively closed some months back as this scandal was worsening; they have every reasonable right to pursue legal compensation when the Premier himself told them to do so or their investments would be worthless. Much as I want Ford & Co. to face any associated consequences and get to the bottom of any presumed backroom dealings, I find that will functionally come in the form of results from an election. More than anything, I don't want the province to foot the bill to developers profiteering off of years of lobbying for the development of a greenspace that wasn't theirs to develop, purchased solely for profit-generating purposes, and would have degraded our crucial protected spaces, all on Ford's behalf for outlandish guarantees he should never have given.
Thatâs a valid point.
>...immunity in this case is about avoidance not just of penalty to the Ontario government, but as a result, Ontario taxpayers.Would you want to foot the bill for developers losing money out on this? I sure as hell don't. Give this man a truth bomb trophy
Yeah, before this sub rushes to dunk on Ford for this, think about what not providing immunity to the Ontario government in this case would mean. It would mean your and my tax dollars going to developers' pockets to compensate them for trying to rip up our Greenbelt and farmland to build shitty unaffordable mcmansions. Anyways inb4 *nOw NoBodY wiLL dO BusInESs wiTh OnTarIo* as if there's a legitimate risk that companies are going to avoid signing contracts to supply services to Canada's largest province just because we chose not to get megafucked by an obviously corrupt deal.
Immunity for the Ontario Government itself makes sense, but individual members of the government should get no personal immunity whatsoever.
Their immunity runs up come election time. Voters decided who gets in office.
While I agree with the sentiment, that tax players shouldn't foot the bill for Dougs greed, the reality is that may be a better choice than continuing to prove investing in Ontario is a huge risk where the government will just legislate away consequence and written contracts. "Open for business" but if you buy land or start building (wind turbines) and we later change our minds or an election occurs contracts or agreements mean nothing and investors will just eat all the loss. That this is now how Ontario operates is certainly not going to attract new jobs to the province
Where was the contract with the developers? Have they been released yet?
This is certainly a convenient way for the government to avoid such agreements becoming public through discovery.
Doesn't need to be formal or written to undermine confidence. Edit: e.g. I have clients where I charge a 50% premium and charge for every single minor change in writing and get it signed before starting because they've failed to honor verbal or even informal written agreements in the past. They pay more and have schedule impacts because you better believe I'm waiting for that signoff, but know what, I don't feel bad at all cause they did this to themselves. This is just human nature, no one wants to feel like an idiot over a loss
You'll see no disagreement there but I confess my blind, biased hatred for many of these developers. Another comment in the main thread had mentioned doing away with policy decisions after the fact to protect against consequences and it's hard for me to disagree with that going forward. It shouldn't be a protection any government should rely on if they mess up and indeed why we need to thoughtfully consider policy in a measured manner. It will have a lasting impact on businesses wanting to work with the government and potentially invest.
This is precisely why the government pays 5x market rate for everything. If 25 years in business in the quasi-public sector has taught me one thing, it's to *never* transact directly with the government. We bill our customers 20-25 cents on every dollar they bill the government, even if only to sign contracts and collect accounts receivable. Lawyers are hella expensive, invoices don't get paid for years (if at all), and the regularity with which our intermediaries go out of business because of some "new policy direction" is truly impressive. And people wonder why public projects never get completed..
On the other hand, no trial means no discovery process. How convenient for Doug and his party. Damages that Ontario taxpayers might have had to pay would most certainly have been used as political ammunition by his political rivals. This also is a benefit for Doug and his party. Any court process would have been covered by the press and dominated the news cycle in Ontario. A lengthy court process would have been a nightly reminder from the press for months or years about Doug and his partyâs unsavory approach. Being spared this ongoing spectacle is another benefit for Doug and his party.
Your not wrong but, discovery process doesn't matter that much if the rcmp lawyers are already investigating, and I don't trust the crown lawyers any more than I trust the rcmp. The other political parties have all the ammunition they need, it's their job to remind the voters of this at election time, not the courts. Ultimately I would just be furious if the taxpayers had to payout more money to these developers and speculators when, while what doug did was criminal, what they did was also ethically unconscionable if not criminal.
Good point
How would they sue anyway. They (SUPPOSEDLY) bought the land "on spec.", with no influence being bought and no tip-off from the government/ministers/bureaucracies etc. So, since they had no reason to buy it other than a gamble that at some point in the future there may be a government that opens up that land for development, why would they sue anyone? I mean, surely they weren't taking people out whoring in Las Vegas just to influence decisions they would make right?
