The Treasury Board Policy on the Internal Disclosure of Information Concerning Wrongdoing in the Workplace is no longer in effect as of April 15, 2007. It has been placed in archives on-line and kept solely for historical purposes. Replacing this policy is the new Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act, which came into force on April 15, 2007. For more information on the new Act consult the Office of Public Service Values and Ethics website at http://www.psagency-agencefp.gc.ca/veo-bve/psdpa-lpfdar/index_e.asp.
Consistent with the democratic traditions and values of Canadians, our
Governments are elected by citizens to define and to serve the public interest.
Employees of the Government of Canada play an important role in ensuring that
the democratic framework of our society is upheld by serving the duly elected
government with neutrality. In this way, public servants play a fundamental role
in serving the public interest.
Public servants owe a duty of loyalty to their employer. In serving the
public interest, they are entrusted, as a fundamental part of their duties, with
access to a wide range of government information and are required to treat this
information responsibly and with discretion and integrity.
Public servants also serve the Government and the public interest by
providing professional and neutral advice in a manner that is consistent with
Public Service values and ethics. Accordingly, when an employee has reasonable
grounds to believe that another person has committed a wrongdoing in the
workplace, he/she should be able to disclose this information through clearly
defined processes with confidence that he/she will be treated fairly and
protected from reprisal.
It is recognized that deputy heads are responsible for making decisions which
involve weighing the risks and benefits of various courses of action and
selecting approaches which they consider to be in the best public interest,
including some that carry with them a risk. The judgement call that results from
a balanced and informed decision-making process would not be considered a
wrongdoing within the scope of this policy.
With this policy, deputy heads are responsible to put in place internal
mechanisms to allow employees to disclose, in good faith, information concerning
wrongdoing within their organisations; to ensure that these disclosures are
addressed in an appropriate and timely fashion; and to ensure that employees who
disclose information are treated fairly and protected from reprisal.
This policy emphasizes the responsibility of deputy heads and managers to
promote a culture of open communication where issues and concerns can be dealt
with in normal interaction, but also provides an alternative when one is needed.
As such, deputy heads have the responsibility to put in place internal
mechanisms (e.g. the designation of a Senior Officer in the department) where an
employee may turn to disclose information concerning wrongdoing in the
workplace.
The policy also establishes a government-wide review mechanism outside the
departmental processes where employees, who, having unsuccessfully exhausted
departmental mechanisms, may turn to disclose information concerning wrongdoing.
The processes so established will allow employees to deal with the vast
majority of instances of wrongdoing. However, in certain exceptional
circumstances an employee might be justified in making an external disclosure:
for example, when there is an immediate risk to the life, health or safety of
the public. Employees might be also justified in making an external disclosure
where they have exhausted all internal procedures. As any unauthorised external
disclosure could expose the employee to disciplinary action, it is recommended
that an employee obtain advice or assistance from his or her union, trusted
adviser or independent counsel before taking action.
The effective date of this policy is November 30th, 2001. The policy was
revised to expand the definition of wrongdoing to incorporate a breach to the Values
and Ethics Code for the Public Service effective on September 1st, 2003. A
provision approved March 8, 2004, retroactive to February 10, 2004, ensures
protection from reprisal for public servants who provide information and
testimony in good faith in the course of a parliamentary proceeding or an
inquiry under Part I of the Inquiries Act related to the 2003 Report of
the Auditor General.
To allow employees to bring forward information concerning wrongdoing, and to
ensure that they are treated fairly and are protected from reprisal when they do
so in a manner consistent with this policy.
Disclosure (divulgation) - is defined as
information raised within the organization in good faith, based on reasonable
belief, by one or more employees concerning a wrongdoing that someone has
committed or intends to commit.
Duty of loyalty (devoir de loyauté) - refers to
the commitment of employees to fulfil their duties faithfully and honestly and
not to disclose confidential information unless authorized to do so.
Responsible use of information (utilisation responsable
d'information) - is defined as use of information that:
- shows proper concern for its accuracy and for the legitimacy of how the
information is acquired; and
- shows proper concern for its protection and authorised disclosure in
accordance with the Government Security Policy and other relevant
policies that exist or may be adopted.
