It was a brief news item lost in the swirl of the election tornado.
A motion by two Vancouver city councillors to beef up whistleblower protection for city staff was shuffled back to staff to “conduct further consultations, specifically to consult with labour unions and labour organizations that represent staff within the city.”
Adriane Carr was pushing for the motion after the city lost out on a controversial $65-million land swap deal. It’s hard to say what, if any, rules that would enhance whistleblower protection would have had on the whole deal – but it caught my attention. Why? Because I believe whistleblower protection is critical to the future of local democracies.
Too grandiose a statement, some might say. But I think it’s an understatement.
Let’s face it, the days when city hall staff would drop off big brown envelopes to newspaper offices are almost over. Almost, I say, because I still get all weak-kneed when a big brown envelope appears on my desk with no return address on it. Sadly, nowadays, it’s usually someone’s vanity press book.
There are a lot of reasons for this. Firstly, the media ranks are reduced and, unfortunately, those left in the business have less time to go out and nurture sources over coffee in dark cafés. And those same sources were usually the ones dropping off those big brown envelopes. Secondly, whistleblower protection in B.C. municipalities and cities is largely contained in collective agreements between the unions and city hall. (There is whistleblower protection in the B.C. government ministries and governmental bodies.)
And since those rules are subject to bargaining, deals are made. Those deals often involve the union getting something in return for not enhancing whistleblower protection if the party in power is a union-supporting party. There was whistleblower protection in Burnaby’s bargaining proposals years ago, and, surprise, it went away by the time the final deal was sealed.
It doesn’t take a political scientist to realize a city hall run by politicians dependent on voters’ confidence doesn’t want embarrassing mistakes or, worse, corruption to be part of a whistleblower’s case made public. In fact, it’s kind of a conflict of interest to even expect them to root for more whistleblower protections.
Without protection, what city employee who hopes to retire with a sweet pension and a clap on the back wants to risk it all to reveal political influence in city hall, or substandard materials being used, or simply favouritism to certain developers? Not surprisingly, they make movies about whistleblowers just because it’s not very common.
Part of the problem is that there is no single standard for whistleblower protection. There is a law that covers federal whistleblowers, and there is a provincial equivalent. While some municipalities may make them part of a union collective agreement, that doesn’t cover non-union staffers. And, again, it can change depending upon the next collective agreement.
If we are to assume the mainstream media is going to get more splintered and weaker in the future, it makes abundant sense to beef up all whistleblower protections and make them mandatory in all government offices and levels in B.C.
Someone needs to be able to speak out about what goes on behind closed doors on the taxpayers’ dime.
Pat Tracy is the editor the Burnaby NOW and New West Record newspapers.
