UNION NEEDS TO MAKE CHANGES IF IT CARES ABOUT PUBLIC OPINION

'We cannot say it often enough," declared Rick McIntosh, former ( as of today ) president of the Toronto Police Association, writing his regular column in April's Tour of Duty, the union newsletter.  "Your Association is not in the business of protecting 'bad cops' who give all of us a bad name."

Given the chance to say exactly the same thing yesterday, within minutes of learning that Mr.  McIntosh himself had just been charged with accepting bribes, influence peddling, breach of trust, conspiracy to commit breach of trust and "frauds on government," his successor at the high command of the Toronto police union, Andrew Clarke, demurred.

"The Toronto Police Association maintains a strong position," he said, commenting on the fact that two of the union's nine board members now stand accused of outright corruption under the Police Services Act and the Criminal Code.

"It represents all of its members, it does so with integrity and decency.  We're going to act in a fair and responsible manner," he said.

So Mr.  McIntosh has "stepped aside" and a "group of peers" will decide whether the union will finance his legal defence.  "These are allegations," Mr.  Clarke added.  "Nobody has been convicted of anything."

That nobody would include fellow union board member Mike McCormack, whom the union nevertheless tried to kick off its board even before his colleagues laid several charges against him under the Police Services Act over his involvement with shady car dealer Jeffrey Geller, now deceased.  Concerned not to "rush to judgment" in the criminal matter involving Mr.  McIntosh, the union has done just that in the case against Mike McCormack ( whose brother, William McCormack Jr., was charged with several criminal offences yesterday, jointly with Mr.  McIntosh and others ).

The fact that the union has embarrassingly failed to shed the younger Mr.  McCormack only adds to the confusion.  Its second meeting on the attempted ouster ended without resolution early yesterday, while Mr.  Clarke and his colleagues rushed to police headquarters to defend their credibility in light of the McIntosh charges.

Obviously, some confusion is understandable.  The union is doing what it can to rescue whatever good reputation it may have enjoyed in the past, and its contradictory tactics reflect the difficulty -- some might say impossibility -- of the task.

In the meantime, Mr.  Clarke is keen for the public to know that the union wants to work with retired Judge George Ferguson to implement new safeguards against police misconduct.

It spelled out its position in a long article in Tour of Duty, authored by none other than Rick McIntosh, that denounces the Ferguson report and dismisses the need for many of the reforms it recommended, especially the implementation of drug and alcohol testing and "a service policy to disclose ALLEGED police misconduct and financial background checks."

Writing on behalf of the police union, Mr.  McIntosh described financial background checks -- recommended in order to detect large debts that might induce officers into wrongdoing -- as "abhorrent to me."

"It is absolutely none of the service's concern how you spend your money," he wrote.

"If you spend all of your income on travel or fast cars, that is your business and we intend to fight to keep it that way."

Mr.  McIntosh's successors -- possibly the last ones standing once the dust has settled -- might want to rethink that position in light of recent events, especially if they want to be taken seriously in the weeks and months ahead.  At the very least, they might consider changing the byline.

And for their part, the union members might consider changing the entire executive -- at least if they value public opinion.  Right now, it is almost impossible for any fair-minded citizen not to be skeptical about a single word any of the incumbents -- whomever they may be -- might say.