Wrongdoing (actes fautifs) - is defined as an act
or omission concerning:
(a) a violation of any law or regulation; or
(b) a breach of the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Service; or
(c) misuse of public funds or assets; or
(d) gross mismanagement; or
(e) a substantial and specific danger to the life, health and safety of
Canadians or the environment.
This policy applies to all departments and organizations of the Public
Service listed in Part I, Schedule I, of the Public Service Staff
Relations Act.
The primary responsibility and authority for applying this policy rests with
the deputy head.
Deputy heads must:
- ensure that employees understand the requirement to use government
information responsibly;
- promote a culture of open communication within their organisations where
issues and concerns can easily be dealt with in the normal interaction
between employees and their managers;
- establish internal mechanisms to manage the disclosure of wrongdoing,
including – at a minimum – a designated Senior Officer, who will be
responsible for receiving and acting on such disclosures. This Senior
Officer will report directly to the deputy head on matters related to this
policy but could report to another manager for administrative purposes and
could be involved in other responsibilities within the organization.
(Note: Departments which already have in place internal
mechanisms to administer the disclosure of wrongdoing should ensure that
they do meet the requirements of this policy while others might want to take
additional measures to respond to their specific mandate or organisational
requirements.);
- inform all employees of this policy, including the name, location and
phone number of the Senior Officer who will be responsible for receiving and
acting on disclosures;
- ensure that disclosures are reviewed in a timely fashion and investigated
when required, and that prompt, appropriate action is taken to correct the
situation; and
- protect from reprisal the employees who disclose wrongdoing in good faith.
Employees are responsible for:
- using government information responsibly and in good faith in
accordance with their duty of loyalty;
- following the internal processes established to raise instances of
wrongdoing in the workplace; and
- respecting the reputation of individuals by not making trivial or
vexatious disclosures of wrongdoing or, by making disclosures in bad faith.
Employees should also be aware of their responsibilities under the various
policies and laws, for example the Criminal Code, the Government
Security Policy, the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Service,
the Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code for the Public Service,
the Policy on Losses of Money and Offences and Other Illegal Acts Against
the Crown.
Managers are responsible for:
- informing their employees of this policy;
- ensuring that their employees understand the requirement to use government
information responsibly;
- ensuring that their employees are aware of the processes available to them
if they wish to disclose information concerning wrongdoing under this
policy;
- promoting openness in their interaction with employees;
- acting promptly when information concerning wrongdoing is brought to their
attention; and
- protecting from reprisal the employees who disclose wrongdoing in good
faith.
The Senior Officer shall be responsible for:
- disseminating information on this policy, providing
interpretation and related advice;
- receiving, recording and reviewing disclosures of information concerning
wrongdoing, establishing if there are sufficient grounds for further action
and;
- ensuring that prompt action is taken in all cases;
- ensuring that procedures are in place to manage disclosures that require
immediate or urgent action;
- initiating investigations when required, reviewing and reporting the
results of the investigations and making recommendations to the deputy head;
- ensuring that the privacy rights of both parties, the employees making the
disclosure and the employees implicated or alleged to be responsible for the
wrongdoing, are respected;
- establishing adequate procedures to ensure that the protection of the
information and the treatment of the files are in accordance with the
Privacy Act and the Access to Information Act;
- maintaining information on the number of disclosures received, rejected,
accepted; completed without investigation, of disclosures investigated; of
disclosures still under consideration or investigation; and
- preparing an annual report to the deputy head.
As a minimum, the annual report should cover the number of general inquiries
and advice; the number of disclosures received from employees and their status
(e.g. rejected, accepted, completed without investigations, still under
consideration); the number of disclosures investigated, completed, still under
consideration.
Refer to Appendix A for information on the Internal Disclosure and Resolution
Process.
The Office of Values and Ethics will:
- provide policy support and interpretation to deputy heads and
departmental Senior Officers;
- provide advice and assistance to the departmental Senior Officers on the
handling of disclosures of information concerning wrongdoing, as required;
and
- review the efficiency of mechanisms established in departments for the
internal disclosure of information concerning wrongdoing.
The mandate of the Public Service Integrity Officer is to act as a neutral
entity on matters of internal disclosure of wrongdoing. In particular, he or she
assists employees who:
- believe that their issue cannot be disclosed within their own department;
or
- raised their disclosure issue(s) in good faith through the departmental
mechanisms but believe that the disclosure was not appropriately addressed.
