(An editorial comment by Zygmunt M. Gorski)

Few structures in society are as important as a reliable system of justice. In the end, that reliability rests on the wisdom, honesty, independence and foresight of a very few individuals whom we call judges. However it also rests upon others working within it and under the scrutiny of those judges. Over a number of years I have appeared as an expert witness where, on rare occasions, but disturbingly too many, the actions of members of the court and those appearing before a court, have been, to use the least offensive term, inappropriate. At no point or time could I see a remedy to this because the proper functioning of the courts was not under my control or even my influence. Only yesterday if I had raised my concerns my words would be used at my next court appearance by an opposing lawyer as an indication of my bias and perhaps even my contempt of the court. It is not surprising how often criticisms that could be beneficial to the functioning of the courts never see the light of day in this environment.

However, today is a new day. The new Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada made an important comment that few others could make. Chief Justice Richard Wagner acknowledged that “the system for dealing with complaints of serious misconduct by judges needs an overhaul” (Canadian Press). He also reportedly pointed out “It has become increasingly evident that our procedures for dealing with serious judicial conduct complaints are outmoded, slow and opaque”. He also indicated “While Canadians expect transparency and accountability, we continue to operate under 1970s models of judicial administration”.

Transparency is a very large word. Without it many inappropriate actions are capable of being hidden. I do not expect that all the problems of the courtroom can be corrected via some magical potion. And not all those problems can be attributed to judges. However transparency is the one ingredient that can play a very large role in exposing those problems and therefore preventing them. I am hopeful that Chief Justice Wagner can achieve this one important change.

I am obligated to attend trials and be an unbiased reporter of truthful facts. I understand that duty clearly and whatever else takes place in a courtroom will not sway me from that commitment. It would make my work easier however if the courtroom became less of an uncontrolled battleground of twisted reasoning, as I have sometimes had the misfortune to observe.  In the present system that exists two opposing sides often make ridiculous pronouncements. It not only requires the judge’s intelligence to cut through this maze, but it also requires a focus on careful listening,  and a non-egotistical and non-prejudicial temperament to correctly guide the court to justice. I cannot say that I have always seen this happen.

In the fall of 2017 the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released figures for the number of roadway deaths that occurred in the U.S. in 2016. 37,461 persons were reportedly killed which represented an increase of 5.6 percent over 2015. This is a concern because, since the mid-1970s traffic deaths have been plummeting except for 2015 when alarm bells went off due to a surprising increase. Now the news indicates that 2016 is yet another increase over 2015. So why is this happening?

NHTSA provided some clues. Motorcyclist, cyclist and pedestrian fatalities all showed major increases. However they do not tell us whether these deaths are related to an increased danger to these segments of society or whether there is simply an increased exposure due to larger numbers of these groups in the roadway environment.

Are there greater differences in the types of motorcycles scooters and e-bikes an there used to be?

Throughout recent years cars and light trucks have become technologically more advanced. Electronic stability control was supposed to reduce a vast number of loss-of-control crashes. Is that what the national statistics show?

Advanced air bags situated throughout the vehicle interior were supposed to reduce fatalities. Did this actually occurred?

When modern vehicles became equipped with a vast array of electronics did this complicate the situation? Are there more fires in modern vehicles due to damage of these electronic components?

There are many questions that need answers.

Are pedestrians becoming more distracted in traffic? Is there vision of traffic reduced because of what they are wearing?

What would make a cyclist venture out on a cold and snowy day and into heavy traffic? Whatever the reason it is becoming more common on Ontario roadways.

While many were happy when roads in North America began to become more cyclist-friendly, no one considered what would happen in northern cities where snowfall is common and cyclists suddenly decide to venture out. In warm months some cyclists could avoid dangerous sections of roads by simply riding on the sidewalk and then returning to the road when the dangerous area was passed. But when heavy snow falls the sidewalk is no longer an option. Many cyclists now plow through the narrowed lanes of a road even in those dangerous sections and collisions are only inevitable. Unfortunately many collisions involve sideswipes of the cycle where the driver of a motor vehicle might not even detect that contact was made. In some instances drivers become charged with a hit-&-run due such glancing blows while in other cases collisions could even be deadly to the cyclist. It is a problem that appears to be on the rise.

What will we do if this Carillion dinosaur becomes extinct? Will your local grandma scramble onto Highway 401 and begin clearing it with a shovel?Privatization of the Province of Ontario’s road maintenance was sold to the public as a cost saving and the public swallowed it like a hungry fish. As time passed, the initial large number of contractors that held those maintenance contracts became diminished as the Government slowly transferred those contracts to a smaller number of large firms. Presently, a multi-national British firm, Carillion, now has most of the contracts in Ontario. The problem is that this week the parent company fell in a financial collapse leaving the Canadian arm in limbo along with 6000 Canadian jobs. While Carillion has assured the public that road maintenance will continue it leaves the question of what the Ontario public “bought and got” due to the privatization of it road maintenance.

When the Ontario government had its own snow plows and other maintenance equipment there was no concern over what might happen  to a distance multi-national company, maintenance would continue. If the Canadian arm of Carillion were to fold what would happen to the maintenance of Ontario’s roads? Could the government send out its military to force road maintenance personnel to continue their work? Likely not. But the point is clear. The public was blindsided over deals made by certain government personnel and politicians.

In another matter, Aecon, a massive construction and engineering firm operating in Canada is recently going through the final stages of being purchased by a Chinese multi-national construction firm, China Communications Construction Co., which is a company owned by the country of China. The problem is that Aecon also won the Canadian government contact to assess the safe transportation of nuclear waste from its nuclear energy generating stations to a permanent underground facility, most likely near the Bruce generating station near Kincardine, Ontario. Again, does no one see a problem with China’s ability to influence the safe transportation of nuclear waste in Canada? Should that assessment not be carried out by a Canadian firm and Canadian experts?

Gorski Consulting was part of a group of experts assembled by Dillon Consulting, a Canadian engineering firm, to compete against Aecon for that contract. There were no problems from our viewpoint when that contract was not given to Dillon as this would have been a side-line to our regular work and could have taken us away from our regular clients for a substantial time. However, for the independent assessment of the safety of the Canadian public, we now recognize the jeopardy that could exist when China could be the one pulling the strings on its new puppet.

In totality, various deals are taking place continually in the world marketplace that have an impact on the daily activities of the general public in many countries. Canada is no exception. There is a necessity to be alert to these goings on as they can influence our communal safety. The inhabitants of Canada and Ontario should be the ones to decide how their safety will be assessed and protected.