Ombudsman’s report an embarrassment for Region

Niagara Region council received a serious black eye this week with the release of Ontario Ombudsman Paul Dube’s investigation the meeting of Dec. 7, 2017.

Dube’s 60-page report, titled “Press Pause,” deals with the expulsion from the council chambers and regional administrative building of Standard journalist Bill Sawchuk, citizen blogger Preston Haskell, and the seizure of their equipment.

Dube came to the clear conclusion that the Region’s actions that night were “unreasonable, unjust, wrong and contrary to law.” He has called on the Region to publicly apologize to both Sawchuk and Haskell. We think the apology should be made by Regional Chair Alan Caslin.

The events from that meeting were laid bare in Dube’s report. They have been reported upon in detail.

The meeting descended into chaos during an incamera session held to discuss an integrity commissioner report on Coun. Andy Petrowski. Haskell, who had gone to the washroom prior to the start of the closed door session and didn’t know such a session was going to occur, left his recorder running. It’s discovery partway through the in-camera resulted in a rush to judgment by the CAO and chair which in the end led to the serious infringement of constitutional rights — namely the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure — as well as the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of the press.

This was clear from the outset, in initial reporting of the meeting and in the days following. Yet to this day, the Region and many councillors still do not seem to understand the gravity of what occurred and how the rights of two individual Niagara residents were trampled upon.

Dube has included 14 recommendations which are well thought out and should be implemented as followups to what the Region has already done to improve its policies and bylaws.

In December The Standard asked the Region to proffer a public apology to Sawchuk, stipulating it should occur during a televised council meeting.

At the time, the Region’s legal counsel informed us the municipality was declining to do so, citing the ongoing Ombudsman’s investigation as its reason. We hope the report’s release will spur the chair to offer that well deserved apology to a reporter whose reputation and professionalism were called into question. We also expect it to be clear – there should be no phrases, such as “We are sorry for inconveniencing Mr. Sawchuk and Mr. Haskell.”

What occurred was much more than an inconvenience — the rights that the Region’s actions violated are core principles at the heart of our democratic system. They are fundamental to Canada’s governance structure and the protection of this country’s citizens.

The attack on these reputations and rights of these two men was an attack on all Canadians.

As disturbing as the events of Dec. 7 were, equally troubling is the Region’s response to the Ombudsman.

The Region was given 17 days to respond to the report, and while its lawyer and five councillors did so, the Region itself never met to consider the contents. As Dube said in an interview, this is baffling. The Region’s lawyer responded by taking an “adversarial approach” that was counterproductive, according to the report. The lawyer tried to influence the investigative process and challenge the authority of the Ombudsman’s office. We have to assume this was done at the direction of the Region.

This, and some of the report’s findings that directly contradict the Region’s version of events — such as the finding that the CAO personally ordered the equipment seized despite an assertion from the external lawyer that he did not (Haskell’s recording ironically provides the proof ) — leaves us questioning Niagara Region’s administrative direction and leadership.

Answers, as well as apologies, are needed.