B.C. health firings: Ombudsman promises thorough, high quality investigation
Jay Chalke says although he's new to the job, he's ready to take on the investigation
B.C.'s Ombudsperson Jay Chalke says he's confident his investigation into the controversial firings of eight ministry of health workers in 2012 will have a similar impact as a public inquiry.
The province has faced pressure from the fired health workers and their families as well as the opposition to conduct a public inquiry on the controversy. Instead, it has agreed to hold an ombudsman review.
- B.C. health researcher firing scandal timeline
- B.C. health firings referred to ombudsman despite objections
Chalke is brand new to the job, but tells The Early Edition's Rick Cluff that he's ready to take on the investigation.
Traditionally ombudsman investigations are done behind close doors. Will this be the case with this?
My office's investigation are conducted in private. That's a legal requirement. It's apparent that the employees have real concerns of how they were interviewed in the past and we're very sensitive to their experiences.
In our justice system, there are various methods of finding the truth of the matter. There are adversary models such as you would find in a criminal trial, there are inquisitorial trials such as public inquiries, and there are investigatory models such as provided by the Ombudsperson Act.
Certainly it's the view of our experienced investigative staff that being able to interview in private assists in getting complete candour in witnesses.
While the process is conducted in private, we can make those statements public as part of our reporting.
You've raised concerns about your office's ability to truly get to the bottom of what happened. Do you have all the tools you need to conduct a full investigation?
When this matter first arose about a month ago, we identified a number of issues ... that we might encounter. We wrote to the select standard committee of finance to express those concerns.
We provided the committee with our best advice on what we thought ought to happen before a referral was made [to our office]. The committee were able to deal with most of the matters our office had raised and as a result, we're in a better position than we were a month ago on issues such as matters covered by cabinet privilege or confidentiality provisions on others statutes.
How do you feel about the government forcing you take on this investigation despite your explicit request that a decision to refer the matter to you be unanimous?
My advice to the standing committee was that a decision about the referral ought to be unanimous. That was in recognition that this type of mandatory referral was uncharted territory and deserved careful preparation if it was to go ahead.
While the referral was not unanimous and something I certainly would have preferred, I will acknowledge that the committee conducted several days of careful deliberation before coming to its decision. The committee and the legislature were able to provide us with many of the tools we need to conduct an investigation.
The seven researchers who were fired — and the family of the eighth researcher who took his own life — want a public inquiry. They've written a detailed letter arguing the ombudsperson would not be able to truly answer the most important questions about why these firings occurred. Will you be able to answer what motivated the interference with research programs which, as the fired researchers say, were improving the safety and effective of prescription drugs in B.C.?
Well I think everybody wants to see answers to the kinds of questions you're asking and that the public is asking. We're certainly committed to a diligent and professional investigation.
Speed is not our first goal. A thorough, high quality investigation is our primary objective but we're conscious that people want to see a result in a timely way
The researchers also write the ombudsperson cannot hold anyone accountable. Your report may or may not name individuals. How is an investigation that doesn't lead to accountability effective?
I think that the power of our report in our regular work is the ability to make public our findings and recommendations, and that has a power of persuasion in a manner not dissimilar to the sort of outcome in a public inquiry. Public inquiries make findings and recommendations and that's similar to the kind of outcome that would occur from our office.
It goes to the integrity of the kind of work we do. Our report will have to speak for itself.
What is it like to be thrown into the midst of a major political scandal in your first weeks in office?
It's actually been a real challenge and not the expected way you would think you were going to start a new job but I've relished the opportunity to roll up my sleeves and get right to work.
This interview was condensed and edited. To hear the full interview, click the audio labelled: Ombudsman report will be just as effective as a public inquiry in health firings: Chalke.