Ferguson to blame for lawsuit cost, lawyer argues

Former Saint John councillor John Ferguson is to blame for the millions spent on a five-year lawsuit with the citys pension board, the boards lawyer argued Monday.

Ferguson fought back fiercely after being threatened with legal action by the board in January of 2007, instead of apologizing for things he had said and trying to find some way to work out a solution, Barry Morrison told the court.

"Litigation is extremely expensive and extremely time-consuming," Morrison said. "He's fought it tooth and nail."

Morrison, lead counsel for the pension board, was wrapping up two days of closing arguments in a trial that is now in its twelfth week.

Ferguson is being sued by the board for numerous statements he madeas a city councillor in 2005 and 2006 about poor management of the city's $400-million pension fund.

At the time, the fund was running a deficit of about $45 million. The shortfall has since ballooned to more than $190 million and resulted in significant funding cuts to city services.

Deliberations set to begin Tuesday

Although Justice William Grant was scheduled to give his instructions to the seven-person jury on Monday, closing arguments took longer than expected.

Grant said he will now give his charge Tuesday morning. Deliberations could begin by noon, he said.

Morrison began his closing remarks on Friday, but couldn't finish and resumed arguments Monday morning.

He criticized Ferguson's lawyer Rod Gillis for suggesting during his closing argument that if Ferguson is found guilty he should be made to pay onlyone cent for harming the pension board's reputation, since that is all its worth.

Morrison called that typical of the "utmost contempt" Ferguson displayed for the board and its members during his term in office.

The lawyer urged the jury to find Ferguson guilty and to award substantial damages to teach him a lesson.

Morrison said the lawsuit could have been settled inexpensively years ago if Ferguson had apologized for some of the things he said, but alleged Ferguson preferred to fight.

"He was not concerned with truth or honesty," said Morrison. "He wanted attention, he got attention."

Gillis was allowed a brief rebuttal and told the jury the lawsuit was the pension board's attempt to silence an elected representative who was probing an important public issue.

Gillis said even if councillors get their facts wrong, say strange or prejudicial things, they need to be able to speak their minds without constraint.

"Freely and frankly, boldly and bluntly," he said.