As such, the responsibilities of the Public Service Integrity Officer are:
- to provide advice to employees who are considering making a disclosure;
- to receive, record and review the disclosures of wrongdoing received from
departmental employees and/or the requests for review submitted from
departmental employees;
- to establish if there are sufficient grounds for further action and
review;
- to ensure that procedures are in place to manage instances of wrongdoing
that require immediate or urgent action;
- to initiate investigation when required, to review the results of
investigations and to prepare reports, and to make recommendations to deputy
heads on how to address or correct the disclosure;
- in some special cases or in cases when the departmental responses are not
adequate or timely, to make a report of findings to the Clerk of the Privy
Council in his role as head of the Public Service;
- to establish adequate procedures to ensure that the protection of the
information and the treatment of the files are in accordance with the Privacy
Act and the Access to Information Act;
- to protect from reprisal employees who disclose information concerning
wrongdoing in good faith;
- to monitor the type and disposition of cases brought to the attention of
the Public Service Integrity Officer; and
- to prepare an annual report to the President of the Privy Council on his
or her activities for tabling in Parliament.
As a minimum, the annual report should cover the number of general inquiries
and advice; the number of disclosures received directly from departmental
employees and their status (e.g. rejected, accepted, completed without
investigation, still under consideration); the number of disclosures
investigated, completed, still under consideration. The same data would be
provided in relation to requests for review. The report could include an
analysis of the categories of disclosures and recommendations to improve the
processes.
See Appendix B for information on the Public Service Integrity Officer
Disclosure and Review Process.
In respect to the application of this policy, employees and managers may be
subject to administrative and disciplinary measures up to and including
termination of employment, when they:
- retaliate against another employee who has made a disclosure in
accordance with this policy or against an employee who was called as a
witness; and/or
- choose to disclose in a manner that does not conform to this policy and
its procedural requirements.
Any administrative or disciplinary measures are to be taken in consultation
with departmental Human Resources Services and Legal Services.
Except in circumstances stated directly above, no employee shall be subject
to any reprisal for having made a good faith disclosure in accordance with this
policy, or in the course of a parliamentary proceeding or an inquiry under Part
I of the Inquiries Act related to the 2003 Report of the Auditor General
of Canada. This includes employees who may have been called as witnesses.
Reprisal may include any administrative and disciplinary measures.
Employees who believe they are subject to reprisal as a direct consequence of
having made a disclosure in accordance with this policy may complain to the
Senior Officer or to the Public Service Integrity Officer in the case where the
original disclosure was made directly to the Public Service Integrity Officer.
The Senior Officer or the Public Service Integrity Officer will review the
matter following basically the same process as a disclosure (see Appendix A or
B). Employees may also resort to other existing redress procedures , for example
those under the Public Service Staff Relations Act and the Treasury
Board Policy on the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace.
Confidentiality, within the intent of this policy, is subject to the
provisions of the Privacy Act and Access to Information Act.
The Senior Officer and the Public Service Integrity Officer will explain the
parameters of confidentiality employees can expect when they make a disclosure.
The Senior Officer and the Public Service Integrity Officer are also available
to provide information on the policy and to give informal advice to assist
employees who are considering making a disclosure. Employees should feel free to
consult them in confidence.
Disclosure of any information concerning criminal activity or action should
be referred to proper authorities for investigation in accordance with the
Policy on Losses of Money and Offences and Other Illegal Acts Against the Crown.
Confidentiality in such circumstances will be subject to the applicable regime.
The Office of Values and Ethics will verify that all departments and
organizations have in place, on the effective date of this policy, internal
disclosure mechanisms.
Treasury Board Secretariat, departments and organizations will work together
to monitor the activities and the results in achieving the objectives of this
policy.
This policy will be evaluated no later than three years after implementation.
Access to Information Act
Canadian Human Rights Act
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Case law:
Fraser v. Public Service Staff Relations Board, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 455
Grahn v. Canada (Treasury Board), [1985] C.P.S.S.R.B. No
213 (166-2-15093)
Grahn v. Canada (Treasury Board), [1987], 91 N.R.394
(F.C.A.)
