A view to a kill Despite being pulled from major cinemas, The Interview opens at The Hyland Cinema this weekend. >> Pg. 4
thegazette
TODAY high -9 low -15
Awkwardly drinking Scotch since 1906
TOMORROW high -11 low -15
WESTERN UNIVERSITY • CANADA’S ONLY DAILY STUDENT NEWSPAPER • FOUNDED 1906
FRIDAY, JANUARY 9, 2015
Ontario ombudsman in Twitter feud with Western political science profs Amy O’Kruk NEWS EDITOR
VOLUME 108, ISSUE 54
Spoke replaces memories with Wave handme-downs Richard Raycraft MANAGING EDITOR
@AmyAtGazette
@RichAtGazette
The actions of Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin came under fire over the holidays from two Western professors, in a Twitter feud and an exchange of op-eds in the London Free Press. Andrew Sancton, a Western political science professor, tweeted criticizing Bill 8 — which would see the ombudsman have greater oversight of municipal affairs — and its implications for the banning of closed municipal meetings. In response, Marin blocked the political science professor on Twitter for three days. Marin also sent out a tweet referring to Sancton as being from “the Mad Men generation,” an allusion to the TV series set in the 1960s. Sancton’s fellow Western political science professor Erika Simpson responded to the ombudsman in an opinion piece for the LFP published on December 19, which questioned the transparency of the ombudsman’s behaviour. Simpson argued in the editorial that, “public officials should not be able to block members of the public from reading their tweets. Marin’s electronic media postings, written under his authority as the ombudsman, should be open, transparent and subject to public scrutiny.” Sancton said in an interview that he was ““outraged” at being blocked by the ombudsman. “Here I am, a citizen of Ontario, I’m trying to be conscientious … doing what I think academics should do and I was blocked from the official ombudsman’s account.” Marin replied to these criticisms with his own op-ed in the LFP, published on December 26. He defended his actions by stating his Twitter account and tweets are ultimately subject to public review regardless if a user is blocked or not. “Sancton could still read my tweets. They are open, transparent and subject to scrutiny, not just on Twitter but on the home page of the Ombudsman Ontario website,” Marin said in the editorial. “The block function is useful when a follower, like Sancton, becomes obsessive in a bid to have a ‘debate.’ ” He further explained that the block feature is useful for figures in the public eye who deal with anonymous trolls who send vile, bigoted and bullying tweets. Marin, in response to Simpson recounting her past experience as an ombudsman
Professor Andrew Sancton in his office on Thursday.
as an “independent, impartial and confidential mediator” said his public duty goes beyond that. “We are scrupulously impartial while conducting an investigation, but once it is completed, we make recommendations and use moral suasion — including social media — to convince the powerful to change their ways,” Marin said. “I can’t imagine the public interest would have been served had I ‘made sure never to take sides.’ ” The conflict stemmed from proposals made by a provincial bill — Bill 8 — legislation created to improve public sector accountability and
I
WAS OUTRAGED. HERE I AM A CITIZEN OF ONTARIO, I’M TRYING TO BE CONSCIENTIOUS… DOING WHAT I THINK ACADEMICS SHOULD DO AND I WAS BLOCKED FROM THE OFFICIAL OMBUDSMAN’S ACCOUNT. ANDREW SANCTON
WESTERN POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR
alter the ombudsman’s mandate. The bill would expand Marin’s areas of authority to include municipalities, universities and school boards. Initially, the bill would also have given the ombudsman jurisdiction over the decisions of closed-meeting investigators appointed by municipalities. Since the Municipal Act fails to define what constitutes a meeting, Marin characterized it as a gathering for the purpose of laying the groundwork to exercise the power of a council or committee. Consequently, the ombudsman asserts these meetings must be held in public. Sancton argued Marin’s jurisdiction shouldn’t be expanded to include municipalities and was specifically critical of Marin’s definition and condemnation of closed municipal council meetings. “The Ontario legislature had no intention of making it illegal for municipal councillors to talk to each other informally about business,” Sancton said in an interview. “I didn’t think the ombudsman had any right to make up his own definition of what a closed meeting was.” Marin previously published a report cracking down on the seven members of the former London city council that met in the back room of an east-end restaurant in February 2013.
Winnie Lu • GAZETTE
Sancton argued that seeing as provincial and federal politicians talk to each other informally, like at party caucuses and closed cabinet meetings, it doesn’t make sense for municipal councillors to be treated differently, or at least without public debate on whether they should be able to. “If we expect our lawmakers to do a good job, they have to talk to each other informally before they get out in the public arena,” Sancton said. “That doesn’t mean they all should all get together and rehearse everything … it just means that they should feel perfectly comfortable in individual groups talking to each other and trying to figure out what to do.” Although an amendment to Bill 8 ultimately resulted in the ombudsman not gaining additional oversight over the decisions of municipal closed-meeting investigators, Sancton said that while he agrees an ombudsman should actively advocate for public issues, Marin can take it too far. “I think that he doesn’t treat that account in a way that is appropriate for someone in his position,” Sancton said. “He attacks individuals … and he retweets things that are even more abusive of other people. I just don’t think it’s an appropriate way for a public official to behave.”
Remember those giant tables in the Spoke? You know, the ones with all the engravings all over them? They’re gone and will never grace the campus greasy spoon again. They’ve been replaced by a swath of generic-looking tables and chairs imported from the Wave, the Spoke’s sister restaurant operation on the second floor of the UCC. According to Matt Helfand, University Students’ Council president, the tables became a safety hazard. “Those tables have been here for decades,” he said. “And, despite them being a genuine Western institution, they were no longer structurally sound, to the point that it was unsafe to have them in the Spoke.” “We could no longer in good faith keep them there for risk of injury.” The Wave’s decor change made it possible to swap the dangerous, but recognizable Spoke tables, with unneeded ones from the Wave. While aware the deceased giant tables will be missed, Helfand pointed out that the upside is increased seating capacity at the Spoke. “Totally understandable, but to that [the tables being missed], I’d say we’ve actually increased the seating capacity in the Spoke by over 100,” he said. “So while we do lose the communal tables and the iconic look, we have gotten a lot more seats for students and ultimately we think that that in the long run will be what’s worth it.” The change was implemented as part of the USC’s capital plan. Helfand hinted that the Spoke tables may rise from the dead sometime in the future. “I will miss the tables, but they may be making an appearance in some fashion, so stay tuned.”
Inside
•••
UC being renovated
P2
How to run for president
P3
Movie Review: The Interview
P4
Fashion for Friday
P4
Road head a good idea?
P5
Free speech already under attack
P6