Pam Parsons blasts 'archaic,' 'sexist' logic in harassment report ahead of House debate

The five harassment reports will be front and centre in the House of Assembly this morning, but even ahead of that debate, Liberal MHA Pam Parsons is panning the findings of the investigation into her allegations of inappropriate behaviour by former caucus colleague Dale Kirby.

Last week, former education minister Kirby released a report from Bruce Chaulk, the commissioner for legislative standards, that cleared him of all but one of the allegations made by Parsons.

In a letter to the management commission of the House of Assembly, obtained by CBC News, Parsons said she wants to "set the record straight" on what she calls "factual errors" in Chaulk's report.

When the legislature opened on Tuesday, there were heated exchanges between members of all parties on the findings of those report and who should be held accountable.

To be clear, it was not a casual conversation, it did not take place in a parking lot, and it was not friendly in nature.- Pam Parsons

Kirby and fellow MHA Eddie Joyce, who was facing separate accusations of harassment and bullying, were booted from the Liberal caucus while the investigation was underway, and it remains unclear whether they will be allowed to rejoin the party.

'It's been flawed, no doubt'

On Tuesday, Premier Dwight Ball told reporters that the debate needed to unfold.

"There is a process that we've established — it's been flawed, no doubt," he said.

"We've learned some lessons along the way here, far from perfect, but what we will do is we will learn from this process to bring improvements that are necessary."

MHAs were notified late Tuesday that Chaulk would provide a private technical briefing on the process followed in producing the reports during the recess in the House of Assembly on Wednesday.

In her letter, Parsons pointed to the findings of a night on 2016 at the Liberal annual general meeting in Gander.

In Chaulk's report, he said that Kirby's evidence was compelling "in that he provided details that did not paint him in the best light and which formed a more coherent story than that of the complainant."

That event is, as Kirby described it, when he and Parsons went to the hotel parking lot to smoke a joint, where Kirby "said that he might have said that he loved the complainant in 'an aging punk rocker 1980s way.'"

Chaulk said that he found the way the complainant — Parsons — presented the meeting in her complaint to be "somewhat disingenuous," in that she didn't talk about smoking marijuana with Kirby.

"To be clear, choosing to take the high road and not bicker over irrelevant details does not equate to being 'disingenuous,'" Parsons wrote in the letter.

"I gave a full and accurate account of the event and Mr. Kirby's inappropriate conduct. Mr. Kirby responded by introducing false and misleading context and statements in a further attempt to shame, bully, and smear my reputation."

She said that Kirby's story is an effort to "deflect and distract" from the issue meant to be under review, adding that he "did not deny making the lewd remarks."

Parsons said Chaulk was "distracted" by those details provided by Kirby, mistaking them for proof that Kirby's statements were true, and hers were not, in what she calls a loop of "circular logic."

"To be clear, it was not a casual conversation, it did not take place in a parking lot, and it was not friendly in nature," Parsons wrote.

"Mr. Kirby asked to speak privately with me in his hotel room. He proceeded to attempt to convince me to drop my petition, to cease my vocal advocacy, and 'fall into line.' He said 'you are beautiful and I love you' in an attempt to manipulate me, make me uncomfortable, and put me into a more agreeable state of mind."

Not given opportunity to refute: Parsons

Parsons questioned whether Chaulk has any training in workplace harassment investigations or human rights issues in a modern workplace.

In the letter, Parsons says that an outside firm was commissioned to help in the investigation, but Chaulk made no reference to that report in his findings.

"At times the commissioner ignored my evidence and appeared to accept statements given by Mr. Kirby, without explanation, and further he accepted Mr. Kirby's statements which until the report was released, I had never seen or heard or been given an opportunity to refute," Parsons wrote.

Parsons said she only received the written response from Kirby, but wasn't given a chance to refute any of Kirby's allegations or statements.

"Unfortunately, and without my rebuttal, the commissioner sided with Mr. Kirby on many of these statements and positions," Parsons wrote.

"The commissioner erred in law in his unjustified weighing of statements, erroneous assumptions, and selective dismissal of evidence."

Parsons said the report "treats Mr. Kirby's statements as though they are a part of a complaint against me, rather than dealing with my complaints about Mr. Kirby."

She added that Chaulk "applied the archaic and outdated sexist logic that 'if they were friendly on some occasions, then harassment could not have occurred.'"

In addition, Parsons said she was assured prior to submitting her complaint that the process would be "completely confidential," and all parties were unable to speak about the content of the report.

Chaulk said last week he would not be commenting on the report.

Read more articles from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador