A 'glaring conflict of interest' in determining how OPP will be paid

[Michael Jack]

There have been hundreds of letters, e-mails, discussions, etc, regarding the proposed new OPP billing model. While not disagreeing with the valid concerns, the much more serious issue is the process itself.

The correspondence received from the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services on March 25th in response to previous inquiries was troubling. The following excerpts demonstrate a direct involvement by OPP in creating legislation.

“The OPP and MCSCS have heard from many of the OPP’s client municipalities.”

The OPP do not need to hear from their employers (not clients) during the development of legislation. They will be informed by their employer once a decision is made.

“The OPP and the MCSCS are currently refining the proposed billing model.”

Why are the OPP refining this legislation while their elected employers (municipalities) are left out of the process?

“(A)s soon as the billing model is completed the OPP will communicate fiscal impacts in a timely fashion.”

Since when do elected municipalities receive provincial legislative information from an unelected employee (OPP)?

“In the meantime, the OPP will be happy to meet with you to discuss any additional questions you may have about the proposed billing model and the OPP billing review process.”

The discussions and questions are about how the OPP will be paid through this new legislation and shouldn’t be answered by the OPP. There is a glaring conflict of interest. How the municipal and provincial governments collect taxes to pay police is no business of the police. Police do not and must not possess taxing or legislative powers in a democracy. This abdication of legislative powers by the province must not be tolerated. The ability to legislate is bestowed on governments only and is not transferable, even willingly.

Tom Southwick,

Bayham Councillor

Vienna

http://www.stthomastimesjournal.com/201 ... ll-be-paid