It starts at the top

One would figure that Sheila Fraser testifying before the Public Accounts Committee about the Accountability Act would be a huge boon for the Cons. But rather than offering any support for the move to provide statutory whistleblower protection, Fraser rightly points out that the Cons are headed in exactly the wrong direction where it matters most:

Strong, ethical leadership from senior managers will do more to stop mismanagement and wrongdoing in the public service than the Conservatives' much-touted whistleblower legislation, according to Canada's spending watchdog...

She conceded there is no stopping the drive for the law, but questioned whether it will encourage people to come forward with complaints.

"I have always felt that to resort to whistleblower legislation, where people feel they need that kind of protection, is an indication that the system is not healthy and people can't freely bring forward cases of wrongdoing with the confidence that it will be dealt with confidentially and also that appropriate action will be taken."

Fraser's reservations about whistleblower protection came out when repeatedly pressed by Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre on how the government could stop spending abuses without such a law. Poilievre is an outspoken champion of whistleblower legislation, which is the key piece of the Harper government's prized accountability bill.

"Why is it when someone sees abuses, no one sounds the alarms and cries out in the name of taxpayers for something to be done? ... Do you have any idea why you have to be the one who finds the fire that has been burning for years?" asked Poilievre.

Fraser pointed to her recent report into the ethical conduct of the Mounties, border guards and prison guards who overwhelmingly said they would report suspected cases of wrongdoing, but they didn't think their co-workers would and said they wouldn't be respected by their colleagues if they did. A significant number also doubted management would do anything about it...

She said legal protection against reprisals wouldn't ease fears of bureaucrats who fear personal consequences of exposing problems.

"If there is only legal protection, it takes an awful lot of courage to do that and I think a lot of people would rather say 'this isn't my responsibility, I didn't sign off on those documents, and I am not going to get involved rather than assume the risk of ... (personal) consequences,'" she said.

Now, there can be little doubt that Fraser herself has pointed out many areas where the system is indeed unhealthy, including the Ron Stewart case, such as to create a need for some statutory protection. But the more important message is that a whistleblower law is a poor substitute for a management structure which actually values critical input rather than seeing it as a threat. Which can only serve as a direct slam against a government notorious for expelling, firing and/or ostracizing anybody who dares to question the party line.

As an added bonus, Fraser also agrees with the NDP's criticism of the leaks surrounding her recent reports:

The committee is also considering a motion, initiated by NDP MP David Christopherson, to find out who leaked Fraser's reports. Details of last spring's gun registry report and her latest audit into the huge relocation contract to move 15,000 RCMP, military and bureaucrats were leaked to the media before they were tabled in Parliament.

Fraser said she would welcome a probe by the committee.

"I am annoyed that these things are getting leaked ... and we have gone as far as we can go. Physical control over the documents is one thing ... but the issue is how do you keep people from talking and how will you ever know whom it was?"

While Fraser's effectiveness in rooting out Lib abuses made her a darling of the Cons for a long time, it looks like the tables have turned. Which comes as no surprise when an impartial watchdog for good government comes face to face with with PMS' culture of information abuse - but which could easily be the final nail in the Cons' coffin as the harm done by their management style becomes public.