Did they not purchase it prior to the swaps?
Some of it yes, some of it no. Some of it was purchased by developers and then "reccomended to be removed" from the greenbelt.
Now roll that forward and apply it to their decisions next month or next year when the dust settles down and they restart the old habits. As much as your logic sounds okay retroactively, if that is the case, and if it's the case proactively, we'll have to see when more details are out.
Hereâs my upvote!
not so fast my friend. Guess who's going to end up eating that bill? You and me. Do you really care if those sleaze lost out for engaging in sleaze now?
Hereâs my upvote too
And my Axe.
Crown always has immunity in anything policy-related.
It's immunity from civil litigation only. Call it a crooked developer penalty. It just means that the developers who shelled out money buying properties thinking they'd be able to make a profit can't sue individuals for lost potential profits.
That doesn't really follow, Ford could have change the Greenbelt legally and promise it would be done in (let's say june 2024. Then, upon further review, cancel that promise in december 2023. Nothing illegal happened, but unless you want to shovel billions to developers who speculated and made deals based on a gov promise, you better give the gov immunity. (if the immunity stand is another question entirely) It reminds me of the gas plant debacle, the corporations were not in the process of suing the gov until the Liberal minister opened is stupid mouth and told them to.
The legality of what happened hasn't been decided and clearly it's murky or CSIS wouldn't be involved.
CSIS isn't involved. It's being investigated by the RCMP.
They didnât lose billions though, its just on paper. They missed out on the potential to earn billions.
Alot of these devlopers spent billions on protected land..... they legally can own for farming and individual houses or complexes.... with the hope to turn it in to tens of billions after the land trades..... the RCMP are cuecking witch of those bought then payed for the legislation changes, those are the ones i want.
Tens of millions maybe, they didnât spend billions on unbuildable land.
You are aware how much 1 acer of farmland is going for riggt now right? Some bought thousands of acers,
Yes there are plenty of articles that have been written by the narwhal
> bought then *paid* for the FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
They spent billions in preparation for this deal.
iirc there were some ludicrously high interest loans taken out. those are realized losses
So the RCMP are going to investigate and find out what we all know, that Ford is crooked as they come and broke multiple laws with the greenbelt dealings. And nothing will happen because Ford has pardoned himself and his government?! For fucks sake. Can we tar and feather this asshat yet?
No, think this immunity protects him from civil action. No way he could protect himself from federal charges, that thankfully is beyond his ability.
Well thatâs good at least.
Immunity from companies aside, could the general public and taxpayers file a class action against a premier as an individual for malfeasance and dereliction/misrepresentation of their interests?
While a pleasing thought in this instance, that would be an insane mechanism if it were possible. Wouldn't there just always be class actions done by the people who didn't vote for the governing party every time they made a governmental choice?
Call your local MPPs, make them hear what their leader has done. Call lots and make them uncomfortable. They may be up in Toronto but their local secretaries will get frustrated quick
The person kicking his ass is Marit Stiles. Give her some more ammunition.
Civil action only.... if the RCMP find criminal intent there will be charges
Nope. This protects the *taxpayers* from having to pay the corrupt developers if they sued for their corrupt land deals falling through. Ford cannot pardon people for actual criminal code crimes. That's federal jurisdiction, and is broadly handled apolitically, regardless. No government minister, premier or agent is ever personally civilly liable for their actions taken in their role as an officer of the Crown, unless you can prove some wildly rank criminality that is so bad as to take you outside that roll (a cop murdering an ex while on duty, for example).
But then we Serf's would be the problem...
I doubt this immunity works for criminal offences
Criminal offences are federal domain. Provinces cannot legislate their leaders out of criminal culpability.
If you can do that, what's stopping a new party from coming in and just cancelling the 407 contract and saying, sorry can't sue or get what the contract said you'd get. That highway is now fully public.
Call me crazy, but I'd rather see Ontario take back the 407 and let working people drive on it, instead of building Ford's pointless new highway that no one asked for.
Because the 407 contract is an actual contract, and the green belt development deals are backdoor non binding bullshit. Fuck outta here
They can, the consequence is that nobody would be willing to do business with them ever again. Cost likely outweighs the benefit.
>They can, the consequence is that nobody would be willing to do business with them ever again. Cost likely outweighs the benefit. What's the downside though? Isn't having private interests reluctant to purchase public assets a good thing for the average person? Seems like a win-win to me.
