 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PDF version of this Page | Word version of this page IntroductionThis website tells the story of my whistleblowing at Transport Canada, and the reprisal and cover-up which followed. I wish I could say that my case is isolated, but my reading and my experience as Secretary of Canadians for Accountability tells me that it is not. This page provides both an introduction and my conclusions about my ordeal. ContentsEvent Summary
Event Summary
Visit the Events page for a full description of my case, with supporting documentation. Status of Concerns Brought ForwardThe issues I raised can be grouped into three categories: regulatory, operational and ethics/management. Summarized, Canadians should be concerned about:
While the second may seem more of an organizational problem, it should be remembered that organizations where misconduct has become accepted practice are less efficient and much less likely to serve the public interest. Of 31 issues I brought forward, only six were investigated. Eight (not necessarily the same ones) were later addressed. This assessment is based on my reading of documentation obtained through Access to Information Act requests. Visit the Issues page for a breakdown and analysis of the issues. Comment on Transport Canada's Response to my ReportThe response by Transport Canada executives was immediately hostile. This is, perhaps, to be expected, as former Deputy Minister Louis Ranger immediately assigned it to Laureen Kinney, former Director General of Marine Security, and Marc Grégoire, Assistant Deputy Minister of Safety and Security. Both were implicated in the report. There were three main thrusts: formal reprisal, with the intent of disciplining me, informal reprisal, with the intent of isolating and discrediting me, and cover-up, which involved self-conducted evaluations and investigations. As you read the narrative and documents on the Events page, you will notice that at no point is it considered that I might be right: rather, the initial assumption is that I am not only wrong, but completely wrong. In addition, I am characterized as malicious, and it is alleged that I am trying to disguise a personal issue as a whistleblowing issue (while still maintaining that I am wrong). Further, I was informed by my union representative that Mr. Grégoire had instructed human resources personnel "to have no mercy" on me. In one document, Ms. Kinney makes clear the objectives of the management response:
Another document also sets out attacking my credibility as an objective. At no point has any individual at Transport Canada asked me for what I would term neutral or friendly input or clarification on any of issues. All questions centred on my conduct and who might have helped me in my report. My only opportunity for input has been through a Deloitte and Touche investigation, which largely omitted operational and regulatory issues. Transport Canada's response to my report cost in excess of $200,000. Its legal costs likely exceed that, and the administrative costs of mobilizing so many resources probably runs into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Nearly all of that could have been avoided by simply taking the appropriate action when issues first arose.
Comment on Completeness of DocumentationAs you read, keep in mind that the documents I present were mainly obtained through Access to Information Act requests. It appears that management has been doing everything in its power to frustrate these requests, which have, when they included useful content, substantiated my concerns. One example is the use of government-issued taxi chits for personal purposes. Tactics use to frustrated my requests include delays of over a year (which were then extended), the loss of requests, the failure to forward my requests to the appropriate people in the organization, protests that requests were too broad and, of course, the broad and illegitimate use of exemptions under the Access to Information Act. I also believe that numerous documents have been destroyed or simply not disclosed. One individual indicated that he was instructed not to reply to a particular request. Assuming that the department and (and the Treasury Board of Canada) has only released information deemed "safe", one can assume that far more incriminating information awaits discovery. Implications for Whistleblowers in the Federal Government
My inability to find a way to stop the reprisal through internal administrative and external legal means sets the stage for more reprisals against whistleblowers in the federal government. Indeed, federal government whistleblowers are in more danger than they were five years ago. Consider:
Canadians will not be well served by this state of affairs. As we have seen in the case of Richard Colvin and Luc Pomerleau (who spoke out against reductions in food inspections prior to the 2008 listeriosis outbreak which killed 22 people), whistleblowers serve an important role. My FightI speculate whether the strength of the response to my whistleblowing was because I had violated rigid hierarchical organization norms. One individual stated that he had never heard of such a thing happening before - meaning the submission of a set of concerns in a report format - and was clearly appalled. The sentiment was shared by others. The implicit message appears to be that subordinates do not have the right to question the actions, decisions, judgement or behaviours of their managers. In effect, Transport Canada management appears to believe that subordinates must accept routine mismanagement and unethical behaviour. If any individual chooses to advance a more serious concern, they must do so through a mechanism which informs management of a complaint but requires no action. And if an individual is remains persistent, then he or she becomes the problem. None of this is accidental, nor is it original. It is why most whistleblowers live lives of quiet desperation. They are abandoned by people they thought friends and colleagues, harassed at work and pushed from their jobs. Frequently, even home is no refuge. Spouses who cannot understand may be angry, and the stresses of the reprisals can tear apart marriages and destroy the health of the whistleblower. Outsiders, unaware of the context or the damage that can be done, frequently see them as Quixotic at best, and "a little bit nuts" at worst. They are not, and if they appear so, it is only because they are determined and are perhaps less cynical than most. That, and much fighting wears them down. Who wouldn't be a little bit obsessed after fighting asymmetrical warfare for years? As for me, my fight is over. I cannot continue this anymore. I also cannot advise anyone to blow the whistle in Canadian government - at any level. It is simply too unsafe. While the Public Service Integrity Office refuses to investigate any complaints, and individuals such as Mr. Grégoire are free to abuse employees and the public trust without any accountability for their actions, it would be very, very foolish for anyone to try. Rather, concerned individuals must approach outside agencies such as Canadians for Accountability with their information. Visit their website for more information on how to do so. I do not intend to stop advocating for whistleblowers and drawing attention to the abuses I and others have suffered, however, and hope that others will join the fight for real protections for whistleblowers. Silence only gives the corrupt and incompetent a licence to continue.
Site created: May 25, 2010 | Last update: June 8, 2010 |
||||||||
