Forty-five minutes of council training from Chatham-Kent’s integrity commissioner (IC) at a recent council meeting earned nary a single question from councillors.
Suzanne Craig, the municipality’s IC, spoke to council Nov. 17 after the body of elected officials requested on Sept. 8 that she provide them with some training over their own code of conduct.
As well, three days before the council meeting, Craig sent councillors an information bulletin that another issue has been raised in regard to this council.
“It’s not a sign of an investigation,” she said of the bulletin, adding it was a means to offer advice and education.
During her info session with council, Craig said she believed it was “really important for the public to hear what I provide to council,” and to explain how she is proceeding based on provincial guidelines and legislation.
“Integrity commissioners allow people to bring their issues forward other than going to court,” she explained.
Municipal codes of conduct came into being as a result of a judicial inquiry in Toronto over computer equipment leasing back in 1999.
Auditor generals, ombudsmen and ICs began to spring up. Codes of conduct became mandatory for municipal councils, as did ICs.
Craig said an IC is independent and impartial.
“I’m an independent officer and I report to council,” she said.
As for the code of conduct, those are developed by municipalities.
“It is council’s agreement on standards that they espouse that they will follow. It’s not mine,” Craig said.
She added the codes have complaint procedures and they are investigations, not punishments.
“It’s a reset; a course correct,” Craig said.
When a complaint comes in, she said it does not automatically result in an investigation. Vexatious complaints are dismissed outright.
Craig said she takes code investigations “very seriously.
“However, I believe the effectiveness of my role is to assist members of council to understand what the rules say so that they can continue to do what they were elected to do,” she said.
Craig explained the Municipal Act sets out what a councillor can face if they violate their code of conduct – a reprimand and/or a suspension of pay for up to 90 days.
“Councillors, you are not employees. You can’t be suspended; you can’t be terminated,” she told council, although that could change next year.
Craig warned that proposed changes at the provincial level could make punishments go much further than they do today. Beyond reprimands and pay docking, the Ford government’s Bill 9 is seeking to give councils the power to unseat a member of council.
That legislation will be voted on in 2026.
With current Municipal Act regulations, Craig said “the suspension of pay is accountability – this was the intent of the legislation. Misconduct should not be financially rewarded.”
Provincial legislation protects complainants from exposure.
“Who speaks with me, who emails me, who calls me, I cannot disclose, unless that person gives me consent,” Craig said. “I follow the complaint process. It has to be filed by a member of staff, council or the public. I don’t take anonymous complaints.”
Craig stressed councillors can most certainly express their opinions, “but should be mindful of the unfairness of stating opinion as fact.
“Stating one’s opinion without fact-checking accuracy and presenting opinion as fact is not only conduct that runs afoul of the code, it is misleading to the public and incredibly damaging to the reputation of staff,” she said.
