Get on the path to results today.
Get on the path to results today.
held on March 29, 2023
Not fair, Not balanced, Just True
By Winfield Corcoran
The meeting was convened at around 5:00 pm and David van der Woerd, the reigning president of the Hamilton Law Association, was the moderator for the night. The meeting was attended by about 5 lawyers from the community, compelling evidence of the importance of the bencher campaign to the local lawyers.
There are 9 candidates in the Central South. Three came to the event: Andrew Spurgeon, Mike Winward and Winfield Corcoran.
The main event of the meeting best referred to as “Andrew Spurgeon Night” was the incumbent regional bencher Andrew Spurgeon. The theme for the evening was, “How Great Thou Art”. The highlight of the evening for me was when Andrew promised not to run again. He will need to quit after 12 years. So, one way or the other, we are nearing the end of the road for the Andrew Spurgeon bencher monopoly.
The focal point of Andrew’s “Vote for Me” thrust was the fact that under his tutelage, the amount of money we as lawyers pay to the Law Society of Ontario each month is roughly the same as it was 30 or so years earlier, with adjustments for inflation. Apparently, Andrew is responsible for this amazing feat. Harvey Strosberg who whacked an amazing amount of money off our monthly dues was not mentioned at all. How quickly we forget. The difference in today’s money’s worth is $80.00. Wow!
David’s introduction of Andrew to the audience started with the words “this is not his first rodeo” followed by a description of Andrew Spurgeon’s many accomplishments, to wit:
The lingering question is, what do all of these accomplishments have to do with his qualifications as a bencher, other than to participate as a bencher in holding the fees we pay to a minimum?
Andrew’s concern is that Convocation is out of control. The benchers do not agree with each other. The manner in which this disagreement manifests itself is bickering, incivility, bad faith, and a host of other adjectives that clearly are frustrating Andrew’s ability to add more notches to his gun. It appears that Andrew’s influence at Convocation is defeated by the Stop Sop slate, who in the last election succeeded in having all of their candidates elected and are now a major force to be dealt with at Convocation. However, Andrew hopes to be able to restore a sense of decorum into Convocation. This was not possible in the last four years or the four years before that.
Almost the entire evening was occupied by Andrew quoting statistics ranging from the number of foreign-trained lawyers that come to Ontario to practice law, to the possibility of reducing the law school requirement to two years and the enhancement or the elimination of the bar admissions course.
On the foreign-trained lawyer theme, apparently, his daughter went to the UK to obtain a law degree, which allows her to come back to Ontario and apply for entry to the bar alongside those who have been subjected to three years of law school in Ontario. According to Andrew, the UK-trained lawyers now receive a one-year leg up over the Ontario-trained lawyers.
Unfortunately, it looks like Andrew’s daughter may have other plans. As it often happens, his daughter met a man in Scotland and wants to stay with him rather than return to Ontario and follow in his footsteps, one year advantage or not. She would have big shoes to step into if she came back to Ontario.
The first question of the evening came from Andrew Confente who asked Andrew Spurgeon to reveal what the salaries of the LSO staffers are. Andrew immediately went into a long run of statistics including a reference to “poop and scoop” in the context of ethical standards, or something else, with the result that when everything was in, the question was not answered.
According to Stop SOP, 72 of the 116 million dollars available to the LSO each year is spent on salaries that are kept secret. In my experience, when something is kept secret, it is because if the facts were known the subject of the secrecy – in this case, a salary – might be lost. If Andrew Spurgeon knows the answer to Andrew Confente’s question, he is not telling!! So much for being “open” pursuant to s.4.2(4) of the Law Society Act, which section Andrew Spurgeon quoted as being the guiding light toward self-governance. Transparency was not mentioned, I suggest because it is not mentioned in the statute. However, the word “open” is there to be considered. For those who have never heard of s.4 .2 of the Law Society Act, it reads as follows:
Principles to be applied by the Society
4.2 In carrying out its functions, duties and powers under this Act, the Society shall have regard to the following principles:
1. The Society has a duty to maintain and advance the cause of justice and the rule of law.
2. The Society has a duty to act so as to facilitate access to justice for the people of Ontario.
3. The Society has a duty to protect the public interest.
4. The Society has a duty to act in a timely, open and efficient manner.
5. Standards of learning, professional competence and professional conduct for licensees and restrictions on who may provide particular legal services should be proportionate to the significance of the regulatory objectives sought to be realized. 2006, c. 21, Sched. C, s. 7.
