|
|
|
|
|
|
- CASES |
- ISSUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issues We're Following
Canadians for Accountability has an interest in all accountability and whistleblowing issues. Sometimes, however, we pay special attention to topics we consider especially relevant or important. Some of therse topics include:
- Strengthening and broadening whistleblower protection laws: We believe that laws to protect and encourage whistleblowing should be expanded to the private sector, with stricter penalties for retaliation.
- Industry self regulation in food safety and transportation: We believe that easily identifiable flaws in these regulatory frameworks put Canadians at risk. This includes food safety and Transport Canada's Safety Management Systems. In fact, Canadians for Accountability was a key participant in the Air Safety Round Table held on Parliament Hill in April. The round table is evolving into an alliance, details of which can be found at SafeSkies.ca.
- Access to information rights: We believe that access to information is fundamental to open democracy and government. Recent reports suggest that access rights have been eroded in recent years.
- Attitudes and Understanding of Whistleblowing: We surveyed candidates during the 2008 federal election to better understand their points of view. This will help us in our education efforts.
Safety Management Systems
- The April 2009 Air Safety Round Table
- SMS: Description and Flaws
- More information on SMS and the Movement for Air Safety
The April 2009 Air Safety Round Table
|
Kirsten Stevens, an Advocate for the Safety of Workers Transported by Air, lost her husband to a preventable crash in 2005 Since then, she has worked as an advocate for greater accountability, better enforcement and effective safety laws for the aviation industry. She, like Canadians for Accountability and many others, is deeply concerned by Transport Canada's move to Safety Management Systems (SMS).
Kirsten arranged an Air Safety Round Table for Tuesday, April 21, 2009. This event was hosted by Dennis Bevington, Member of Parliament for Western Arctic and NDP Transport Critic. Following the Round Table, a press conference was held on April 22. Mr. Bevington was joined by Mr. Greg Holbrooke, Chair of the Canadian Federal Pilots Association, Mr. Ian Bron, Secretary for Canadians for Accountability and Ms. Kirsten Stevens. They were joined by Peter Julian, former NDP Transport Critic.
See the details of the Round Table - including transcripts and video - on the SafeSkies.ca website.
SMS: Description and Flaws
Wikipedia describes SMS as "...A move away from prescriptive regulations (in which regulatory requirements are set out in detail, and require strict adherence to specific criteria) to performance-based regulations (in which the objective is set out, and the regulated entity is only measured against achievement of the objective). In practical terms, it requires that the industry institute policies and systems designed to reduce risk, such as by implementing reporting systems for the reporting and correction of shortcomings. The regulating authority would then change emphasis from direct operational oversight to oversight of the organizational systems and their effectiveness."
In order for performance-based regulatory frameworks like SMS to be effective, several conditions must be met:
- The industry/operator must already be mature and have a high degree of compliance
- The initial safety assessment for the operator must be conducted at arm's length
- There must be a safe environment for people to bring problems forward and have them dealt with in a transparent manner
- There must be no conflict of interest between oversight and the business end of operations
- Performance standards must be developed and measured by the regulator
- The regulator should have sufficient resources and expertise to properly inspect all aspects of operations
|
Canadians for Accountability does not believe that the conditions for a successful implementation of SMS are in place. In particular, the proposed legislation leaves out whistleblower protection and keeps crucial information from the public.
Equally disturbing is the lack of transparency with which recent crashes have been handled by Transport Canada - the crash which killed Kirsten's husband being an example. There are concerns that Transport Canada itself may not have the requisite safety culture to properly oversee SMS.
It should also be mentioned that Transport Canada has conducted no risk assessment of SMS, making this a massive experiment with human lives at stake. The results of this experiment are predictable, however: Transport Canada implemented SMS for the rail industry several years ago. It has not been a resounding success.
More Info on SMS and the Movement for Air Safety
For more information on SMS and its flaws, visit the Federal Accountability Initiative for Reform website.
For more information on the roundtable and the emerging aviation safety alliance, visit the Safeskies.ca website.
2008 Federal Election Candidates' Survey
Canadians for Accountability has completed its 2008 Election Survey on Whistleblowing. This survey was intended to raise awareness of the issue of whistleblowing, to stimulate debate, and to determine each candidate's and party's position and intentions.
Candidates were quite consistent in their responses. Nearly all saw a link between accountability and whistleblowing, and most agreed that whistleblowers act out of genuine concern and at great personal risk.
One area we were particularly interested in was how candidates would determine whether a person was a whistleblower. They were given a choice of subjective criteria.
- Many identified several of these criteria as factors in considering whether a person was a whistleblower, and how to respond.
- However, a number also noted that each case had to be determined on its own merits.
This is significant as many whistleblowers are immediately identified as lone, disgruntled employees, their concerns dismissed and their careers ruined. This occurs not just when targeted by ministers, CEOs or other very senior managers, but when intermediate managers falsely represent the motives and character of the whistleblower to their superiors. In fact, the latter is far more common.
We hope that candidates that were elected will keep this in mind. Subjective criteria, while worth consideration, are susceptible to manipulation. A neutral examination of the facts is a safer course.
Most candidates polled supported stronger laws to protect whistleblowers and to penalize those who retaliate against them, both in government and in the private sector. At present, there are almost no protections for private sector whistleblowers.
Most also agreed that:
- whistleblowers forced into legal action should have their legal costs supported by the government,
- bureaucrats found guilty of retaliation against whistleblowers should be forced to pay legal fees back to the government, and that
- past whistleblowers should be compensated for their losses and suffering.
We hope that the survey gave all participants reason to reflect, and look forward to the successful candidates bringing real protections to whistleblowers in the public and private sectors. There are a number of whistleblowers in government still facing harassment and long battles in court, and many others who have given up the fight.
Created: June 17, 2009
Last updated: June 17, 2009
