Carbonear councillors call for clarification of new Municipal Conduct Act

By Mark Squibb/October 21, 2022

The new Municipal Conduct Act, which largely deals with conflicts of interests and codes of conduct, took effect September 1, but members of Carbonear council say that much clarification is needed.

The issue came to the forefront during the September 27 meeting, in which questions of conflicts of interest swirled around council chambers.

The first had to do with a motion to allow the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 23 to build a small storage shed on its Bannerman Street property.

“So, what’s the policy now?” asked Mayor Frank Butt, a member of the Legion. “I know that the government has a new policy now for conflict of interest, and I don’t really know where that stands in regards to being a member of an organization.”

Councillor Danielle Doyle said she thought you have to be a director of an organization for there to be a conflict, and Town Clerk Cathy Sommers agreed that was the way it was before. Sommers added that regardless, Butt had the option to ask council whether he was in conflict.

Councillor Peter Snow noted the legislation was worded to suggest the conflict must be apparent to a “reasonable person.” Doyle added there would have to be a monetary gain.

Deputy Mayor Sam Slade suggested he too might in conflict as he is also a member of the Legion.

Neither member was found by council to be in conflict, and the motion to approve the shed passed.

Next, council voted on the removal of two sheds, one at Remembrance Loop and one on the Line Road.

Doyle said both were constructed without a permit, and in both cases the residents have been contacted multiple times, by letter and by phone.

Butt said he has family members on the Line Road. Doyle told Butt the person in question isn’t a member of his family.

“No, it’s mine,” Slade spoke up, to which Doyle agreed.

The man is a distant relative of Slade, and the deputy mayor felt that according to the new regulations, he might be in conflict.

“At one time, it was mother, father, brother, sister, and so on and so forth,” said Slade. “I think it goes beyond that right now. I think it could include even, if you and I were friends, and I made a decision if whether you got a permit or so, and someone identified me as being your friend, I would be in conflict. So, one of those permits you’re referring to happens to be a cousin of mine, a first cousin. And so, I don’t know, I feel that may be in conflict.”

Sommers said if Slade feels he is in conflict, he could declare himself as such.

“With the new regulations, I think this is something that could come back one day, because somebody could accuse me, and say, ‘Oh, you’re related to him, that’s you’re first cousin,’ so I think I should remove myself,” said Slade.

He added that, as he understands it, under the new legislation, a council’s decision that someone is not in conflict could be overruled.

Councillor Chris O’Grady said council needs clarification of the Act.

“I don’t know if the Department is going to be doing some training, but I think it wouldn’t hurt for us to get some clarification on how far this goes,” said O’Grady. “Because it’s not just, like you said, mother, father, sister, brother (anymore).”

Doyle said Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador (MNL) did offer training sessions regarding the new legislation, though it was hardly accessible.

“The training for this new code of ethics is lengthy, it’s a nine-to-five session,” said Doyle. “And I don’t know about anyone body else, but Saturday is really the only day I can do a nine-to-five session and there was only one Saturday, maybe two, offered.”

Doyle added council could inquire further about arranging a training session.

Councillor Ray Noel agreed clarification is needed, and, to Slade’s point about a council decision that a member was not in conflict could be overthrown, said so far as he knew, council’s decision is final.

“There’s a lot of gray here, for sure,” said Noel.

In regard to the matter at hand, Slade declared himself in conflict and refrained from voting.

“I think we need perfect clarification,” said councillor Malcolm Seymour. “Because if we have a conflict with everyone that is our friend in this town, there’s a lot of us at this table not going to have any say or be able to put anything through… because I could be your friend, and therefore I have to move away from this table? Something has got to happen here. Something has to be clarified big time.”

Slade agreed with Seymour’s assessment.

“We need that training, and we need perfect clarification on what we can and cannot do,” he said.

Councillor Danielle Doyle, taking the conversation in a new direction, noted that under the new rules the repercussions are “softer” than before.

“Before, there were no other choices, you had to vacate seats,” said Doyle. “But now at least there are options. I do like those parts of the changes, because that’s much more positive and easier for people to deal with, especially when there are difficult situations. But we 100 percent need the training.”