HALDIMAND—Haldimand-Norfolk MPP Bobbi Ann Brady recently invoked parliamentary privilege during Integrity Commissioner (IC) David Boghosian’s investigation, which ultimately determined Mayor Shelley Ann Bentley was guilty of four code of conduct violations.
For a full breakdown of Boghosian’s report and its findings, see the September 11 and 18 editions of The Press.
An interview with MPP Bobbi Ann Brady
Brady defended her choice to use parliamentary privilege, asserting it is “often invoked” and citing Premier Doug Ford and Deputy Premier Sylvia Jones’ use of it when a federal committee wanted to question them regarding the Freedom Convoy protests in 2022.
Brady said taking part in Boghosian’s investigation would have been a waste of taxpayer dollars, asserting she had no involvement or prior knowledge of the leaked documents.
In his report, Boghosian said Brady’s lawyer “confirmed that MPP Brady would not submit to any form of questioning by me and would not be producing the documents I had summonsed her to produce, claiming the latter was also covered by parliamentary privilege.”
Speaking to The Press, Brady said, “I didn’t refuse to give documents – I don’t have documents…. The simple matter is I don’t have anything he’s asking for. Zero.”
She said her lawyer relayed that message to Boghosian.
In his report, Boghosian said, “I find it frustrating and disappointing that MPP Brady would elect to invoke a discretionary privilege to avoid having to tell the residents of her Haldimand-Norfolk riding what she knows about the leak.”
In response, Brady said, “I believe the role of an IC should be to present facts, not opinions or commentary on third parties to an investigation.”
She added, “I’m not hiding anything. I’m not about to have an IC go after my integrity in a report because I didn’t have anything to offer him.”
Brady said regardless of whether the document leak was intended to appear before the 2025 provincial election vote, it would have been inconsequential to the outcome considering the 20,000-plus vote differential between her and Progressive Conservative candidate and Norfolk Mayor Amy Martin.
However, Brady noted, “I do wish someone had not posted that.”
Boghosian’s report also noted that Brady commented on a November 2024 Facebook post, suggesting that Martin had “been trying to disadvantage (Haldimand residents) at a few tables she sits around. Time will reveal.”
The IC report said that, according to Martin, the only organizations she was involved with at the time impacting Haldimand residents were the Haldimand-Norfolk Board of Health and the health unit merger committee. Boghosian suggested that Bentley could have provided insider information to Brady, which Bentley denied in her interview with him.
Brady told The Press she was approached by a “few public health employees … (about) paying attention to what is happening around the transition board table…. I think it’s very naïve for the IC to think the only way I could learn about anything at the transition board table was through Mayor Bentley.”
Brady said she never discussed the issue with Bentley before or during the election.
“I didn’t discuss it with anyone,” she said, noting she would not divulge her sources. “There are people who do the right thing. I’m not about to say who those people were.”
The use of parliamentary privilege: an outsider’s perspective
The Press spoke with Gregory Flynn, an assistant professor of political science at McMaster University, to discuss the use of parliamentary privilege.
“We really inherited parliamentary privilege as a core element of our constitutional foundation from the United Kingdom,” explained Flynn, who noted its intended purpose is to allow legislature to function without interruption and to ensure the ability to debate openly and freely in the houses of Canadian government.
For instance, Flynn cited a call for revolution would be allowed for discussion on the floor of the legislature but might be subject to civil proceedings if said outside those walls.
He believes that, despite the fundamental importance of parliamentary privilege to democracy, certain aspects of the legislation could use a modern refresh.
“Imagine the Premier having to take three days to travel to Ottawa by horse drawn cart, and then a full couple of days testifying, and another three coming back – you could see where being forced to testify could really take them out of a legislative possibility,” said Flynn, noting modern advancements like flights reduce this burden significantly.
He cited the Ford/Jones case, likening it to MPP Brady’s invocation of privilege.
“The idea (is) that a Member of Parliament has to be present in the legislature and focused solely on their legislative duties, while the legislature is in session, and that’s sort of a necessary requirement … to act as representatives, but also for the legislature to function as a representative body.”
However, Flynn said, “People are using it as a way of escaping having to participate in inquiries that may or may not really interfere with their ability to sit in the House…. In some ways, it does feel like it’s being used in a way that’s contrary to the purpose of it.”
Flynn also questioned how parliamentary privilege would apply to the emails and texts Brady was instructed to submit as part of Boghosian’s investigation.
“Presumably, the submission of emails and text messages would not prevent a member from being able to be present in the legislature, although I imagine they would say it could serve as a potential distraction from their legislative duties,” he said. “You could get around the privilege by whoever received the emails. (Brady) can claim privilege over their records, but anybody else’s records would be subject to subpoenas in the same way.”
The Press followed up with Boghosian, asking if had similarly directed Bentley to submit her texts and emails with Brady from the stipulated timeframe. He responded, “I do not regard it as appropriate for me to comment in the media any further regarding my report on Mayor Bentley.”
While Brady has argued that parliamentary privilege is used commonly by her peers, Flynn said it’s difficult to judge how often it is used.
“We don’t know if it’s used frequently because we only see where it’s contested,” he explained. “In terms of Supreme Court of Canada cases, I think there’s been maybe a half a dozen since the 1980s.”
Asserting his belief in accountability as a core of democracy, Flynn added, “I would say that the actions of Mr. Ford and Ms. Jones, as well as the individual in your case (Brady), sort of do seem to be using something that was designed to permit openness to be used in the opposite direction.”
Local reactions to the IC report, use of privilege
President of the local PC Riding Association Phil Hauser shared his thoughts on the report and on Brady’s use of privilege.
He called the charges in the report “very serious” and suggested apologies are due to both constituents “for the money and time that was put into this” and to Martin.
Hauser called invoking parliamentary privilege “very serious” as well, asserting, “If she had no involvement, then nothing to hide, hence no need to call privilege.”
He rejected Brady’s criticism of the IC report, noting that her displeasure with it “doesn’t absolve her from answering questions that the public needs answers to” and arguing her actions don’t clearly demonstrate transparency.
President of the local Liberal Riding Association Allan Wilson agreed that “an explanation is required to be transparent. I would like to know what the questions were that the IC wanted answered.”
Online, opinions have been mixed.
Many of Brady’s supporters defend her choice not to participate, citing concerns with IC reports at large, as well as what they see as an attempt to distract the community from the issue of Empire Communities’ Minister’s Zoning Order (MZO) application in Nanticoke.
Meanwhile, others have demanded accountability and answers from both Bentley and Brady in the wake of the report’s findings.
