Whistleblower Advocates Call for Reforms as AG Launches Probe
or
Another Extraordinary Example of the Façade of Accountability
in Canadian ‘Democratic’ Governance
© 2010 Brad Kempo B.A. LL.B.
Barrister & Solicitor
Two centuries of nepotism and patronage and then the 20th century being dominated by the Liberal Party produced a non-democratic paradigm of governance operating behind a façade of one during the early years of the Trudeau era. Then the closet authoritarians geo-politically ‘married’ Chinese totalitarians in the late 1970s.
The Federal Court lawsuit the RCC founder prosecuted beginning in 2002 – dismissed on a nominal technicality by Trudeau political advisor and Chrétien close friend Chief Justice Lutfy. The edification of three levels of government, including opposition parties, and the entire administration of justice about unlawful and unconstitutional Chinese interests between August 2007 and July 2009 – hostility, non-cooperation, reform sabotage and character assassination. Triggering all other accountability mechanisms in the country during 2008 and 2009 – every single one failing. See a pattern?
The evidence really is overwhelming how much accountability institutions were undermined and co-opted into perpetuating all kinds of impropriety and immorality. Now there’s more proof – as astounding as corroborative when viewed in conjunction with everything done and observed over the last eight years that produced no reform or accountability. The cumulative failure of those efforts: emboldening malfeasant parties in the public and private sectors and thereby strengthening institutionalized corruption and criminality in Canadian governance.
The Epoch Times’ nationally circulated October 28th front page article exposes accountability in Canada under the Conservatives as a massive sham. The Liberals were booted out of office by the electorate after 13 consecutive years over the sponsorship scandal and the Conservatives offered to take the reigns of federal governance promising to address all kinds of dysfunctionalities. They brought in the Federal Accountability Act, 2006 c.9 – its election platform’s primary initiative:
Federal Accountability Act Introduced
Office of the Prime Minister
April 11, 2006
Canada's New Government today introduced the proposed Federal Accountability Act to restore Canadians' trust in government.
"With the Federal Accountability Act, we are creating a new culture of accountability that will change forever the way business is done in Ottawa," Prime Minister Harper said.
The Federal Accountability Act and Action Plan would:
[…]
ensure people who see problems in government know they can speak up by providing iron-clad protection for whistleblowers.
[…]
These measures will strengthen and streamline government so it can function more efficiently," Prime Minister Harper said. "We are following through on our commitment to deliver good, clean government to Canadians."
It’s now evident nothing but the face of the political landscape changed in January 2006.
Whistleblower Advocates Call for Reforms as AG Launches Probe
Day says public sector integrity office safe for whistleblowers to bring forward their concerns
by Joan Delaney
October 28, 2010
Something went wrong somewhere. The legislation that was touted by the government as providing ironclad protection for whistleblowers when it was introduced has found zero evidence of wrongdoing in three years, despite disclosures from public servants.
Now, with the sudden resignation last week of Christiane Ouimet, Canada’s first federal public sector integrity commissioner, whistleblower advocates are calling for an overhaul of the legislation to make it more effective.
The Public Sector Integrity Commissioner’s office confirmed last week that Ouimet had retired on Monday, four years before the end of her seven-year mandate, and that Auditor General Sheila Fraser is investigating the commission.
The AG’s office is also investigating a complaint it received from a member of Ouimet’s staff, as well as the high number of resignations at the commission—18 of the 22 staff members allegedly quit in less than a year, according to news reports.
Shortly before she resigned Ouimet had published her third annual report, which found no instances of wrongdoing in the 56 cases brought before her in 2009-2010.
Of 170 disclosures of wrongdoing since the office of the integrity commissioner was created in 2007, nine investigations were begun and four completed, but no instances of wrongdoing were found.
“That’s an awful lot of people who have been left in limbo, and a lot of wrongdoers running loose,” says David Hutton, executive director of FAIR, an independent watchdog that supports whistleblowers in the public service.
At a press conference Wednesday on Parliament Hill, an alliance of more than 30 accountability groups called on Prime Minister Stephen Harper and opposition leaders to appoint a “competent commissioner” and to undertake sweeping reforms of the legislation.
They also want an independent review of the 170 claims of wrongdoing and 58 claims of reprisal that were brought before Ouimet.
“We predicted that the system would fail even before it was passed into law,” Hutton says.
[...]
Stockwell Day, president of the Treasury Board Secretariat, the body responsible for the commission, is not commenting to media during the AG’s investigation. However, he said in a statement that the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act has strengthened protection for public servants.
[...]
After a complaint is investigated, it is up to the commissioner to decide if a referral to the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal (PSDPT) is warranted—something that never came to pass even once in Ouimet’s three years as integrity commissioner.
“[The PSDPT] has a budget of $1.8 million and a permanent staff of seven people and it has never sat in three years. Because the commissioner has not ever found a case of reprisal, she has never referred anyone to the tribunal,” says Hutton.
[...]
“If this commissioner had just nailed one department for wrongdoing, there would have been ripples run through the whole public service and a lot of people would be suddenly upping their guard and wondering if they could continue getting away with something,” he said.
Never-used whistleblower panel has an $8.1-million budget Tribunal hasn't heard a single case since it was set up in 2007 by Amy Minsky
Vancouver Sun
October 26, 2010
A little-known, never-used government tribunal will spend as much as $8.1 million of taxpayers' money by the end of 2012-13, federal documents show.
The Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal was set up in 2007 to protect public servants from retaliation after reporting immoral or illegal activities in government. Since then, it hasn't heard a single case.
The fact that the tribunal hasn't been used comes to light following the sudden departure on Oct. 18 of Christiane Ouimet, the first federal public sector integrity commissioner, while her office was being investigated by Auditor-general Sheila Fraser.
The tribunal would take cases referred by Ouimet's office. In three years, the commissioner didn't find any wrongdoing in any of the 170 complaints her office received.
Fifty-eight whistleblowers complained to the commissioner's office since 2007-2008, saying they were mistreated or violated after filing a report. The commissioner launched only four investigations as a consequence of those complaints, and only two have been completed.
Because neither had findings of reprisal, the tribunal has never been referred a case.
"It's clearly a waste of money," said David Hutton, executive director with the Federal Accountability Initiative for Reform, a registered charity advocating for whistleblower protection. "This whole expensive system has achieved absolutely nothing. In fact, it has made things worse."
Hutton said the tribunal gives whistleblowers an "illusion of protection" when the reality is that civil servants are left without recourse after filing a complaint to the integrity commissioner about irresponsible, immoral or illegal government activities.
