Private complaints, public response a challenge

Transparency in reporting amounts to good politics, MUN professor says

The challenge right now for Commissioner for Legislative Standards Bruce Chaulk, in addition to investigating complaints of misconduct by elected officials, is making private consultation and investigation possible, while also satisfying demand for public recommendations and response.

The tug of war between confidentiality/privacy and transparency/publicity has found a balance under other investigators: the province’s auditor general, information and privacy commissioner, and child and youth advocate, to name a few.

Sensitive reports from all of these offices have been made public, providing essential information, while still protecting the identities of individuals and other details as required.

But their work often begins under a cloak of confidentiality, and away from the spotlight.

Chaulk has noted that’s not the case for the recent concerns from the halls of Confederation Building and in the House of Assembly, specifically the complaints to his office involving Liberal MHAS Eddie Joyce and Dale Kirby.

At a House of Assembly Management Commission meeting last Wednesday night, he said he encourages elected members to come to him with any potential breach of the members’ code of conduct, but he’d generally prefer quiet referrals and private meetings, and no public notice of investigations as has recently occurred.

However it begins, his own abilities to investigate and the powers of the office were fully endorsed by members during the management commission meeting. Individual commission members gave credit for his professionalism and even proven ability for his office to keep matters confidential.

“I would never have any doubt in confidentiality in going to the commissioner for legislative standards,” said NDP MHA Lorraine Michael, who offered a nugget of information she hoped would provide confidence to other members of the House: that she went to the office, Chaulk’s predecessor, “a couple of times” with different issues in privacy.

Chaulk admitted to the commission he struggles with the fact there are public comments and news reports around the matters he’s currently investigating.

“Generally our office doesn’t report (publicly) on files that we’re investigating because they may actually go nowhere, depending on the circumstances involved,” he said.

On transparency, the standing question is where the results from current investigations will go.

Reports from Chaulk’s office are not automatically put to the public. It remains unclear at this point where reports on the complaints against Joyce and Kirby will be sent. If they are made available to the public, what level of detail will be included?

In a statement May 2, Chaulk confirmed he would conduct two separate investigations on the request of Premier Dwight Ball. There are different means of sparking an investigation by Chaulk, including an individual MHA coming to him, a vote of the House asking for an investigation or him choosing independently to undertake an investigation. In the fourth case, with a referral by the premier, the report is, by legislation, to go back to the premier and complainants.

Progressive Conservative MHA Paul Davis suggested, while posing questions to Chaulk, reporting to the premier leaves concerns around transparency and access for public follow-up.

In an interview last Tuesday with The Telegram, Amanda Bittner, an associate professor in Memorial University’s department of political science, said it’s important that information coming out of the investigations be offered to the public. She suggested a good political move right now would be to take politics out of the process as much as possible.

She used the example of CBC’S review of complaints levelled against former radio host Jian Ghomeshi to show the effectiveness of a thirdparty review of complaints by a respected expert, with a public report. The Ghomeshi report withheld details for privacy reasons, Bittner noted, while still offering the public a clear view of the problem and recommended solutions.

“To put it aside and give it to somebody else who has expertise in this area, who will do it publicly and independently and then have the results be binding on the legislature, would be the best way to take politics out of the process,” she said.

Chaulk could continue at the reins, bringing in harassment and bullying experts to assist, Bittner said, but the public needs a clear look at the cases, rather than a situation where the government has the option to close ranks and limit information.

“Opening it up, naming (any) problem and being willing to accept criticism for being an organization that has that kind of a problem means that you can move forward,” she said.

At the management commission meeting, Chaulk mentioned he was scheduled to speak with more members of the House and would not preclude more complaints relating to behaviour of members.

Further complaints could lead to initial, final reports being provided outside of the premier and complainants, as per the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act (going to the management commission, for example).

In question period in the House of Assembly last week, Ball did commit to providing information from the investigations to the public.

“As I said many times now publicly — and I’m sure the leader of the Opposition would have been aware of this — any information that would be included in any report that would come back to me, it is my intention to get that stuff out there publicly,” Ball said in response to questions from Progressive Conservative MHA David Brazil.

“Whatever public information that would go out there, number one, would have to be done in consultation with those that are submitting the allegations under this review process,” he added.

While discussion around the subject of bullying and harassment continues in the province, the Gender and Politics Laboratory of MUN is offering a public event Tuesday to discuss the subject. The event — as per notice issued on social media — will feature an expert panel, including Equal Voice executive director Nancy Peckford; Unifor Atlantic regional director Lana Payne; St. John’s Status of Women Council executive director Jenny Wright; provincial Human Rights Commission executive director Carey Majid.

The panel will discuss bullying and harassment specifically as it relates to Newfoundland and Labrador politics, and will be moderated by MUN provost and vice-president (academic) Noreen Golfman.

The event is scheduled for 7-10 p.m. and will be held on the St. John’s campus in the Arts and Administration Building, Room A-1046. Free parking will be available in Lot 15B.)