Mike Winward, seated to Andrew Spurgeon’s left, was the beneficiary of the overflow from the gracious comments from David directed at Andrew Spurgeon. Mike is the former director of the Federation of Law Societies of Ontario (FLO) who, as I understand it, saw months of his work trying to save money defeated by Stop SOP – those dirty bad guys who had all of their members elected. In any event, Stop SOP (now known as “Full Stop”) is now a power in Convocation to be reckoned with. Mike hopes to somehow defeat the strength of this organization. He also laments the fact that the Benchers do not seem to agree and their manner of disagreement is also disappointing. According to Mike, self-governance is a gift. According to Full Stop, good governance is not done in the shadows. As lawyers, we need to preserve the gift of self-governance as opposed to governance by the court. Self-governance is associated with trimming down overhead. What can we eliminate in order to reduce overhead? According to Mike, trying to save money poses three questions.
Mike Winwood also enjoys the endorsement of the HLA.
Winfield Corcoran, who spent almost the entire evening looking at David’s back (the ‘HLA shun’, as he calls it) as he addressed Andrew and Mike throughout the entire evening, has nothing to offer in comparison to the credentials of Andrew Spurgeon and/or Mike Winwood. Most of what he had to say was a reflection of his violent past before he became a lawyer, 32 years ago. Winfield stated that he was fortunate to be allowed to practice law and has always directed his gratitude toward serving as many clients as possible. His desire to be a bencher flows from that gratitude. As he approaches the last decades of his practice, it is time to start giving back as seems to be the case in the lives of many lawyers. He was a member of the admissions committee at Windsor Law and had a large influence over who was accepted in first year at Windsor Law in 1988.
Winfield believes that the way to resolve the problem with Legal Aid is to stop taking it as he has done some five years ago. Winfield also believes that the decision not to offer CPD through the HLA is wise. The law is the same in Toronto as it is in Hamilton, and the fact that there is more expertise in Toronto than in Hamilton, and therefore more CPD originating in Toronto, should be seen as a good thing. The HLA should not try to compete with Toronto in the area of CPD but enjoy the benefits such expertise provides. David seemed to like that statement.
Winfield advised that he tried to join the Full Stop slate but they would not return his communications.
If elected, Winfield would vote as follows:
1. The preservation of the Local Law Societies with a healthy budget. They are a guiding light to so many lawyers.
2. To stop wasting time in convocation with Legal Aid. The LSO can do nothing about Legal Aid, so why spend so much time debating about it.
3. Initiatives that promote and encourage the attraction of persons into the profession that reflects the makeup of society that we see when we walk down the street, including people of all colours and races. The same should be the makeup of the candidates in the bencher election.
4. The appointment of as many women as possible to as many positions as possible in as many professions and job descriptions as possible.
5. If elected he will represent all lawyers regardless of race colour or creed before Convocation as if they were his clients.
Also present at the meeting was Angela Ogang, a candidate in the election who is running in Toronto Region. According to David, Angela applied to the HLA to receive their endorsement for her campaign but her request was not granted. David explained that her rejection had nothing to do with the fact that:
When asked for her views, Angela stated she did not support voting in slates or blocks. When asked to vote on an issue she would receive as much information about the issue as possible and vote her conscience. On this particular issue, she felt more aligned with Winfield who was also an independent.
Copyright © 2022 Corcoran Law Office - All Rights Reserved.
Office: 905.387.2129
Powered by GoDaddy Website Builder
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.