PARLIAMENT HILL—Auditor General Sheila Fraser issued a damning report of former Public Sector Integrity Commissioner (PSIC) Christiane Ouimet that alleges she abused her staff in exactly the manner her office was responsible to investigate.
The report found that not only did Ouimet’s office fail to carry out its duty to investigate complaints of wrongdoing and reprisal in the public sector, but that she had carried out reprisals of her own.
“I find this obviously very troubling and I think very disappointing,” Fraser said in Ottawa Thursday.
In a section of the report titled “The Commissioner engaged in inappropriate conduct,” it notes that former PSIC employees described the commissioner “yelling, swearing, and berating PSIC employees, at times in front of co-workers.”
Ouiment even left a paper trail of her misdeeds including notes, emails, and electronic documents on PSIC hard drives.
Some current and former staff also told the AG’s office that Ouimet wanted to push some PSIC employees to quit and over two years, over half the commission’s staff did, including a majority of the staff in senior positions that reported directly to Ouimet, noted the report. Many said they left because of the Commissioner’s conduct.
But Ouimet didn’t stop once employees did leave, the report uncovered she continued to haunt one former staff up to eight months after he left, believing he had cooperated with the AG’s investigation.
Ouimet compiled a binder of information on the former employee, even breaching privacy laws to dig up dirt. She then circulated information about his character, health and performance to others when he left.
The report notes that of 156 files brought to the commissioner, only three were investigated and none went further than that. But after the AG’s office reviewed 86 of those cases, they concluded the PSIC had not done enough work to dismiss them.
“In our view, a more thorough approach to these files was warranted before decisions to refuse to investigate, or to dismiss, these disclosures and complaints could be reached,” said the report. It also noted that many former staff reported the commissioner was reluctant to investigate complaints and many investigative and legal staff raised concerns about her impartiality.
“There are two troubling issues: the way the staff in that office were treated but also the way that she didn’t carry out her mandate.”
Fraser described the situation “disturbing” but said it should not be generalized.
She referred to concerns the situation could cast a shadow over parliamentary officers like herself who are granted special independence to ensure they can hold the government to account.
“I think we have a duty to ensure that parliamentarians and the public are given assurance that we are carrying out our mandate as parliament intended, that we are running our offices, treating our people appropriately.”
She said she has approached her fellow officers of parliament to look at how that can be done.
That said, those officers are still accountable to parliament, so they are not without oversight, she said.
Under the act governing the PSIC, the AG’s office was charged with the responsibility to investigate complaints against the commission but it prevented Fraser’s investigators from interviewing former public servants, those with inside knowledge of abuses and less threatened by possible retaliation.
Fraser said that is a major limitation of the act that will need to be reviewed.
To get around that limitation, she turned her investigation into a performance audit of the PSIC and did it under the authority of the Auditor General Act, but that meant that those that cooperated with the investigation would not get the same protection from reprisals as they would have under the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.
Another limitation is that the PSDP Act gives its commissioner sole authority to refer reprisal complaints to the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal for consideration, but in this case, it was the commissioner accused of carrying out reprisals.
The report found that not only did Ouimet’s office fail to carry out its duty to investigate complaints of wrongdoing and reprisal in the public sector, but that she had carried out reprisals of her own.
“I find this obviously very troubling and I think very disappointing,” Fraser said in Ottawa Thursday.
In a section of the report titled “The Commissioner engaged in inappropriate conduct,” it notes that former PSIC employees described the commissioner “yelling, swearing, and berating PSIC employees, at times in front of co-workers.”
Ouiment even left a paper trail of her misdeeds including notes, emails, and electronic documents on PSIC hard drives.
Some current and former staff also told the AG’s office that Ouimet wanted to push some PSIC employees to quit and over two years, over half the commission’s staff did, including a majority of the staff in senior positions that reported directly to Ouimet, noted the report. Many said they left because of the Commissioner’s conduct.
But Ouimet didn’t stop once employees did leave, the report uncovered she continued to haunt one former staff up to eight months after he left, believing he had cooperated with the AG’s investigation.
Ouimet compiled a binder of information on the former employee, even breaching privacy laws to dig up dirt. She then circulated information about his character, health and performance to others when he left.
The report notes that of 156 files brought to the commissioner, only three were investigated and none went further than that. But after the AG’s office reviewed 86 of those cases, they concluded the PSIC had not done enough work to dismiss them.
“In our view, a more thorough approach to these files was warranted before decisions to refuse to investigate, or to dismiss, these disclosures and complaints could be reached,” said the report. It also noted that many former staff reported the commissioner was reluctant to investigate complaints and many investigative and legal staff raised concerns about her impartiality.
“There are two troubling issues: the way the staff in that office were treated but also the way that she didn’t carry out her mandate.”
Fraser described the situation “disturbing” but said it should not be generalized.
She referred to concerns the situation could cast a shadow over parliamentary officers like herself who are granted special independence to ensure they can hold the government to account.
“I think we have a duty to ensure that parliamentarians and the public are given assurance that we are carrying out our mandate as parliament intended, that we are running our offices, treating our people appropriately.”
She said she has approached her fellow officers of parliament to look at how that can be done.
That said, those officers are still accountable to parliament, so they are not without oversight, she said.
Under the act governing the PSIC, the AG’s office was charged with the responsibility to investigate complaints against the commission but it prevented Fraser’s investigators from interviewing former public servants, those with inside knowledge of abuses and less threatened by possible retaliation.
Fraser said that is a major limitation of the act that will need to be reviewed.
To get around that limitation, she turned her investigation into a performance audit of the PSIC and did it under the authority of the Auditor General Act, but that meant that those that cooperated with the investigation would not get the same protection from reprisals as they would have under the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.
Another limitation is that the PSDP Act gives its commissioner sole authority to refer reprisal complaints to the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal for consideration, but in this case, it was the commissioner accused of carrying out reprisals.
