What happened to Harper's cheques for whistleblowers?

In the 2006 election, the Conservatives talked some good talk about whistleblowers. They got a whistleblowing former federal civil servant to run for them as a candidate, and they made protecting whistleblowers a key part of their election platform.

Here’s what they promised:

 

They won that election, and several since. And how are they treating whistleblowers? Here’s just the latest of many examples:

A federal fraud investigator has been suspended without pay, after she leaked documents showing that investigators had to cut people off their employment insurance benefits in order to meet quotas.

Sylvie Therrien told CBC News that she and other investigators were given a target to recover nearly $500,000 in EI benefits every year.

"It just was against my values, harassing claimants… trying to penalize them in order to save money for the government. We had quotas to meet every month," Therrien said.

According to their own policy, not only should the Conservatives not be suspending Therrien without pay, they should be protecting her… AND writing her a cheque.

This is far from an isolated situation, however. Harper’s war on whistleblowers is long-standing. There was Linda Keen, fired as head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for daring to raise issues of nuclear safety. There’s the muzzling of federal scientists, who can no longer speak to the media on routine matters of research, for concern their science could contradict the Conservative worldview.

And then there's the Agriculture Canada whistleblower who raised serious concerns about food safety. Not only did he face punishment, but Gerry Ritz -- lauded last week for his long tenure in the portfolio -- praised the person who leaked the whistleblower's identity.

Indeed, it seems most federal civil servants have gotten the message: if you value your job, keep your head down and your mouth shut:

Federal public servants remain fearful of disclosing wrongdoing, years after Stephen Harper's Conservatives rode to power promising protection for whistleblowers.

A government-commissioned study completed in December 2011 found that most federal workers see job reprisals as the likely outcome of any effort to expose a wrong.

In fact, bureaucrats said they believe that it's typically the whistleblower who gets punished.

Maybe the cheques are in the mail?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Munir Sheikh, Tony Clement and the war with Eastasia

The two figures at the heart of the census brouhaha – Industry Minister Tony Clement and now former Statistics Canada boss Munir Sheikh – actually have a lot in common. But it’s the one major difference that really sets them apart.

Sheikh resigned yesterday on a point of principle, his position having been made largely untenable by the government and the minister his department falls under, Tony Clement. It was about more, I believe, than just the wrong-headed Conservative decision to end the mandatory long-form census and replace it with a voluntary one that will produce useless data for more money. If a senior civil servant resigned every time their political masters told them to do something stupid, there’d be no one left.

As important was Clement deliberately misrepresenting the advice he had received from and the position of Statistics Canada on the census changes. Clement tried to throw Sheikh’s department under the bus to deflect some of the blowback he was taking, knowing full well the civil servants weren’t in a position to publicly respond and correct the record; they'd essentially be calling BS on the government. Sheikh’s choice was either let Clement destroy the department’s hard-earned reputation for excellence and competence by letting the Clement-created contention they'd failed Grade 11 math stand, or resign on principle. He choose the honourable path, and also set a standard for the public service.

Which brings us back to Clement. What do he and Sheikh have in common? Well, it would seem they both agree going to a voluntary long-form is stupid, and bad policy.

Another source said that Clement had, in fact, advised against the decision, as had Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. Both were overruled. “It was a one-man decision,” Harper’s.

“The PMO thought nobody would care,” added the source. But now, it’s said to be stunned by the range and depth of the backlash, from right across the political spectrum.

But while Sheikh was willing to fall on his sword over principle, and to protect his integrity and that of his department at the cost of his job, Clement was not. His ministerial salary, car and driver, Challenger Jet access, and ability to sprinkle taxpayer dollars across his riding like Santa Claus was more important to him. Asked by the Prime Minister to implement policy he knew was badly flawed, he could have said no. He could have followed in Sheikh's path, in the path of Michael Chong, and stood on principle. But that's not easy.

Instead, Steamboat Tony is out in public and on Twitter making a fool of himself, resorting to nonsensical arguments and mythical Twitter supporters as he tries to lamely defend policy he himself knows to be wrong, all to keep his cushy job and please his political master. It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad, but that’s too much the norm in modern politics.

Meanwhile, the Harper government has had Sheikh’s resignation letter disappeared from the Statistics Canada web site (you can still read it here).

And Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Even Ottawa's fiction is dry

I’m sure Ottawa civil servants find this civil service fiction series in the Ottawa Citizen to be riveting stuff. Me, not so much.

E.X. . What's old is new again
The ease of transition from a Once New Government to a Re-elected Once New Government is often a matter of experience

E.X., Citizen Special
Published: Tuesday, November 04, 2008

It was two days after the federal election and Gérald, an Assistant Deputy Minister of Policy in a government department of The System, was thinking about transition, transition from the Once New Government to the Re-elected Once New Government.
(more)

I did find this bit amusing though, and apropos for the Stephen Harper “Once New” government:

"Minister, given the lack of policy direction that we can find that specifically affects our department, are there any priority areas you would like us to focus on? What would the government like to accomplish here?"

The Minister paused and said a silent prayer to himself: "God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference." He looked at Camille.

"You know," he said, "that's a very good question. Let me call the Prime Minister ..."

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers