Mr. Transparency no help to whistleblowers

The Liberal government is failing to follow its own rules. That’s what auditor general Karen Hogan found when she looked into its plans to recoup billions of dollars in COVID-19 benefits given to ineligible recipients.

But when Hogan reported Tuesday that some $27.4 billion may have gone to ineligible individuals and employers, Revenue Minister Diane Lebouthillier called her figures “exaggerated,” then bizarrely and inaccurately claimed Hogan’s numbers were produced under pressure from the Conservative party.

Oh, how far we’ve fallen from the “sunshine is the best disinfectant” mantra Prime Minister Justin Trudeau used to so often repeat. “Openness and transparency is what Canadians expect,” he told the House of Commons back in 2017. “That is what we will always stand for.”

Everyone — the government, the bureaucracy, the opposition, the public — has an interest in exposing waste, fraud and mismanagement. So why is there such reticence to reform?

Last week, the government moved to respond to an international black mark — Canada’s weak whistleblower law. Treasury Board president Mona Fortier announced an arm’s-length panel to review the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act and make non-binding recommendations to strengthen the process.

In 2021, Canada tied for dead last with Lebanon and Norway in an international survey of whistleblower regimes by the U.S.-based Government Accountability Project and the U.K.-based International Bar Association.

Critics say our federal system discourages whistleblowers from coming forward by limiting who can make disclosures, what they can disclose and to whom they can disclose. The public and even retired public servants have no formal avenue to flag wrongdoing. Bureaucrats who choose to go to the media with their concerns are offered no protection unless it’s an urgent, life-threatening matter.

The Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner — which is charged with protecting whistleblowers and investigating their claims — rarely opens any investigations. Last year, of the 200 disclosures of wrongdoing received, eight investigations were launched, none of which resulted in a finding of wrongdoing; of the 73 reprisal complaints received, five investigations were launched, one case moved to be settled through conciliation.

It is, in the words of government whistleblower Joanna Gualtieri, a “very, very clever” system that gives civil servants the illusion that protection exists for them.

When I asked the prime minister about reforming the law nearly two years ago, Trudeau was noncommittal. I was later told my question caught him off guard. To his credit, he tasked Fortier with reviewing the act, putting it in her mandate letter and devoting funds to it in the spring budget.

But that review — set to take 12 to 18 months — is drawing criticism as yet another delay tactic. For five years now, the Liberal government has sat on a unanimous committee report (yes, even Liberal MPs supported it) that recommended sweeping changes to the act, after hearing from 52 witnesses and considering 12 briefs.

“Why do we need more years and millions of taxpayers dollars wasted on a commission when we have the solution sitting on the shelf ready to go?” Conservative MP Kelly McCauley told the Star.

If the government was serious about making needed changes, it would use the committee’s recommendations, echoed David Hutton, a whistleblower-protection advocate and senior fellow at the Centre for Free Expression at Toronto Metropolitan University.

Hutton also questioned why the government failed to include any former whistleblowers on its panel.

Fortier has no good answer to that question. In an interview, the minister stuck to her talking points: “This will give us a chance and the needed time to look with academia, experts and this task force to … make it right and not necessarily just take one report and say that that’s what is needed,” she said.

Fortier acknowledged the act needs to be “strengthened,” and spoke of “expanding protection to public servants involved,” “increase fines for contraventions” and “extend(ing) the time period for making reprisal complaints.” These are all changes that Bloc Québécois MP Jean-Denis Garon included in a private member’s bill, C-290, which is up for debate next week.

Garon said he sought to reform the ineffective whistleblower law to help ensure the integrity of state institutions — perhaps not something you’d expect to hear from a sovereigntist.

“I read that cross-partisan committee report and sincerely felt we were ready to bring forward a bill,” the newbie MP told me.

He’s cautiously optimistic government will help move his bill to committee for study and didn’t want to appear too critical of the government’s intentions. But towards the end of our interview, Garon noted that MPs have a responsibility to move quickly with the only legislation that’s in front of them.

“The government can consult as much as it wants and improve (the law) afterwards.” But the panel’s review shouldn’t be a reason to squash his bill, he said. “It’s not a stunt we’re doing. It’s a real desire to ameliorate the process.”

If the Liberals are sincere, here’s their opportunity to show it.

Openness and transparency is what Canadians expect. That is what we will always stand for.

PRI ME MINISTER J USTIN TRUDEAU I N 2017