Re Caroline Mulroney’s Testing Time (Sept. 14): In 1968, an Ontario Royal Commission issued a report following an inquiry into the uses and abuses of government power. An entire chapter was de- voted to the duties of the Attorney-General. “The duty of the Attorney-General to supervise legislation imposes on him a responsibility to the public that transcends his responsibility to his colleagues in the cabinet. It requires him to exercise constant vigilance to sustain and defend the rule of law against departmental attempts to grasp unhampered arbitrary powers…”
In the Toronto City Council case, it is the duty of the AttorneyGeneral to advise cabinet against the invocation of the notwithstanding clause, to vote against the legislation and probably to resign her cabinet position should it proceed. What did Caroline Mulroney do? She voted for the bill. Her actions will define her not only as a politician, but as a person.
As someone who has voted for each of the three major parties, I was looking for an alternative to the Ontario Liberals in the recent election. Had either Christine Elliott or Caroline Mulroney been the leader of the Progressive Conservatives, I would have seriously considered voting PC. I could not support Doug Ford, as I consider him demonstrably unfit for office.
I now believe, given their apparent unqualified support for whatever Mr. Ford does, those two leadership rivals, and the Attorney-General in particular, are equally unfit for office. The PCs have demonstrated that being in power is more important than integrity and doing the right thing. As their mentor might say, sad. Phil Ford