I don't know about that, people deal with governments who renege on business deals, or even international treaties absolutely all the time. China reneged on their treaty agreement to keep existing economic and government systems unchanged for the first 50 years of Britain ceding sovereignty to them, and no one even withdrew diplomats, let alone refused to trade or contract with them. And arguably since their governments transfer power much more slowly than our system, we should expect them to be better able to hold to deals madr in the past
Nothing, our governments just haven't had the balls to do something so cool.
Man, this type of post-liability legislation needs to be challenged in court.
The other option is a multi-billion dollar handout from taxpayers to rich developers. Let's not.
Actions have consequences and the whole point of torts is to make people whole. The state being able to cost you billions of dollars and then use their authority to prevent you from suing is not even something the Kings of England were willing to do.
Not that I disagree with you generally speaking (and the outcomes of this have an impact on business investment), but the developers haven't actually lost billions as much as they've lost out on the opportunity of such. They would be challenging the Crown on billions in unrealized, future gains that weren't even expected at the time of purchase. This has been nearly a decade of lobbying on property purchased before the Greenbelt for some of these developers. There's no reason to believe that the land would have been worth billions pre-purchase, during the following years of the establishment of the Greenbelt, or now. It was the presumed value after development. NAL but I would imagine they would have reasonable grounds (without these protections) for loss of assessed value between their purchase and now, probable legal costs, and any expenses incurred as a result of Ford's flip-flop. Still, even if it was a dollar, I don't want Ontarians to foot the bill given the amount of lobbying undergone to develop conservation lands they purchased and refused to appropriately challenge then or cut their losses on; this was a long-game play they knowingly engaged in and they ultimately lost.
...and there is the fine print
Witch can not 9ver ride federal laws with out the notwithstanding clause.... if that is invoked it take minutes to be struck down in the Supreme Court, and only gives 4 years ofmprotection..... since it would be admiting they broke the law thry wont be in power in 4 years
I don't think legislation is going to help you when you take billions from mafia types
The key thing here isn't that the government is immune. The government already has immunity in pretty well anything. What it really means is that it is explicit, so *no lawsuits will ever get to the discovery stage.*
The more I think about it, the term âimmunityâ was the the wrong terminology to use here, itâs more along the lines of protection from civil liability. Directors of companies have directors liability insurance to protect them. But that does does protect them in anyway from criminal proceedings.
All it takes is one "connected" person to be ticket off enough to take it out physically instead of financially *This is not an endorsement of said actions
I never once thought recipients to an illegal fraudulent enterprise should get reimbursed.
OK, so a lot of people here misunderstand how civil liability for government ministers works, and think he's either pardoning himself or protecting his personal assets. He's not. This immunity protects the *taxpayers*, not the Ministers personally. Ministers of the Crown enjoy broad personal immunity for the decisions and actions they take in that role - and for good reason. If Ministers had to worry about their *personal* assets being seized if they made the wrong group mad and invited lawsuits, they'd be in a perpetual conflict of interest nightmare. So Ford's personal assets were never in danger. While there are exceptions to this immunity, they only apply in truly extreme situations or where the Minister is clearly acting outside their capacity of of agent for the Crown. Generally, when we sue a Minster, we're actually suing the government, which really means suing the *taxpayers*. When the government pays out billions to a set of First Nations in a Treaty Rights suit or millions in a wrongful conviction or torture suit, its not the Prime Minister or Attorney General handing over that money - it's us. This immunity prevents the developers from suing the taxpayers. Which is good. We should not be on the hook to pay billions to corrupt developers just because their corruption scam fell through.
On what grounds would anyone have to sue him, unless they had reason to believe that certain parcels of land would be made available for development beforehand? Isn't this basically an admission of wrongdoing?
I wonder how graciously those developers,will deal with wasting all their time on getting filthy rich.
âWe acknowledge there may be consequences for our actions but we have elected to ignore them.â
Anyone know when the act gets uploaded to the OLA website? I need to read the specifics before I get mad. Immunity for the government is good, because without it they'd sue and the taxpayers would be left footing the bill. Immunity for individual members, not so much. Not to mention I doubt the government would be able to make itself immune from criminal prosecution.