Haydon v. Canada (Department of Health) [2000]
F.C.J. No 1368
(September 5, 2000)
Osborne v. Canada (Treasury Board), [1991] 2S.C.R. 69
Trevena and the Treasury Board of Canada (Revenue Canada- Taxation), [1998]
C.P.S.S.R.B. No 102 (166-2-28562)
Values and Ethics Code for the Public Service
Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code for the Public Service
Criminal Code
Financial Administration Act
Government Security Policy
Inquiries Act
Official Secrets Act
Policy on the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace.
Policy on Losses of Money and Offences and Other Illegal Acts Against the
Crown
Privacy Act
Public Service Employment Act
Public Service Staff Relations Act
Public Service Terms and Conditions of Employment Regulations
Treasury Board Manual – Chapter 4 (Grievance Procedures) and
Chapter 6 (Discipline) of the Volume on "Staff relations"
Please refer inquiries about this policy to the Senior Officer in your
department, who in turn may direct questions about policy interpretation to the
Office of Values and Ethics of the Treasury Board Secretariat.
Inquiries about disclosures that cannot be disclosed within the department
and inquiries about the review process by the Public Service Integrity Officer
should be referred to the Public Service Integrity Officer.
Employees who become aware that a wrongdoing has been committed or will be
committed should first attempt to raise the matter using the usual reporting
relationship. If that has not been successful or if that was not possible,
employees may communicate with their Senior Officer responsible for
administering such disclosures.
The Senior Officer is available to provide information on this policy and to
provide informal advice to employees who are considering making a disclosure. He
will also explain the parameters of confidentiality the employees can expect
when they make a disclosure.
An employee who comes to seek advice or to make a disclosure can be
accompanied by another person such as a union representative, a friend, a peer,
etc.
What follows is the basic process that will be followed when an employee
decides to disclose information concerning wrongdoing. Each step should be
completed promptly. All steps should normally be completed within six months or
less. The nature of certain disclosures might require very prompt, sometimes
immediate, action.
Step 1 – Disclosure of wrongdoing
The employee should disclose the information to the Senior Officer,
preferably in writing. The disclosure must include the nature of the wrongdoing,
the name of the person alleged to have committed the wrongdoing; the date and
description of the wrongdoing; and other pertinent information. The information
should be as precise and concise as possible.
Step 2 – Screening and review of a disclosure
The Senior Officer will review the information and determine if there are
sufficient grounds for further action. The disclosure may be rejected if it is
determined that it is trivial and vexatious; fails to allege or give adequate
particulars of a wrongful act, or if it is determined that it was not given in
good faith or on the basis of reasonable belief.
The Senior Officer may also decline to review a disclosure if it is
determined that the matter could be dealt with more appropriately by means of a
procedure provided for under another Treasury Board policy or law in force in
Canada (e.g., Policy on the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the
Workplace or existing redress procedures under the Public Service Staff
Relations Act.). Alternatively, the Senior Officer may choose, following
consultation with the employee, to deal with the disclosure while the other
procedure is in progress or, deal with the disclosure while the other procedure
is held in abeyance.
The disclosure of any criminal activity should be dealt with in accordance
with the Policy on Losses of Money and Offences and Other Illegal Acts
Against the Crown.
The Senior Officer will inform the employee in writing of whether he/she will
proceed further. If the Senior Officer decides to proceed further, he/she will
decide, from the nature and particulars of the wrongdoing what are the most
appropriate next steps, which include attempt at resolution and/or
investigation.
Step 3 – Attempt at resolution
It is expected that most situations will be addressed by discussing the
matter with the employees concerned, identifying avenues of resolution and
taking appropriate action.
Step 4 – Investigation
If the matter cannot be resolved, the Senior Officer may initiate an
investigation.
The Senior Officer may decide to investigate right after the preliminary
review of the disclosure.
Step 5 – Decision
The Senior Officer will prepare a report, including recommendations, for the
deputy head. The deputy head shall review the Senior Officer 's recommendations
and make a decision.
As a result of the deputy head's decision, the Senior Officer will inform the
parties in writing of the outcome of the investigation. When required,
corrective measures will be taken.
Normally, employees should initiate their disclosure of wrongdoing using the
internal disclosure mechanism within their organisation. In some cases, however,
when they believe that their issue could not be raised in confidence within
their organisation, employees may make their disclosure of wrongdoing directly
to the Public Service Integrity Officer. Employees may also contact the Public
Service Integrity Officer when they have disclosed an incident of wrongdoing by
means of the departmental mechanisms and believe that their disclosure was not
reviewed and/or investigated adequately.
In these cases employees should get in touch with the Public Service
Integrity Officer in order to discuss how to proceed.
A. Disclosure of wrongdoing could not be raised within the department
Each step should be completed promptly. All steps should normally be
completed within six months or less. The nature of certain disclosures might
require very prompt, sometimes immediate, action.
Step 1 – Disclosure of wrongdoing
The Employees should provide the following information, preferably in
writing:
- the nature of the wrongdoing;
- the name of the person(s) alleged to have committed the wrongdoing; and
- the date and description of the wrongdoing and any other relevant
information.
The information should be as much precise and concise as possible. Employees
should also provide their name, phone number and address so the Public Service
Integrity Officer may contact them for more information.
Step 2 – Screening and review of a disclosure
The Public Service Integrity Officer will review the information, consult the
employee when required and determine if the matter should be pursued further.
The Public Service Integrity Officer may reject the disclosure of wrongdoing if
it is determined that:
- the employee should try first to resolve the matter using the departmental
mechanisms provided for under this policy;
- the matter is trivial, frivolous or vexatious;
- the disclosure of wrongdoing fails to allege or give adequate particulars
of a wrongful act; or
- the disclosure of wrongdoing was not given in good faith or on the basis
of reasonable belief or was found unfounded.
The Public Service Integrity Officer may also decline to review a disclosure
if it is determined that the matter could be dealt with more appropriately by
means of a procedure provided for under another Treasury Board policy or law in
force in Canada (e.g., the existing redress procedures under the Policy on
the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace or under the Public
Service Staff Relations Act). Alternatively, the Public Service Integrity
Officer may choose, following consultation with the employee, to deal with the
disclosure while the other procedure is in progress or, deal with the disclosure
while the other procedure is held in abeyance.
There might be circumstances where the Public Service Integrity Officer will
need to discuss the matter with the department.
The disclosure of any alleged criminal activity should be dealt with in
accordance with the Policy on Losses of Money and Offences and Other Illegal
Acts Against the Crown.
The Public Service Integrity Officer will inform the employee in writing of
whether or not they will proceed further. The Public Service Integrity Officer
will also inform the deputy head of the department.
Step 3 – Attempt at resolution
It is expected that most situations will be addressed by discussing the
matter with the employees concerned, identifying avenues of resolution and
taking appropriate action.
Step 4 – Investigation
If the matter cannot be solved, the Public Service Integrity Officer may
initiate an investigation.
The Public Service Integrity Officer may decide to investigate right after
the preliminary review of the disclosure.
Step 5 – Report
The Public Service Integrity Officer will review the results of the
investigation and prepare a report, including recommendations to the deputy
head. The report will be sent to both the deputy head and the employee who
raised the disclosure of wrongdoing. The Deputy head shall review the Public
Service Integrity Officer's recommendations and make a decision.
B. Request for review after employees have raised their issues within
their department
Employees who disclosed wrongdoing (or raised their issues of wrongdoing) by
means of the departmental mechanisms and believe that their disclosure was not
adequately reviewed and/or investigated, may make a request to the Public
Service Integrity Officer for a review of the departmental decision.
In these cases, employees should submit in writing their request, specifying:
(a) the details of the wrongdoing, e.g. the nature of the wrongdoing, the
name of the person(s) alleged to have committed the wrongdoing;
(b) the date and description of the wrongdoing and any other pertinent
information, if applicable;
(c) a description of the process followed by their department; the
reason(s) why the employee believe it was not adequately reviewed and/or
investigated by the department; and
(d) his/her name, address and phone number so the Public Service Integrity
Officer can contact him/her for more information.
The Public Service Integrity Officer will review the information and inform
the employee in writing of whether they will proceed further in accordance with
the procedures outlined in section A of this appendix.
Each step should be completed promptly. All steps should normally be
completed within six months or less. The nature of certain disclosures might
require very prompt, sometimes immediate, action.
Display full size graphic
|