The ethics of four candidates in Brossard is involved

Photo archive
A photo of the municipal council of Brossard taken in 2016: one sees the four counselors that are the subject of an investigation, Serge Séguin, Claudio Benedetti, Daniel Lucier and Pierre O’donoughue, including the mayor Paul Leduc (centre).

Matthew Payen

Thursday, 12 October, 2017 23:26

UPDATE
Thursday, 12 October, 2017 23:26

Look at this article

Four municipal councillors of Brossard are the subject of an investigation in ethics and ethics so that they aspire to be re-elected on 5 November.

Pierre O’donoughue, Serge Séguin and Daniel Lucier, of the party of the outgoing mayor, Paul Leduc, and Claudio Benedetti, the team of Doreen Assaad, are in the cross hairs of the Commission municipale du Québec.

According to a complaint in which The Journal has obtained a copy, the four elected representatives would have participated in the 16 June 2015 to vote on a resolution in which they were the beneficiaries.

Court costs

The resolution provided for the payment by the City of their legal fees of $ 180,000 to make a judgment on appeal. The advisors were to lose in the first instance a case in defamation brought by the ex-mayor Jean-Marc Pelletier.

The latter reproached the seven councillors, four of which are still in this position, of having destroyed his reputation in the media at the time where he was mayor from 2005 to 2009. Mr. Pelletier had been compared to the mascot Youppi! and his economic mission in China it was called ” holiday “.

For Danielle Pilette, a professor at UQAM in municipal affairs, it is the fault of the four elected is not in doubt. “They would have had to abstain from voting,” she said.

Photo courtesy

Danielle Pilette, a professor at the UQAM

According to the expert, the fault is much greater that the cause is based on the public advisors and not on an administrative decision.

Other failure

“Their vote gives the impression that they wanted to do justice for themselves with the money of the City, she says. They do not know the difference between their interests and those of the City. “

According to Ms. Pilette, despite several abstentions, the vote could still be held with a smaller number of votes.

This had been the case a few minutes earlier at the same meeting of city council. The ex-advisor of the opposition, Steve Gagnon, was removed from a vote that was concerned.

Mr. Gagnon had challenged his colleague Daniel Lucier, and he asked the City for the reimbursement of legal fees of 3287 $.

In this case, Mr. Lucier was not omitted, and is also the subject of an investigation for this second violation.

Support

Called to speak on the topic, the training policies of the elected officials referred to we were informed by email that they were supporting their candidate.

“We can compare this situation with the salary increases that the elect are called to vote for themselves,” says by e-mail Brossard Together, to defend the gesture by Claudio Benedetti.

As for the three candidates of Priority Brossard, “they mention that the legal department of the City has been consulted prior to the holding of the vote on the resolution,” said the party.

What the law says

The member of the council of a municipality who is present at a meeting at the time shall be taken into consideration a matter in which he has directly or indirectly a pecuniary interest must disclose the general nature of this interest before the beginning of the discussions on this issue and refrain from participating and from voting or attempting to influence the vote on this question.

– Article 361, the Law on elections and referendums