|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parliament needs to act on integrity
Allan Cutler and Haiyan Zhang
For whistleblowers who have been watching with disappointment the failure of the Public Service Integrity Commission, the auditor general's finding that the former commissioner Christiane Ouimet acted without integrity came as little surprise. The AG said bluntly that "the commissioner's behaviour and actions do not pass the test of public scrutiny and are inappropriate and unacceptable for a public servant-most notably for the agent of Parliament specifically charged with the responsibility of upholding integrity."
However, of greater concern to us is how the government and Parliament failed in their oversight of an organization mandated with much-needed action on safeguarding public integrity.
The AG's report on Ms. Ouimet's treatment of the commission's employees read like a typical case of reprisal that whistleblowers are subjected to on a regular basis for simply doing their job. The commissioner retaliated against her employees using the very same tactics whistleblowers are subjected to. For example, the AG pointed out that Ms. Ouimet removed employees from the decision-making process and communications network, illegally disclosed personal information and reached to another department in order to punish the employee.
Such reprisals mirror the experience of other whistleblowers cases. Whistleblower and veterans' advocate Sean Bruyea's personal files were distributed by Veteran Affairs Canada to hundreds of people. Transport Canada's reprisal of Ian Bron, who reported on public safety threats, followed him to his new position at Public Works. Similarly, whistleblowers have come to Canadians for Accountability with stories of being isolated, demoted or even forced out of employment after reporting on the wrongdoings of their managers.
The irony that the integrity commissioner displayed no integrity was never lost on those of us who have been following Ms. Ouimet's dismal performance for the past three years. We have consistently and publicly criticized her failure to protect whistleblowers. On many occasions we also reached out directly to her office to offer recommendations for change. In fact, on a very telling and perhaps prophetic occasion, after repeated requests from us, Canadians for Accountability made a presentation to the Commissioner's Office on whistleblowing, the only person absent from the meeting was the commissioner herself.
We were not alone in our disappointment of Ms. Ouimet and her office. Dr. William De Maria, an Australian expert in whistleblowing, met with Ms. Ouimet as the commission's guest two years ago. His assessment, and we quote with his full permission, was blunt and brutal: "I found her Machiavellian, insincere, ignorant about the integrity field, opportunistic and heavily into her own career."
Whistleblowers fight an uphill battle for real action for accountability. What saddens us more is the fact that the government and politicians from all parties sat idly by as the Commissioner's Office issued three annual reports which amounted to nothing but platitude. With an annual budget of $6.5-million and more than 20 fulltime staff, in over three years in operation, PSIC did not uncover a single case of wrongdoing or uncover one single valid whistleblower. In answer to complaints about the lack of results, the PSIC made revealing excuses: "We are not a representative of nor advocate for any individual; rather, we are an advocate for the public interest" and for "maintaining confidence in public institutions," it asserted. This alone was a betrayal of public integrity and of whistleblowers.
Such reports should have set off alarms amongst all political parties who voted unanimously for the Accountability Act because it promised minimal yet imperative protection of whistleblowers. However, our repeated appeals through correspondence, or by public opinion letters, have consistently fallen on deaf ears.
The AG's report should serve not only as an indictment of Ouimet's abysmal failure another colossal waste of public resources, but, perhaps more importantly, a wakeup call for the government and Parliament.
Whistleblowers' demand that the new commissioner be selected using a more transparent process, is required to have a more appropriate background for the job, be a person of integrity and have a strong belief and commitment to public integrity and the protection of whistleblowers. Preferably, such an individual should from outside of the cadre of senior bureaucrats.
Meanwhile, changes must be made to the Accountability Act to eliminate loopholes, expand the mandate of the commissioner, increase compensation for whistleblowers and penalties for those making reprisals, and allow for more proactive investigations.
If the government and Parliament are sincere about accountability and transparency, then it must pursue real action. Without real action, more whistleblower lives will be ruined and scandals will surface again. Whistleblowers deserve real protection and Canadians should not have to wait until another AG investigation for a commissioner with integrity. The time for real action is long overdue.
Published in the Hill Times December 20, 2010
Created: January 16, 2011
Last updated: January 16, 2011