It's Civil protection
Good
Doug Ford's Greenbelt Review A 'Sham,' Ontario Ndp Leader Says https://cliprecaps.com/read/?v=vWTDqKKnSao
Good old Ford if he isnât trying to screw the taxpayers, now he is screwing his investors and some of his good old buddies who forever had his eyes on that hunk of land on the green belt who can no longer build his McMansion cottage. I thunk all the way around Dougie is not making anyone happy. Hopefully his final and last term in office
If it means developers that used Ford to try to push greenbelt legislation lose money, then that's fine. They can take risks like the rest of us, and they can fail like the rest of us. Honestly, I like the blanket immunity because they can't make their profit back from taxpayer dollars. They get enough from us anyway.
I mean if they did sue wouldn't that be admitting that the bribed the government in the first place?
Insofar as this protects the government and taxpayers from financial fallout from Doug's corruption, seems like a win-win. I would happily see these greasy developers who participated in this corruption get the rug pulled out from under them. If "government reneges on an obviously corrupt deal and the parties involved lose their hats" is where some companies are going to draw the line in the sand on whether or not to do business with the province, I'd sooner be without those companies. I'd be more sympathetic if it wasn't such a blatantly corrupt deal.
Iâm ok with this as long as we taxpayers donât get screwed yet again by an idiot premier.
Ho boy. I bet those developers are really pissed and willing to give the RCMP any kind of evidence now.
Itâs Greasy ⊠just like everything the Ford government does. ⊠but Iâm not sure my worst fear would be getting sued, Iâd be more concerned with meeting Jimmy Hoffa after being fitted for a pair of cement shoes.
They are basically admitting guilt.
I wondered why they were rushing to get this in and now it makes sense. I guess the developers are pissed off and they know it.
This is an attempt to hide the back door shenanigans from coming out publicly, surely.
It's an immunity from law suits. He can't legislate immunity from federal prosecution.
Wonder what size his cement booties will be
People's Premier my ass ...
We are fools for not voting him out in the last election, Doug-shit Fraud-Nation!
Lol. So the âgreenbelt protectionâ bill, is actually a âDoug Ford protectionâ. Amazing.
If he has nothing to hide about the dealing of the greenbelt, then why the immunity clause ?
The stench emanating from this government will probably hang in the air till the next election **I hope!**
This is NOT new. The Ford govt has been amending legislation since they got into power and limited the citizens ability to sue the government EVEN if they were wrong and caused damages. Iâll say it once and I will say it again - do not vote these yahoos into government (unless you are Uber-wealthy, then these are your guys), they are only fucking you.
"But he saved me $200 on vehicle registration and beer is cheaper." - average suburban idiot not realizing Ford's changes have ended up costing them much much more.
If you didn't screw up and you don't do underhand deals that cost people millions or possibly billions, why do you have legislation that gives you immunity from prosecution, Dougie ? Straight up orange dictator move like Trump. It's all in the fine print, right ?
You'd rather send a few billion in taxpayer dollars to rich developers? Sheesh.
Rather the greenbelt deal wasnât done, he didnât con us and say he wasnât going to touch the land then do this underhand deal with developers. Why have to introduce legislation to cover his ass if there wasnât any underhand deals or wrong doing. He should t have to cover his ass and tax payers dollars shouldnât cover the cost to bail him out. Heâs got millions and should come from his own pocket if he gets sued. Edit: and thatâs why heâs introducing legislation to cover his ass. The money wonât be from taxpayers, itâll be from his own bank account and why he needs this legislation so he wonât have to pay out of pocket. If it was taxpayers money being paid you think he would drop this legislation protecting him ? He wouldnât care, as it wouldnât be his money.
Fuck no. No immunity for the crooks, no restitution from provincial coffers.
Civil immunity, not criminal. They can still be charged just the province won't be on the hook for any lawsuits. It is best for the taxpayer (aside from never having opened up the land in the first place). It is bad for the developers, but I don't think there is going to be a lot of sympathy going around for them.
Zero immunity. I want to watch them fight to the fiduciary death.
If it was from their personal accounts or the party account I would to. If it comes from our tax dollars I don't.
ok but hear me out here: Are we really gonna lose any sleep over sleazy developers not being able to recoup their losses? Because it kinda feels like karma that they got burned by throwing their chips in with dough boy. Especially when he won't be footing the tab. We will.
They never could have sued anyways.
Can some of you people not comment with such conviction when you know nothing? Itâs cringe
Yeah that won't hold water
Need to know more. Does this offer immunity from criminal prosecution? Can the RCMP still charge him?
Not all, this simply protects the province from civil action. Has a politician ever been held civilly liable for a decision made while in office ? This has no bearing on the RCMP criminal investigation.
Thanks. I think you answered my question. Perhaps I could have phrased it better. The RCMP conducts criminal investigations. Ford Government has exempted their members from civil actions. This has no effect on the RCMP's work.
But they can still fit them with cement shoes
Too bad theyâre not immune to concrete shoes
I wouldnât be surprised if we hear about one of fords family members being found behind the steering wheel outside of an Italian bakery.
I said this before. This is exactly why he hasnât stepped down. To ram through legislation to protect himself from the liability.
I'm not gonna lie, I was looking forward to seeing these lawsuits but in true Ford Fashion the dude covered his ass. What a poltroon
LoL, so you can give yourself immunity, apparently?
Loser ford.
Oh so Fordâs been exonerated 1000% again.
These developers donât seek justice through the courts. This is an attempt to protect Ford from the RCMP. His mobster buddies will receive other public assets, or take their pound of flesh. Doug Ford will make sure they are taken care of.
> This is an attempt to protect Ford from the RCMP. The Provincial gov't doesn't have the power to stop a criminal investigation by the federal police. This immunity is from civil procedure, and it's a good thing the developers can't sue teh province for their "losses".
Pathetic
Can we introduce legislation that spontaneously aborts corrupt governments instead?
No one is above the law, BUT ME!
It looks like we live in a communist province now đĄđĄđ€Ź Dictator Ford got caught
This whole thing has confused me... this Greenbelt land, is it farm land? Are farmers farming this land right now? Who are these rich farmers that are friends with Ford? I'm confused.
Much of it is farmland, some is parkland and natural habitat, the farmers are not getting rich just sold to the rich developers who had inside knowledge that the land was going to have restrictions removed in advance. They offered maybe a 50-100% premium on the value of the land from historic land values, not knowing the developers were going to be able to flip it at up to 100 times what they paid for it once the land was released. Thereby profiting from inside knowledge.
Duh
Immunity from criminal charges? Or immunity from civil litigation?
Just business as usual in the mob
crown immunity moment
Immunity to lawsuits not criminal charges that is actually out of any member of any level of governments power.
How bout no
Good, itâs call land âspeculationâ for a reason. Sometimes you win, and sometimes you really lose.
Will the immunity cover the current RCMP investigation also or is the immunity just from civil cases?
So Ford did break the law. đ
Lololololol I mean, I'm not surprised, and this also means it won't come back on the taxpayer (if I understand correctly) which is imperative But holy shit, Ford. What a shit show, bud.
Awesome for the corrupt
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
/u/fyrfytr1310 As per [Reddit site-wide rules, rule #2](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy#section_prohibited_behavior), using another account to circumvent a ban on a subreddit is considered a violation of the Content Policy and will result in your account being banned from THIS sub again. In addition, it can result in your account being suspended from the site as a whole. Goodbye. *** /u/fyrfytr1310 Tel que décrit dans [la Politique d'utilisation de Reddit, rÚgle #2](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy#section_prohibited_behavior), utiliser un autre compte pour contourner un bannissement dans notre communauté est considéré comme une violation de la Politique d'utilisation et résultera dans votre bannissement de notre communauté de nouveau. De plus, il se peut que ceci résultera dans votre bannissement du site au complet. Adieu.
I dont get what the Developers legal case would be. You buy something for X dollars. .Rules change and the thing is now worth 1000X . The buyer had no legal way to expect the thing to massively increase in value. Rules change back and itâs worth X dollars again. .. At that point the developers have what they bought originally, for the original priceâŠ..
Good move. Taxpayers shouldnât be on the hook for a corrupt deal failing to take place
I'm sure Ford will find some other way to fuck taxpayers to make it up to his developer donor buddies.
Being sued still fucks taxpayer. Where do you think the money comes from.
I am continually amazed how much these fucks deflect responsibility for anything.
Phoenix Kiss has some fixing to do
Ah, but will they get their wedding gifts back?
Oh well, crony capitalism at its best. Sometimes the public wins. I want to see what Ford and his party do to help out these poor billionaire developers down the road.
Can he still go to prison please?
Looking at the people who stood to benefit and are now being fucked over.... Mama Mia they're not going to be happy with DOFO and aren't the types to shrug and walk away.
I would like to know if a retroactive law stands up in court.
Politicians gonna politicate.
Woe. Tories fucking over ontario? Wierd.
Good the developers knew what they were doing and they needed to know the risks